Board index » Windows Vista » As usual Vista sucks

Quote

Thing runs fine on XP but sucks wind on a new HP Vista machine



"It's when I'm playing a game that it takes a while for it to Maximize and

when I hit Post My Play it takes about 40 seconds to do it. With my old

computer everything was instantaneous. I have 4 games going with 4

different friends and they aren't experiencing any slow down with the

game."



Site is here: www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm

Home page is: www.thepixiepit.co.uk" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk



M$ stuff never works early on.

Quote

Thing runs fine on XP but sucks wind on a new HP Vista machine



"It's when I'm playing a game that it takes a while for it to Maximize and

when I hit Post My Play it takes about 40 seconds to do it. With my old

computer everything was instantaneous. I have 4 games going with 4

different friends and they aren't experiencing any slow down with the

game."



Site is here: www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm

Home page is: www.thepixiepit.co.uk" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk



M$ stuff never works early on.

Quote

The amount of ram above 1 gb has very little effect on performace unless you

are doing CAD, video editing or heavy high res photoshop work.

Quote

Thing runs fine on XP but sucks wind on a new HP Vista machine



"It's when I'm playing a game that it takes a while for it to Maximize and

when I hit Post My Play it takes about 40 seconds to do it. With my old

computer everything was instantaneous. I have 4 games going with 4

different friends and they aren't experiencing any slow down with the

game."



Site is here: www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm

Home page is: www.thepixiepit.co.uk" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk



M$ stuff never works early on.

Quote

"LouB" <LouB@invalid.com>wrote in message

news:47AB3689.1000306@invalid.com...

>Thing runs fine on XP but sucks wind on a new HP Vista machine

>

>"It's when I'm playing a game that it takes a while for it to Maximize

>and when I hit Post My Play it takes about 40 seconds to do it. With

>my old computer everything was instantaneous. I have 4 games going

>with 4 different friends and they aren't experiencing any slow down

>with the game."

>

>Site is here: www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm

>Home page is: www.thepixiepit.co.uk" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk

>

>M$ stuff never works early on.

>





Is your new HP machine up to the task? How much RAM?

Quote

Why do so many of these incoherent posts come from the UK? No question, no

point, just bitching and moaning about...nothing really.





"LouB" <LouB@invalid.com>wrote in message

news:47AB3689.1000306@invalid.com...

>Thing runs fine on XP but sucks wind on a new HP Vista machine

>

>"It's when I'm playing a game that it takes a while for it to Maximize

>and when I hit Post My Play it takes about 40 seconds to do it. With my

>old computer everything was instantaneous. I have 4 games going with 4

>different friends and they aren't experiencing any slow down with the

>game."

>

>Site is here: www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm

>Home page is: www.thepixiepit.co.uk" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk

>

>M$ stuff never works early on.

>

Quote

Attention Microsoft Windows Vista RTM And Windows Vista Service Pack One

RTM Naysayer's: If You Hate Either Windows Vista RTM or Windows Vista

Service Pack One RTM, You'll Love Microsoft Windows Server 2008 RTM, Just

FYI. It's Much More Stable Than Windows XP Service Pack 2 RTM And Windows

Vista RTM Combined, Just FYI. There Are Many People Out There Who Prefer

To Run Microsoft Windows Server 2003, Release 2, Service Pack 2, Instead

Of Microsoft Windows XP, Service Pack 2, Just FYI. If You're One Of Those

People Who Can Justify Spending A Slightly Higher Amount Of Money For A

Server Product To Run On Your Desktop Computer, Microsoft Windows Server

2008 RTM Is The Product That You Are Looking For, Just FYI.

Quote

"LouB" <LouB@invalid.com>wrote in message

news:47AB3689.1000306@invalid.com...

>Thing runs fine on XP but sucks wind on a new HP Vista machine

>

>"It's when I'm playing a game that it takes a while for it to Maximize

>and when I hit Post My Play it takes about 40 seconds to do it. With my

>old computer everything was instantaneous. I have 4 games going with 4

>different friends and they aren't experiencing any slow down with the

>game."

>

>Site is here: www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm

>Home page is: www.thepixiepit.co.uk" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk

>

>M$ stuff never works early on.

