Vista : Yes or No

Everything for your PC, from case modding to OS discussions, come here to discuss computer hardware and software.
Jmac-
Drift King
Drift King
Posts: 833
Joined: 10 May 2004, 08:57

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Jmac- »

I got OEM Vista Home Premium x64 off NCIX.com for $98 CAD ...
User avatar
race_invader
Professional
Professional
Posts: 2046
Joined: 22 Jul 2006, 15:58
Location: WA, Perth

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by race_invader »

I would be aiming for Vista Ultimate, ive seen what it includes and that suits my needs. :) Even if i have a DirectX 9.0c graphics card will games be improved? since vista includes DX10. :|
Image
User avatar
S2000_Skyline12
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 3538
Joined: 05 Jan 2005, 23:59
Location: Long Island, New York Birthday:12.23.92

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by S2000_Skyline12 »

Yeah it includes it, but you can't use it so the DX10 will just use the DX9 portion for gaming.
*sig removed for being too big. max size 550x120px & 50kb*
Jmac-
Drift King
Drift King
Posts: 833
Joined: 10 May 2004, 08:57

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Jmac- »

Vista Ultimate has some cool stuff, no doubt about it, but there wasn't really enough for me to justify paying an additional $80 for it ... I can always upgrade later thanks to Windows Anytime Upgrade, anyways ...
User avatar
race_invader
Professional
Professional
Posts: 2046
Joined: 22 Jul 2006, 15:58
Location: WA, Perth

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by race_invader »

S2000_Skyline12 wrote:Yeah it includes it, but you can't use it so the DX10 will just use the DX9 portion for gaming.
Hmm.. That sux, so for me to use it i would need a new graphics card what supports DX10?
Image
User avatar
BrontoX
Professional
Professional
Posts: 1895
Joined: 25 Oct 2006, 12:42
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by BrontoX »

Exactly, no DX10 card no DX10 features.
Image
User avatar
race_invader
Professional
Professional
Posts: 2046
Joined: 22 Jul 2006, 15:58
Location: WA, Perth

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by race_invader »

Hmm.. I guess ill start saving a new graphics card then.. Or just get vista & the graphics card for Xmas. :)
Image
User avatar
snoopdogg879
Drift King
Drift King
Posts: 366
Joined: 01 Sep 2006, 20:36
Location: Sitting in a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX MR Edition that is fully tricked out
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by snoopdogg879 »

if anyone is going to get vista get 2 500GB hard drives or what ever (have at least 2 hard drives doesnt matter how much GB) because vista especially vista ultimate 64 bit is a gimungus hog and usees a lot of space
*sig removed for being too big. max size 550x120px & 50kb*
User avatar
Andre_online
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 7730
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 10:43
Location: Singapore (GMT+8)
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Andre_online »

Hmm, given a choice, I'd rather get a Mac instead of a Vista-installed computer. Seriously... you're paying Vista for its looks, and it's lagging my PC at times. I regeretted getting an Acer laptop when I could have gotten a MacBook for the same price, which can run Windows as well on Bootcamp.. #-o

Thank God I got a free upgrad of my RAM to 2GB. If I left it un-upgraded with only 1GB, this laptop would have died a long time ago. Just look at how much memory Vista is taking:

Image


For Windows, I storngly recommend you to stick with XP Pro. It's 10X more stable than Vista.
Last edited by Andre_online on 10 Dec 2007, 20:15, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
BrontoX
Professional
Professional
Posts: 1895
Joined: 25 Oct 2006, 12:42
Location: Bucharest, Romania

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by BrontoX »

I feel Vista is another Windows ME but we haven't seen the SP 1 of Vista yet so let's not give up on it just yet.
Image
User avatar
vellu
Valued Member
Valued Member
Posts: 1733
Joined: 04 Nov 2004, 23:20
Location: Finland

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by vellu »

Andre_online wrote:Thank God I got a free upgrad of my RAM to 2GB. If I left it un-upgraded with only 1GB, this laptop would have died a long time ago. Just look at how much memory Vista is taking:

Image

For Windows, I storngly recommend you to stick with XP Pro. It's 10X more stable than Vista.
85 running processes seem a tad high. My Vista Business (on my laptop) is at 77 processes at the moment, status being vista processes + f-secure 2008 + Nokia PC suite + web browser.