>

Quote

<kevpan815@nospam.hotmail.com>wrote in message

news:uQ%23dugbaIHA.5088@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>Attention Microsoft Windows Vista RTM And Windows Vista Service Pack One RTM Naysayer's: If

>You Hate Either Windows Vista RTM or Windows Vista Service Pack One RTM, You'll Love

>Microsoft Windows Server 2008 RTM, Just FYI. It's Much More Stable Than Windows XP Service

>Pack 2 RTM And Windows Vista RTM Combined, Just FYI. There Are Many People Out There Who

>Prefer To Run Microsoft Windows Server 2003, Release 2, Service Pack 2, Instead Of Microsoft

>Windows XP, Service Pack 2, Just FYI. If You're One Of Those People Who Can Justify Spending

>A Slightly Higher Amount Of Money For A Server Product To Run On Your Desktop Computer,

>Microsoft Windows Server 2008 RTM Is The Product That You Are Looking For, Just FYI.



I thought you were so hot for Ubuntu? Now you are telling people to put Windows 2008 Server

on their desktop? Only YOU would suggest that because you don't know what you are doing or

what you are saying. Just FYI. Windows 2008 Server is more money, doesn't run some

applications, needs modifications. NOT what someone should be doing. For you, it's OK

because as they say, you have nothing better to do than to install and uninstall Operating

Systems. You actually don't do any work, or can't do any work. I've been reading the

threads.



Get a brain in that thick skull of yours. Geeze.

Quote

"Bill Yanaire" <Bill@yaniaire.com>wrote in message

news:OAGLlZcaIHA.748@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>

><kevpan815@nospam.hotmail.com>wrote in message

>news:uQ%23dugbaIHA.5088@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>>Attention Microsoft Windows Vista RTM And Windows Vista Service Pack One

>>RTM Naysayer's: If You Hate Either Windows Vista RTM or Windows Vista

>>Service Pack One RTM, You'll Love Microsoft Windows Server 2008 RTM,

>>Just FYI. It's Much More Stable Than Windows XP Service Pack 2 RTM And

>>Windows Vista RTM Combined, Just FYI. There Are Many People Out There

>>Who Prefer To Run Microsoft Windows Server 2003, Release 2, Service Pack

>>2, Instead Of Microsoft Windows XP, Service Pack 2, Just FYI. If You're

>>One Of Those People Who Can Justify Spending A Slightly Higher Amount Of

>>Money For A Server Product To Run On Your Desktop Computer, Microsoft

>>Windows Server 2008 RTM Is The Product That You Are Looking For, Just

>>FYI.

>

>I thought you were so hot for Ubuntu? Now you are telling people to put

>Windows 2008 Server on their desktop? Only YOU would suggest that

>because you don't know what you are doing or what you are saying. Just

>FYI. Windows 2008 Server is more money, doesn't run some applications,

>needs modifications. NOT what someone should be doing. For you, it's OK

>because as they say, you have nothing better to do than to install and

>uninstall Operating Systems. You actually don't do any work, or can't do

>any work. I've been reading the threads.

>

>Get a brain in that thick skull of yours. Geeze.



You are wasting your time, Bill.



As I have learned, you might as well be talking to a loaf

of bread when responding to Kevin or Alex.





-Michael

Quote

Quote

"MICHAEL" <u158627_7@dslr.net>wrote in message

news:%23BzclecaIHA.5768@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>"Bill Yanaire" <Bill@yaniaire.com>wrote in message

>news:OAGLlZcaIHA.748@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>>I thought you were so hot for Ubuntu? Now you are telling people to put Windows 2008

>>Server on their desktop? Only YOU would suggest that because you don't know what you are

>>doing or what you are saying. Just FYI. Windows 2008 Server is more money, doesn't run

>>some applications, needs modifications. NOT what someone should be doing. For you, it's

>>OK because as they say, you have nothing better to do than to install and uninstall

>>Operating Systems. You actually don't do any work, or can't do any work. I've been reading

>>the threads.

>>

>>Get a brain in that thick skull of yours. Geeze.

>

>You are wasting your time, Bill.

>

>As I have learned, you might as well be talking to a loaf

>of bread when responding to Kevin or Alex.

>

>

>-Michael



Well that might be true, but it feels good to slam 'em every chance I get :-)

Quote

Why do so many of these incoherent posts come from the UK? No question, no

point, just bitching and moaning about...nothing really.



That's because computer users outside the USA are more discerning. For the

Quote

"LouB" <LouB@invalid.com>wrote in message

news:47AB3689.1000306@invalid.com...

>Thing runs fine on XP but sucks wind on a new HP Vista machine

>

>"It's when I'm playing a game that it takes a while for it to Maximize

>and

>when I hit Post My Play it takes about 40 seconds to do it. With my old

>computer everything was instantaneous. I have 4 games going with 4

>different friends and they aren't experiencing any slow down with the

>game."