Ram usage at 850MB/2048MB. At full idle (nothing running but background apps) it drops to about 650-700MB. (for comparison, my XP Pro desktop idles around 500MB though the hardware and software environments are considerably different)

I have no stability issues what so ever, so I wouldn't agree with your 10X statement. It is no doubt much much heavier than XP. That is, XP will run better on virtually any configuration regardless of stability issues.
Image
User avatar
Andre_online
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 7730
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 10:43
Location: Singapore (GMT+8)
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Andre_online »

vellu wrote:I have no stability issues what so ever, so I wouldn't agree with your 10X statement. It is no doubt much much heavier than XP. That is, XP will run better on virtually any configuration regardless of stability issues.
My brother works as a part-time technician in his work place, and he is in charge of repairing the computers and replacing spare parts.

He bought a Dell laptop with a pre-installed Vista Home Premium, and he wasn't able to do as many stuff that XP was able to, mainly with the printers, 'cuz he's a designer, let alone all the computers in his workplace are all Macs.

He got so frustrated then and he condemned Vista.. I don't know what he did to that Dell after that. :P
User avatar
vellu
Valued Member
Valued Member
Posts: 1733
Joined: 04 Nov 2004, 23:20
Location: Finland

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by vellu »

Andre_online wrote:
vellu wrote:He bought a Dell laptop with a pre-installed Vista Home Premium, and he wasn't able to do as many stuff that XP was able to, mainly with the printers, 'cuz he's a designer, let alone all the computers in his workplace are all Macs.
That's a different matter all together. True indeed, some hardware and software simply do not work (atleast yet) with Vista at all. The biggest problem for me at the moment is a complete lack of a working IPSEC VPN client application, which pretty much forces me to use my (really) old XP Pro laptop for certain work purposes instead of my "state of the art"ish new Vista laptop.

Luckily that is purely a software issue, and time will fix that eventually. Some older hardware on the other hand might just go unsupported to eternity. Atleast HP has announced that some of its older multifunction laser/fax printers are not and will not be supported in Vista. Ever.
Image
User avatar
snoopdogg879
Drift King
Drift King
Posts: 366
Joined: 01 Sep 2006, 20:36
Location: Sitting in a Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX MR Edition that is fully tricked out
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by snoopdogg879 »

Andre_online wrote:Hmm, given a choice, I'd rather get a Mac instead of a Vista-installed computer. Seriously... you're paying Vista for its looks, and it's lagging my PC at times. I regeretted getting an Acer laptop when I could have gotten a MacBook for the same price, which can run Windows as well on Bootcamp.. #-o

Thank God I got a free upgrad of my RAM to 2GB. If I left it un-upgraded with only 1GB, this laptop would have died a long time ago. Just look at how much memory Vista is taking:

Image


For Windows, I storngly recommend you to stick with XP Pro. It's 10X more stable than Vista.

it depend on which mac you get because if you deside to get a desktop then get the mac pro tower and get lepeord so you can put both vista and the new OSX lepeord on it


and holy crap that is high for processes, im running vista ultimate 64 bit and i am running 59 processes right now
*sig removed for being too big. max size 550x120px & 50kb*
User avatar
Andre_online
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 7730
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 10:43
Location: Singapore (GMT+8)
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Andre_online »

Actually, an iMac will do the job as well. You don't necessarily need a Mac Pro to run Vista smoothly via Bootcamp. The current iMac itself is pretty high end already by default. ;)
User avatar
Danyutz
Donator
Donator
Posts: 1696
Joined: 25 Oct 2004, 22:17
Location: Romania
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Danyutz »

I had once Vista Ultimate, installed and that "are u sure that are u sure you want to install/uninstall ..." kept on bugging me out, but found a way to get rid of it. I had it for a month, it was ok, can't complain. Soon I reinstalled XP, due to the new games and since I only share 1gb ram, vista + lately games won't go together to well on my comp. I'll wait for a service pack, maybe it will improve some things.
Image
Jmac-
Drift King
Drift King
Posts: 833
Joined: 10 May 2004, 08:57