>

>Site is here: www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm

>Home page is: www.thepixiepit.co.uk" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk

>

>M$ stuff never works early on.

>

Quote

Cameron Snyder wrote:





>Why do so many of these incoherent posts come from the UK? No question, no

>point, just bitching and moaning about...nothing really.

>



That's because computer users outside the USA are more discerning.

Quote

most part, Americans are stupid, driven by marketing, are brainwashed and

half of them voted for Bush, which should say it all.

Quote

yeah, Cheers as*hole!



-

Quote

NoStop wrote:



>Cameron Snyder wrote:

>

>

>>Why do so many of these incoherent posts come from the UK? No question,

>>no point, just bitching and moaning about...nothing really.

>>

>

>That's because computer users outside the USA are more discerning.



Meat pies and canadian beacon...yeah!...LOL!



For the

>most part, Americans are stupid, driven by marketing, are brainwashed and

>half of them voted for Bush, which should say it all.



So what is you're excuse you brain dead lying linux POS loser?

Well...?

Frank

>

yeah, Cheers as*hole!

>

Thanks Frankie Boy. You just proved my point.

Quote

Thanks Frankie Boy. You just proved my point.

Quote

yeah, more Cheers!



-

Quote

Why do so many of these incoherent posts come from the UK? No question, no

point, just bitching and moaning about...nothing really.





"LouB" <LouB@invalid.com>wrote in message

news:47AB3689.1000306@invalid.com...

>Thing runs fine on XP but sucks wind on a new HP Vista machine

>

>"It's when I'm playing a game that it takes a while for it to Maximize and

>when I hit Post My Play it takes about 40 seconds to do it. With my old

>computer everything was instantaneous. I have 4 games going with 4

>different friends and they aren't experiencing any slow down with the

>game."

>

>Site is here: www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk/scrabble/index.htm

>Home page is: www.thepixiepit.co.uk" >www.thepixiepit.co.uk

>

>M$ stuff never works early on.

>

-

Quote

MICHAEL wrote:



Kevin

radio.weblogs.com/0001014/images/2003/03/20/headUpAss.jpg" >radio.weblogs.com/0001014/images/2003/03/20/headUpAss.jpg

Alex.

jakeparrillo.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/head-up-ass.jpg" >jakeparrillo.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/head-up-ass.jpg

Quote

The amount of ram above 1 gb has very little effect on performace unless

you are doing CAD, video editing or heavy high res photoshop work.

Trust me, I have tried both XP and Vista on the same machine...

XP is faster and better on the same hardware my a margine of at least

20%... and whatever you feed vista in ram it wont get better especially in

the case of this guy who is trying to play games....



Can you just accept that the only difference between Vista and a Bucket of

sh*t is the bucket?



From what I have observed over the last 1 year installing Vista for

clients on a multitude of machines, the only way for vista to be at least

functionable (for tasks more that email and browsing) is to have an

extreamly powerful cpu, so that even though Vista will be slowing

everything down, the amount of added slowness will not annoy you to the

point were you want to throw it out of the window.



A client of mine who has dual boot keeps telling me how slow vista is, an

a very fast 2 core machine with 2 gigs of ram...

each time I go to his place for various things, he keeps telling me this.

You see he can compare the 2 OS because I have set up a Dual Boot for him.

He ends up using XP 99% of the time.. LOL



Mind you that there is NOTHING wrong with the Vista install... everything

is ok.. its just Vista...



You know vista.. the failure OS from Microsoft?



By wondering like a fool to this poster if he has enough ram you are

trying to imply that its not Vista that is the problem, you are trying to

mislead him, and make him think that there is something wrong with the

computer itself.



That is revolting, and its not honest. Be a man and come out of the closet

and tell the truth (if you know it that is) because there are only 2

options



a) You are totally ignorant that vista is a slow and bloated POS OS. and

you should not be a MVP

b) You are misleading people on purpose which is worse than a)



in any of the above cases you are not displaying any kind of

intelligence... I suggest you either learn the basics or put a sock in it.

Quote

The amount of ram above 1 gb has very little effect on performace unless

you are doing CAD, video editing or heavy high res photoshop work.

Trust me, I have tried both XP and Vista on the same machine...

XP is faster and better on the same hardware my a margine of at least

20%... and whatever you feed vista in ram it wont get better especially in

the case of this guy who is trying to play games....



Can you just accept that the only difference between Vista and a Bucket of

sh*t is the bucket?