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Jmac- »

Andre_online wrote:Hmm, given a choice, I'd rather get a Mac instead of a Vista-installed computer. Seriously... you're paying Vista for its looks, and it's lagging my PC at times. I regeretted getting an Acer laptop when I could have gotten a MacBook for the same price, which can run Windows as well on Bootcamp.. #-o

Thank God I got a free upgrad of my RAM to 2GB. If I left it un-upgraded with only 1GB, this laptop would have died a long time ago. Just look at how much memory Vista is taking:

Image


For Windows, I storngly recommend you to stick with XP Pro. It's 10X more stable than Vista.
:roll:

First of all, OS X 10.5 has had its own share of issues, some even worse than Vista has ever had (I've yet to hear of Vista deleting files during transfer). I've had white screens of death, blue screens of death, black screens of death, you name it on my iMac. To date, I've had my iMac lock up on me more times than any of my PCs (running Vista and/or XP) combined and I've only owned my iMac for 4 months while I have PCs from way back in 2001. Leopard only made things worse (adding new colours to the screens of death, fancy), so I ended up reverting back to Tiger after a few weeks of use. Don't get me wrong, I like OS X (in some ways better than WIndows), it's just not all its hyped up to be, IMO ...

Secondly, you don't seem to realize that Vista utilizes memory in an entirely different way than XP does. Ever hear of the Superfetch feature that's explicitly advertised in every Vista promotion for the last year ? Well, what Superfetch does is load your most commonly used programs INTO MEMORY so they load quicker (approximately 1/3 of your memory is set aside of Superfetch). So, while on the surface it may look like Vista is consuming more memory and making things slower, what it's really doing is making things quicker. This isn't to say Vista doesn't run slower than XP does, because Vista itself is certainly a lot more resource-intensive than XP is ... Then again, Windows 98/ME runs a hell of a lot better on 256 MB of RAM than XP does, but doesn't mean that 98/ME is better than XP; it just means that you need better hardware to see the benefits.

2 GB is seriously the absolute minimum I would recommend for Vista. 1 GB runs reasonably well for basic tasks, but there just isn't a lot of room to make use of Vista's features that actually make it worthwhile to use (i.e. Superfetch). 2 GB still has some issues, like slow startup/shutdown times and rather excessive writes/reads from the page file compared to XP, but when you move up to 3 GB or more (give or take if you have 4 GB installed on the 32-bit version), it really flies. The CPU also makes quite a large difference as well; having a multi-core CPU on Vista is essenital, IMO, and the more cores, the better. Having built many computers that have run Vista and XP, I can safely say that if you have a quad core CPU and 4 GB of RAM, you will not regret getting Vista, whether you get the 32-bit or 64-bit version.

Acer's also have a lot of crap running in the background, which compounds the problem. This obviously isn't the fault of Vista, but rather your choice of vendor. And, as I mentioned earlier, Vista w/ 2 GB of RAM will have rather excessive reads/writes from the page file, which is located on your hard drive (or on a USB flash drive, if you're using Readyboost). Laptops tend to have slower hard drives (4200/5400 RPM vs. 7200 RPM) and less onboard cache than desktop hard drives, so this makes the problem even worse. On a laptop, having more memory is even more important than on a desktop for this very reason.

As for stability, I haven't experienced any stability issues with Vista on any of the PCs I've built. I would say Vista is at least as stable as XP is from personal experience.

Now, I'm not saying Vista is the greatest or better than XP. I just can't stand it when people say Vista sucks for so-and-so reason when the stated reason is completely incorrect or misunderstood. Both XP and Vista have their places in the market and for the majority of people, I would say XP is a better choice because it works better on older/slower computers, people are a lot more familiar and comfortable with XP, and damn near everything works with XP. Vista has improved in many ways over XP (i.e. scaling w/ high-end hardware, search, GUI, bundled software, etc.), however, it was/isn't ready for primetime for the reasons stated above (runs poorly on low-end/old hardware, UI changed too drastically from previous versions, hardware/software support not as good as it should be, UAC is annoying and most people don't know it can be disabled). Vista Service Pack 1 will address many of the existing issues (Performance improvements on low-end hardware, hardware/software compatibility, number of UAC prompts reduced significantly, etc.) and is due out early in the new year. I've been using a beta of SP1 that I got off torrents for a little bit and there are definitely improvements that I'm sure most people will appreciate.
Jmac-
Drift King
Drift King
Posts: 833
Joined: 10 May 2004, 08:57