From what I have observed over the last 1 year installing Vista for

clients on a multitude of machines, the only way for vista to be at least

functionable (for tasks more that email and browsing) is to have an

extreamly powerful cpu, so that even though Vista will be slowing

everything down, the amount of added slowness will not annoy you to the

point were you want to throw it out of the window.



A client of mine who has dual boot keeps telling me how slow vista is, an

a very fast 2 core machine with 2 gigs of ram...

each time I go to his place for various things, he keeps telling me this.

You see he can compare the 2 OS because I have set up a Dual Boot for him.

He ends up using XP 99% of the time.. LOL



Mind you that there is NOTHING wrong with the Vista install... everything

is ok.. its just Vista...



You know vista.. the failure OS from Microsoft?



By wondering like a fool to this poster if he has enough ram you are

trying to imply that its not Vista that is the problem, you are trying to

mislead him, and make him think that there is something wrong with the

computer itself.



That is revolting, and its not honest. Be a man and come out of the closet

and tell the truth (if you know it that is) because there are only 2

options



a) You are totally ignorant that vista is a slow and bloated POS OS. and

you should not be a MVP

b) You are misleading people on purpose which is worse than a)



in any of the above cases you are not displaying any kind of

intelligence... I suggest you either learn the basics or put a sock in it.

Quote

"cheen" <cheen@microsoft.com>wrote in message

news:47ab4d4f@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>The amount of ram above 1 gb has very little effect on performace unless

>you are doing CAD, video editing or heavy high res photoshop work.

>Trust me, I have tried both XP and Vista on the same machine...

>XP is faster and better on the same hardware my a margine of at least

>20%... and whatever you feed vista in ram it wont get better especially

>in the case of this guy who is trying to play games....

>

>Can you just accept that the only difference between Vista and a Bucket

>of sh*t is the bucket?

>

>From what I have observed over the last 1 year installing Vista for

>clients on a multitude of machines, the only way for vista to be at least

>functionable (for tasks more that email and browsing) is to have an

>extreamly powerful cpu, so that even though Vista will be slowing

>everything down, the amount of added slowness will not annoy you to the

>point were you want to throw it out of the window.

>

>A client of mine who has dual boot keeps telling me how slow vista is, an

>a very fast 2 core machine with 2 gigs of ram...

>each time I go to his place for various things, he keeps telling me this.

>You see he can compare the 2 OS because I have set up a Dual Boot for

>him. He ends up using XP 99% of the time.. LOL

>

>Mind you that there is NOTHING wrong with the Vista install... everything

>is ok.. its just Vista...

>

>You know vista.. the failure OS from Microsoft?

>

>By wondering like a fool to this poster if he has enough ram you are

>trying to imply that its not Vista that is the problem, you are trying to

>mislead him, and make him think that there is something wrong with the

>computer itself.

>

>That is revolting, and its not honest. Be a man and come out of the

>closet and tell the truth (if you know it that is) because there are only

>2 options

>

>a) You are totally ignorant that vista is a slow and bloated POS OS. and

>you should not be a MVP

>b) You are misleading people on purpose which is worse than a)

>

>in any of the above cases you are not displaying any kind of

>intelligence... I suggest you either learn the basics or put a sock in

>it.

>





Troll..



--

Mike Hall - MVP

msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx" >msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Quote

Im not a troll you idiot!



But I see you have nothing to say.. so you throw a troll remark and you

are done...



Yeah ignore me.. then go ahead to your next "victim" to tell him how great

vista is, and if its not working for him, its either 3rd party programs,

drivers, his hardware or himself. Never vista neverrrrrrrr





"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@mvps.com>wrote in message

news:OpXvD7kaIHA.1960@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>"cheen" <cheen@microsoft.com>wrote in message

>news:47ab4d4f@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>>The amount of ram above 1 gb has very little effect on performace unless

>>you are doing CAD, video editing or heavy high res photoshop work.

>>Trust me, I have tried both XP and Vista on the same machine...

>>XP is faster and better on the same hardware my a margine of at least

>>20%... and whatever you feed vista in ram it wont get better especially

>>in the case of this guy who is trying to play games....

>>

>>Can you just accept that the only difference between Vista and a Bucket

>>of sh*t is the bucket?

>>

>>From what I have observed over the last 1 year installing Vista for

>>clients on a multitude of machines, the only way for vista to be at

>>least functionable (for tasks more that email and browsing) is to have

>>an extreamly powerful cpu, so that even though Vista will be slowing

>>everything down, the amount of added slowness will not annoy you to the

>>point were you want to throw it out of the window.

>>

>>A client of mine who has dual boot keeps telling me how slow vista is,

>>an a very fast 2 core machine with 2 gigs of ram...

>>each time I go to his place for various things, he keeps telling me

>>this. You see he can compare the 2 OS because I have set up a Dual Boot

>>for him. He ends up using XP 99% of the time.. LOL

>>

>>Mind you that there is NOTHING wrong with the Vista install...

>>everything is ok.. its just Vista...

>>

>>You know vista.. the failure OS from Microsoft?

>>

>>By wondering like a fool to this poster if he has enough ram you are

>>trying to imply that its not Vista that is the problem, you are trying

>>to mislead him, and make him think that there is something wrong with

>>the computer itself.

>>

>>That is revolting, and its not honest. Be a man and come out of the

>>closet and tell the truth (if you know it that is) because there are

>>only 2 options

>>

>>a) You are totally ignorant that vista is a slow and bloated POS OS. and

>>you should not be a MVP

>>b) You are misleading people on purpose which is worse than a)

>>

>>in any of the above cases you are not displaying any kind of

>>intelligence... I suggest you either learn the basics or put a sock in

>>it.

>>

>

>

>Troll..

>

>--

>Mike Hall - MVP

>msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx" >msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

>

>

>

>

Quote

cheen wrote:





...how many months have we endured your Vista hate campaign? Guess what

capin' crunch...you lost this battle before you even started. Vista

is...all of your hate spewing won't change one damn thing. Now SP1 is

coming. You are a troll...just like all the rest of the Vista hate trolls.

Live with it.

Frank



oh and W7 is Vista more refined.

Quote

Im not a troll you idiot!



But I see you have nothing to say.. so you throw a troll remark and you are

done...



Yeah ignore me.. then go ahead to your next "victim" to tell him how great

vista is, and if its not working for him, its either 3rd party programs,

drivers, his hardware or himself. Never vista neverrrrrrrr





Vista works for me. I've had it a year with very few

Quote

Cameron Snyder wrote:



>Why do so many of these incoherent posts come from the UK? No question,

>no

>point, just bitching and moaning about...nothing really.

>

That's because computer users outside the USA are more discerning. For the

most part, Americans are stupid, driven by marketing, are brainwashed and

half of them voted for Bush, which should say it all.

Quote

Why do the English drive on the left...?

Quote

"cheen" <cheen@microsoft.com>wrote in message

news:47ab4d4f@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>The amount of ram above 1 gb has very little effect on performace

>unless you are doing CAD, video editing or heavy high res photoshop

>work. Trust me, I have tried both XP and Vista on the same machine...

>XP is faster and better on the same hardware my a margine of at least

>20%... and whatever you feed vista in ram it wont get better especially

>in the case of this guy who is trying to play games....

>

>Can you just accept that the only difference between Vista and a Bucket

>of sh*t is the bucket?

>

>From what I have observed over the last 1 year installing Vista for

>clients on a multitude of machines, the only way for vista to be at

>least functionable (for tasks more that email and browsing) is to have

>an extreamly powerful cpu, so that even though Vista will be slowing

>everything down, the amount of added slowness will not annoy you to the

>point were you want to throw it out of the window.

>

>A client of mine who has dual boot keeps telling me how slow vista is,

>an a very fast 2 core machine with 2 gigs of ram... each time I go to

>his place for various things, he keeps telling me this. You see he can

>compare the 2 OS because I have set up a Dual Boot for him. He ends up

>using XP 99% of the time.. LOL

>

>Mind you that there is NOTHING wrong with the Vista install...

>everything is ok.. its just Vista...

>

>You know vista.. the failure OS from Microsoft?

>

>By wondering like a fool to this poster if he has enough ram you are

>trying to imply that its not Vista that is the problem, you are trying

>to mislead him, and make him think that there is something wrong with

>the computer itself.

>

>That is revolting, and its not honest. Be a man and come out of the

>closet and tell the truth (if you know it that is) because there are

>only 2 options

>

>a) You are totally ignorant that vista is a slow and bloated POS OS.

>and you should not be a MVP

>b) You are misleading people on purpose which is worse than a)

>

>in any of the above cases you are not displaying any kind of

>intelligence... I suggest you either learn the basics or put a sock in

>it.

>

>

I generally do not feed trolls, but ...



I have moved most of the systems in the office to Vista as well as 2

here at home.