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Jmac- »

Andre_online wrote:Actually, an iMac will do the job as well. You don't necessarily need a Mac Pro to run Vista smoothly via Bootcamp. The current iMac itself is pretty high end already by default. ;)
The current iMac is great for everything except games (The HD 2600 Pro is weak) and it isn't perfect for graphic professionals (Colour accuracy and screen uniformity, while better than average, is certainly worse than the Apple Cinema Displays, needs a memory upgrade out of the box). If you're getting Leopard, I would probably upgrade to 2 GB or 4 GB of RAM. Of note, adding more RAM is extremely easy (unscrew 1 screw on the bottom of the screen, remove speaker panel, insert memory, re-insert the speaker panel, screw back in) on the iMacs and the 1 GB versions have a single DIMM, so you can just pick up some Apple certified memory for dirt cheap ($25 @ Newegg for 1 GB, $50 @ Newegg for 2 GB) and install it yourself.

For example:
24" iMac w/ 2.8 GHz Core 2 Extreme, 1 GB of RAM, 500 GB HDD, HD 2600 Pro = $2149

Upgrade to 2 GB of Memory = $150
DIY upgrade to 2 GB of Memory = $25 (Savings of $125)

Upgrade to 3 GB of Memory = N/A
DIY upgrade to 3 GB of Memory = $50

Upgrade to 4 GB of Memory = $850
DIY upgrade to 4 GB of Memory = $100 (Savings of $750)

Personally, I would have got the Mac Pro and Apple Cinema Display, but I couldn't afford it, so I settled on the iMac.
User avatar
Andre_online
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 7730
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 10:43
Location: Singapore (GMT+8)
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Andre_online »

Jmac- wrote:First of all, OS X 10.5 has had its own share of issues, some even worse than Vista has ever had (I've yet to hear of Vista deleting files during transfer). I've had white screens of death, blue screens of death, black screens of death, you name it on my iMac. To date, I've had my iMac lock up on me more times than any of my PCs (running Vista and/or XP) combined and I've only owned my iMac for 4 months while I have PCs from way back in 2001. Leopard only made things worse (adding new colours to the screens of death, fancy), so I ended up reverting back to Tiger after a few weeks of use. Don't get me wrong, I like OS X (in some ways better than WIndows), it's just not all its hyped up to be, IMO ...
C'mon.. Is Vista even comparable with Leopard? They're both released in the same year, and I can say by far it's much more stable than what Vista has offered me.

What have you done to it anyway that caused the fancy colurs screen of death to your iMac? AFAIK, I use a MacBook Pro, and it hasn't been giving me any problems on my side.
Jmac-
Drift King
Drift King
Posts: 833
Joined: 10 May 2004, 08:57

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Jmac- »

Andre_online wrote:
Jmac- wrote:First of all, OS X 10.5 has had its own share of issues, some even worse than Vista has ever had (I've yet to hear of Vista deleting files during transfer). I've had white screens of death, blue screens of death, black screens of death, you name it on my iMac. To date, I've had my iMac lock up on me more times than any of my PCs (running Vista and/or XP) combined and I've only owned my iMac for 4 months while I have PCs from way back in 2001. Leopard only made things worse (adding new colours to the screens of death, fancy), so I ended up reverting back to Tiger after a few weeks of use. Don't get me wrong, I like OS X (in some ways better than WIndows), it's just not all its hyped up to be, IMO ...
C'mon.. Is Vista even comparable with Leopard? They're both released in the same year, and I can say by far it's much more stable than what Vista has offered me.