All run just fine with no super CPU as you suggest. The one I am on now

is a 4 year old Dell P4 3.0 CPU.

Installed and ran good on the original 1Gig RAM, but there was a bit of

hesitation from time to time with multiple apps open. Upgraded to 4 Gig

RAM and now just as fast as the two Core 2 systems with 1Gig at the

office.

Quote

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:42:14 -0500, PC Medic wrote:



>"cheen" <cheen@microsoft.com>wrote in message

>news:47ab4d4f@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>>The amount of ram above 1 gb has very little effect on performace

>>unless you are doing CAD, video editing or heavy high res photoshop

>>work. Trust me, I have tried both XP and Vista on the same machine...

>>XP is faster and better on the same hardware my a margine of at least

>>20%... and whatever you feed vista in ram it wont get better especially

>>in the case of this guy who is trying to play games....

>>

>>Can you just accept that the only difference between Vista and a Bucket

>>of sh*t is the bucket?

>>

>>From what I have observed over the last 1 year installing Vista for

>>clients on a multitude of machines, the only way for vista to be at

>>least functionable (for tasks more that email and browsing) is to have

>>an extreamly powerful cpu, so that even though Vista will be slowing

>>everything down, the amount of added slowness will not annoy you to the

>>point were you want to throw it out of the window.

>>

>>A client of mine who has dual boot keeps telling me how slow vista is,

>>an a very fast 2 core machine with 2 gigs of ram... each time I go to

>>his place for various things, he keeps telling me this. You see he can

>>compare the 2 OS because I have set up a Dual Boot for him. He ends up

>>using XP 99% of the time.. LOL

>>

>>Mind you that there is NOTHING wrong with the Vista install...

>>everything is ok.. its just Vista...

>>

>>You know vista.. the failure OS from Microsoft?

>>

>>By wondering like a fool to this poster if he has enough ram you are

>>trying to imply that its not Vista that is the problem, you are trying

>>to mislead him, and make him think that there is something wrong with

>>the computer itself.

>>

>>That is revolting, and its not honest. Be a man and come out of the

>>closet and tell the truth (if you know it that is) because there are

>>only 2 options

>>

>>a) You are totally ignorant that vista is a slow and bloated POS OS.

>>and you should not be a MVP

>>b) You are misleading people on purpose which is worse than a)

>>

>>in any of the above cases you are not displaying any kind of

>>intelligence... I suggest you either learn the basics or put a sock in

>>it.

>>

>>

>I generally do not feed trolls, but ...

>

>I have moved most of the systems in the office to Vista as well as 2

>here at home.

>All run just fine with no super CPU as you suggest. The one I am on now

>is a 4 year old Dell P4 3.0 CPU.

>Installed and ran good on the original 1Gig RAM, but there was a bit of

>hesitation from time to time with multiple apps open. Upgraded to 4 Gig

>RAM and now just as fast as the two Core 2 systems with 1Gig at the

>office.



Well there is one problem with speed: perception.



We all perceive speed extremely differently. What is fast to one person

is slow to the other and vice versa. That is one thing many don't ever

take into account in these speed comparisons.



A machine that feels perfectly responsive and fast to you might feel like

complete crap to the next guy.



One example, co-worker of mine brought her old little 1.something Celeron

based PC with 512 ram in for me the other week to install Ubuntu on it

(and people, please don't hijack this into an linux vs windows thread,

just stating a fact).



Now compared to my 2.4GHz Quad-Core overclocked to 3Ghz, that thing is

absolutely beyond slow to me. It's just absolutely crawling...



She on the other hand is beyond happy with the system now. It saved her

the money from buying a new computer and she's absolutely enjoying using

it and keeps telling how fast her computer now feels compared to before.



Point being, to her the computer is fast...to me it crawls along at a

snails pace. So a users individual perception of speed has a lot to do

with things...



--

Stephan

1986 Pontiac Fiero GT



???????????????

?????????????

Quote

I know the feeling, I use everything from a P3-450/64MB/WinME to a

Q6600/3GB/512MB PCI-e/XP Pro/Vista Ultimate.

Some machines seem to be snails and some jackrabbits. But I use enough

different machines to know when I am waiting too long.

Dual booting between Vista Ultimate and XP Pro on the Q6600 machine makes

me think Vista is a snail.

I've disabled the eye candy, indexing, use classic menus, etc. but it is

still slower on Ultimate.

When people tell me Vista is faster, it makes me wonder...compared to

what? LOL



"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com>wrote in message

news:RN6dnXICrMZLqDDanZ2dnUVZ_u7inZ2d@giganews.com...

>On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:42:14 -0500, PC Medic wrote:

>

>>"cheen" <cheen@microsoft.com>wrote in message

>>news:47ab4d4f@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>>>The amount of ram above 1 gb has very little effect on performace

>>>unless you are doing CAD, video editing or heavy high res photoshop

>>>work. Trust me, I have tried both XP and Vista on the same machine...

>>>XP is faster and better on the same hardware my a margine of at least

>>>20%... and whatever you feed vista in ram it wont get better especially

>>>in the case of this guy who is trying to play games....

>>>

>>>Can you just accept that the only difference between Vista and a Bucket

>>>of sh*t is the bucket?

>>>

>>>From what I have observed over the last 1 year installing Vista for

>>>clients on a multitude of machines, the only way for vista to be at

>>>least functionable (for tasks more that email and browsing) is to have

>>>an extreamly powerful cpu, so that even though Vista will be slowing

>>>everything down, the amount of added slowness will not annoy you to the

>>>point were you want to throw it out of the window.

>>>

>>>A client of mine who has dual boot keeps telling me how slow vista is,

>>>an a very fast 2 core machine with 2 gigs of ram... each time I go to

>>>his place for various things, he keeps telling me this. You see he can

>>>compare the 2 OS because I have set up a Dual Boot for him. He ends up

>>>using XP 99% of the time.. LOL

>>>

>>>Mind you that there is NOTHING wrong with the Vista install...

>>>everything is ok.. its just Vista...

>>>

>>>You know vista.. the failure OS from Microsoft?

>>>

>>>By wondering like a fool to this poster if he has enough ram you are

>>>trying to imply that its not Vista that is the problem, you are trying

>>>to mislead him, and make him think that there is something wrong with

>>>the computer itself.

>>>

>>>That is revolting, and its not honest. Be a man and come out of the

>>>closet and tell the truth (if you know it that is) because there are

>>>only 2 options

>>>

>>>a) You are totally ignorant that vista is a slow and bloated POS OS.

>>>and you should not be a MVP

>>>b) You are misleading people on purpose which is worse than a)

>>>

>>>in any of the above cases you are not displaying any kind of

>>>intelligence... I suggest you either learn the basics or put a sock in

>>>it.

>>>

>>>

>>I generally do not feed trolls, but ...

>>

>>I have moved most of the systems in the office to Vista as well as 2

>>here at home.

>>All run just fine with no super CPU as you suggest. The one I am on now

>>is a 4 year old Dell P4 3.0 CPU.

>>Installed and ran good on the original 1Gig RAM, but there was a bit of

>>hesitation from time to time with multiple apps open. Upgraded to 4 Gig

>>RAM and now just as fast as the two Core 2 systems with 1Gig at the

>>office.

>

>Well there is one problem with speed: perception.

>

>We all perceive speed extremely differently. What is fast to one person

>is slow to the other and vice versa. That is one thing many don't ever

>take into account in these speed comparisons.

>

>A machine that feels perfectly responsive and fast to you might feel like

>complete crap to the next guy.

>

>One example, co-worker of mine brought her old little 1.something Celeron

>based PC with 512 ram in for me the other week to install Ubuntu on it

>(and people, please don't hijack this into an linux vs windows thread,

>just stating a fact).

>

>Now compared to my 2.4GHz Quad-Core overclocked to 3Ghz, that thing is

>absolutely beyond slow to me. It's just absolutely crawling...

>

>She on the other hand is beyond happy with the system now. It saved her

>the money from buying a new computer and she's absolutely enjoying using

>it and keeps telling how fast her computer now feels compared to before.

>

>Point being, to her the computer is fast...to me it crawls along at a

>snails pace. So a users individual perception of speed has a lot to do

>with things...

>

>--

>Stephan

>1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

>

>???????????????

>?????????????

Quote

What part is slow? Booting up, or just generally?

Quote

"Not Me" <cargod01@bresnan.net>wrote in message

news:%23T3Hh%23vaIHA.4344@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

>I know the feeling, I use everything from a P3-450/64MB/WinME to a

>Q6600/3GB/512MB PCI-e/XP Pro/Vista Ultimate.

>Some machines seem to be snails and some jackrabbits. But I use enough

>different machines to know when I am waiting too long.

>Dual booting between Vista Ultimate and XP Pro on the Q6600 machine makes

>me think Vista is a snail.