What have you done to it anyway that caused the fancy colurs screen of death to your iMac? AFAIK, I use a MacBook Pro, and it hasn't been giving me any problems on my side.
First white screen of death I got was doing the following:

Insert Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard Disc
Double-Click Install
Click on Restart
After restart, screen came up white and would not proceed any further.

After I finally got it to actually boot into OS X, it then told me to install updates. Installed the updates, clicked on restart, and upon the restart, guess what ? That's right, white screen of death.

It also randomly boots into a blue screen of death as well and occasionally will give me a black screen of death while watching movies. I must be clicking the mouse wrong or pushing the power button wrong or holding the remote wrong or something ...

I can say Vista has been far more stable than Leopard for me. And I don't suppose you've looked on the internet about how many people have been having problems w/ Leopard, have you ? It's basically Apple's Vista as far as bad PR goes ... :shrug: At least MS doesn't edit your posts when you post your problems in their forums because "blue screen of death" is "distasteful" :roll:
User avatar
Carcrazy
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 4082
Joined: 28 May 2006, 05:08
Location: /// .Happy in Exile. \\\
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Carcrazy »

I know this is kind of a late question... but what model Acer Laptop was it? :lol:
Image
User avatar
Andre_online
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 7730
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 10:43
Location: Singapore (GMT+8)
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Andre_online »

Jmac- wrote:First white screen of death I got was doing the following:

Insert Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard Disc
Double-Click Install
Click on Restart
After restart, screen came up white and would not proceed any further.

After I finally got it to actually boot into OS X, it then told me to install updates. Installed the updates, clicked on restart, and upon the restart, guess what ? That's right, white screen of death.

It also randomly boots into a blue screen of death as well and occasionally will give me a black screen of death while watching movies. I must be clicking the mouse wrong or pushing the power button wrong or holding the remote wrong or something ...

I can say Vista has been far more stable than Leopard for me. And I don't suppose you've looked on the internet about how many people have been having problems w/ Leopard, have you ? It's basically Apple's Vista as far as bad PR goes ... :shrug: At least MS doesn't edit your posts when you post your problems in their forums because "blue screen of death" is "distasteful" :roll:
So your Mac was previously an OS Tiger I suppose? So was mine. I upgraded my OS Tiger to Leopard. So far, nothing wrong. I hope your disc isn't a fake and you bought it legally.. You should go to an Apple store to get it checked.
Jmac- wrote:I can say Vista has been far more stable than Leopard for me. And I don't suppose you've looked on the internet about how many people have been having problems w/ Leopard, have you ? It's basically Apple's Vista as far as bad PR goes ...
You gotta be kidding right? I had a BSOD in Vista the first week I had my Acer. If you haven't noticed, Leopard's reviews are by far nothing close to Vista's. Leopard's too advanced to even be close enough to Vista, far by MILES I can safely say. I trust Apple more than Microsoft. :)

BTW, if you're referring to me, I'm using an Acer Travelmate.
User avatar
Carcrazy
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 4082
Joined: 28 May 2006, 05:08
Location: /// .Happy in Exile. \\\
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Carcrazy »

Once again... WHAT MODEL WAS IT!?

There's a problem with one of Vista's updates for Acer Laptops, (probably all running X3100 Graphics,) at least there was for mine. An error in an "Updated Driver" (from Windows Update) caused a BSOD for me. If you're still having problems, (I'm presuming it's newer, since it's even running vista,) go to intel, ATi, or nVidia or where ever your chipset it from and get the real drivers... if not, then this will help anybody with a system similar to an Extensa 4620. :P
Image
User avatar
Andre_online
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 7730
Joined: 04 Jun 2004, 10:43
Location: Singapore (GMT+8)
Contact:

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Andre_online »

No no, mine's OK now. I forgot what I uninstalled, but whatever it was, it solved the problem. :)
User avatar
Stereo
Unbeatable
Unbeatable
Posts: 3942
Joined: 18 Aug 2003, 19:33
Location: Outside your window

Re: Vista : Yes or No

Post by Stereo »

If you tweak Vista to make it faster, it's very nice. I'm not using it for looks. I have Windows Classic on now. I'm using it for the quick startup and also because I'm used to it. :D
Image
Post Reply

Return to “The Hardware & Software”