>I've disabled the eye candy, indexing, use classic menus, etc. but it is

>still slower on Ultimate.

>When people tell me Vista is faster, it makes me wonder...compared to

>what? LOL

>

>"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com>wrote in message

>news:RN6dnXICrMZLqDDanZ2dnUVZ_u7inZ2d@giganews.com...

>>On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:42:14 -0500, PC Medic wrote:

>>

>>>"cheen" <cheen@microsoft.com>wrote in message

>>>news:47ab4d4f@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>>>>The amount of ram above 1 gb has very little effect on performace

>>>>unless you are doing CAD, video editing or heavy high res photoshop

>>>>work. Trust me, I have tried both XP and Vista on the same machine...

>>>>XP is faster and better on the same hardware my a margine of at least

>>>>20%... and whatever you feed vista in ram it wont get better

>>>>especially

>>>>in the case of this guy who is trying to play games....

>>>>

>>>>Can you just accept that the only difference between Vista and a

>>>>Bucket

>>>>of sh*t is the bucket?

>>>>

>>>>From what I have observed over the last 1 year installing Vista for

>>>>clients on a multitude of machines, the only way for vista to be at

>>>>least functionable (for tasks more that email and browsing) is to have

>>>>an extreamly powerful cpu, so that even though Vista will be slowing

>>>>everything down, the amount of added slowness will not annoy you to

>>>>the

>>>>point were you want to throw it out of the window.

>>>>

>>>>A client of mine who has dual boot keeps telling me how slow vista is,

>>>>an a very fast 2 core machine with 2 gigs of ram... each time I go to

>>>>his place for various things, he keeps telling me this. You see he can

>>>>compare the 2 OS because I have set up a Dual Boot for him. He ends up

>>>>using XP 99% of the time.. LOL

>>>>

>>>>Mind you that there is NOTHING wrong with the Vista install...

>>>>everything is ok.. its just Vista...

>>>>

>>>>You know vista.. the failure OS from Microsoft?

>>>>

>>>>By wondering like a fool to this poster if he has enough ram you are

>>>>trying to imply that its not Vista that is the problem, you are trying

>>>>to mislead him, and make him think that there is something wrong with

>>>>the computer itself.

>>>>

>>>>That is revolting, and its not honest. Be a man and come out of the

>>>>closet and tell the truth (if you know it that is) because there are

>>>>only 2 options

>>>>

>>>>a) You are totally ignorant that vista is a slow and bloated POS OS.

>>>>and you should not be a MVP

>>>>b) You are misleading people on purpose which is worse than a)

>>>>

>>>>in any of the above cases you are not displaying any kind of

>>>>intelligence... I suggest you either learn the basics or put a sock in

>>>>it.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>I generally do not feed trolls, but ...

>>>

>>>I have moved most of the systems in the office to Vista as well as 2

>>>here at home.

>>>All run just fine with no super CPU as you suggest. The one I am on now

>>>is a 4 year old Dell P4 3.0 CPU.

>>>Installed and ran good on the original 1Gig RAM, but there was a bit of

>>>hesitation from time to time with multiple apps open. Upgraded to 4 Gig

>>>RAM and now just as fast as the two Core 2 systems with 1Gig at the

>>>office.

>>

>>Well there is one problem with speed: perception.

>>

>>We all perceive speed extremely differently. What is fast to one person

>>is slow to the other and vice versa. That is one thing many don't ever

>>take into account in these speed comparisons.

>>

>>A machine that feels perfectly responsive and fast to you might feel

>>like

>>complete crap to the next guy.

>>

>>One example, co-worker of mine brought her old little 1.something

>>Celeron

>>based PC with 512 ram in for me the other week to install Ubuntu on it

>>(and people, please don't hijack this into an linux vs windows thread,

>>just stating a fact).

>>

>>Now compared to my 2.4GHz Quad-Core overclocked to 3Ghz, that thing is

>>absolutely beyond slow to me. It's just absolutely crawling...

>>

>>She on the other hand is beyond happy with the system now. It saved her

>>the money from buying a new computer and she's absolutely enjoying using

>>it and keeps telling how fast her computer now feels compared to before.

>>

>>Point being, to her the computer is fast...to me it crawls along at a

>>snails pace. So a users individual perception of speed has a lot to do

>>with things...

>>

>>--

>>Stephan

>>1986 Pontiac Fiero GT

>>

>>???????????????

>>?????????????



What part is slow? Booting up, or just generally?

--

Mike Hall - MVP

msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx" >msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx