Do you Use Vista?

Hey, I was just wondering how many of you are actually trying out Vista or if you are not.

 

Nope, Vista would run pretty crappily on my machine, 512meg ram, gma900 etc.

 

It works, but other than some "security features" that you'll never see, it looks like windows XP with eyecandy.

 

Vista final has made its way to the net as of yesterday. I haven't tried it yet but I tried RC2. It's pretty, but my USB HDTV tuner doesn't quite work with it so I'm sticking with WinXP until they get that straightened out.

 

Typing with RC2...Works without any issues & all of my stuff is compatible with it.

 

never tried it... not to sure how cely would like it

let alone my mirage graphics card...

 

I tried the RC1 and the previous betas but they ran pretty crappy on my computer. But I will try the release edition to see if its worth it or not.

 

Yup, I use it most of the time

The only problem is my bluetooth USB dongle driver doesn't play nice on Vista yet. And not all games work yet ex: NFS carbon.

But otherwise it's doing me fine.

 

Oh so most games like WoW work good?

 

I never tried WoW, but yea most games I tried like Doom3, SWAT 4, MS flight SIM etc: work well.

 

I have RC1 and XP pro on my desktop system... I gave Vista an honest week, couldn't get over some of the slow downs and the insane memory usage, so I've gone back to XP...

 

Use it, but not on my notebook. Running RC2 on my desktop and it seems fine but could certainly benefit more memory. Running it on an Athlon 64 3400, GeForce 6800GT, Seagate 7200RPM SATA HDD, with 1GB DDR400 of which it uses about 70% just doing nothing. Otherwise speed is reasonable, much better than earlier betas.

 

So, how do I go about downloading Vista beta and installing it?

EDIT: And what is the latest version?

 

You'll have to search around for it as the CPP has now ended. The latest public release was RC2, but I hear the RTM is floating around the web somehwere.

 

So should I search just for RC2 or for something else, because I don't have any version installed right now.

 

Well yes, RC2 is the last build to be released to CPP(customer preview program) and they only offered the download for one weekend in October. RC1 is the only one which you can currently officially download from MS.

But if you can get hold of a legit RTM build then I would recommend it over RC2.

 

If you can wait til the end of the month, you can buy a legit retail copy of Vista Business from CompUSA. Apparently they just inked an exclusive deal with MS. Link

 

On the computer which just got replaced, I'm currently toying with Vista. So far I haven't seen anything that's really wowed me... except for the ridiculous RAM usage. Idling and not using Aero Glass, it uses around half a gig of RAM... which is absurd. So much for getting a free upgrade to Vista - 2 gigs of RAM is basically a necessity so Vista will essentially cost the price of an extra gig of RAM.

~ Brett

 

The Celeron-M will be fine, however you are right to worryabout the mirage card, although I'd guess it'd be ok without Aeroglass?

 

Vista isn't like XP or any other previous version of Windows with respects to hard drive activity.

Vista isn't like XP or any previous version of Windows with respects to RAM usage.

So if you're thinking it is, you're in for a big surprise. It doesn't just sit there, with gobs of high speed and relatively expensive RAM just sitting there not being put to use caching your most commonly used data files and applications like XP and previous versions of Windows do.

It doesn't just let the high speed hard drive just sit there and do nothing also.

If you think that, you should spend some time learning about what's going on underneath the hood, or watch some webcasts at www.powertogether.com, or read some FAQs.

Vista isn't XP or any previous version of Windows with a fresh coat of paint and more elevated hardware requirements. It does better on more powerful machines, sure, but it's not written in stone that you have to have the baddest video card on the planet when you buy a machine with it, or oodles of RAM that you think you'll never use (RAM is a must, video card is a plus), etc.

People are saying the same things about Vista they did about XP before it was released 5 years ago. Give it time...

bb

 

I like vista a lot.

As soon as the software i use gets updated to work with it Ill switch to vista


I had lots of compatibility problems with software but I like it.
It runs really fast on my machine.

 

Okay I was wondering the Acer Aspire AS5050-5827 would be able to run Vista? I want it to run smoothly, the highest end game I'll be playing are Source games do you think it would it still run smoothly on 1 gig, if not how about 2 gigs? Also how does ReadyBoost feature work out? Will this USB work with it? http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2207207&CatId=0 Also does it really help the performance of Windows Vista? Also is this laptop better than the one I listed above http://www.tigerdirect.ca/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=2466831&Sku=G153-CX2620 ?

 

I use Vista exclusively and love it. Microsoft will be releasing a trial of RTM to the public shortly... I'd definitely recommend giving it a try -- far better than either release candidate build.


As for the system requirements...

For amazing performance (considerably faster than XP), you'd want fast dual core processor, 2 GB RAM, large and fast hard drive, and obviously an aero-capable graphics card.

For performance about on par with XP, you want a basic dual-core processor, 1 GB RAM, and an aero-capable graphics card.

Less than that, and you probably will not see XP-like speed on Vista, although it still runs fairly well on fast single-core processors.


As for Readyboost... it makes a difference. How much depends on your system. On my notebook, the extra 2 GB of cache is nice, and does speed up things like icons coming up on folder views, etc, but certainly isn't necessary. On my brother's system, with 1 GB RAM and single-core processor, the extra cache makes a pretty dramatic difference. In fact, now his system runs about as fast on Vista as XP, which it didn't before. As far as specific USB devices that will or will not work, I don't really know. Once Vista is released, I'm sure manufacturers will be struggling to update packaging to indicate devices that are ReadyBoost compatible. Till then, it's somewhat hit or miss.

Lastly, to get Vista business "early" through CompUSA you cannot buy a single boxed copy. You have to purchase a license for (I believe) at least 5 systems.

Anyway, my $.02.

 

Does anyone think that premature nvidia drivers for Vista might cause a hard drive to work "harder" and a notebook to run warmer?

 

No, but using non-manufacturer optimized Nvidia drivers on a notebook could be causing the graphics chip to run at speeds other than what the manufacturer wants it set at. This could cause a notebook to run warmer. Also, just using aero means your graphics chip is running harder constantly than it was under XP.

No relation between the graphics drivers and the hard drive though. Depending on how much RAM you have, though, you may be working the hard drive harder because the page file is being accessed more frequently than under XP. More RAM, or using a ReadyBoost device, can alleviate that.

 

I have a Dv2000t | Intel Core Duo 2050 | 1 GB of ram | NVidia 7200
I exchanged my original dv2000t with GMA 950 for the NVidia 7200 figuring I would get better performance out of Vista than the GMA 950. I am still glad that I made the exchange, but this machine definitely runs a little warmer than the previous one. I was also dissapointed on the NVidia drivers for Vista. Doesnt seem like I can do much on the new control panel - I cant adjust colors, digital vibrance, etc...and the PureVideo decoder is quirky in Media Center.

Funny thing is, the GMA 950 got a Vista score of 3.0 and the NVidia got a 2.6 - I am assuming this is because of the premature drivers.

 

Benny were you able to use Aero on Vista with the GMA 950?

 

Yes, it worked pretty good. Just some issues with the desktop getting highly pixelated and then snapping back into place when the machine started, came out of sleep mode, and when closing media center. Also, I noticed that windows are fading away now to another open window with the nvidia card. Overall though, the GMA 950 was good enough for Vista.

 

Yeah, Nvidia drivers have a ways to go on Vista. Intel worked closely with Microsoft to get out a well-performing GMA950 driver for the release. Nvidia, which releases new drivers MUCH more frequently, hasn't been working very closely with Microsoft on their Vista drivers, and we probably won't see top-performing drivers till a couple of months after Vista's consumer release.

 

I have 2GB Ram and use a 256MB card with Ready Boost. It uses 235MB.

I can't tell at all if it improves my system or not.

I might try updating my score & see if it changes.

 

Well, I don't think ReadyBoost is measured in the Windows Experience Index, so I doubt it will have any effect at all.

And you really should use a minimum of 1 GB for ReadyBoost. MS recommends a 1:1 matching of RAM to ReadyBoost, but I think 1 GB should be an effective minimum.

 

Do you know when Microsoft will be releasing a trial of RTM to the public?
What USB Drive are you using for ReadyBoost? Also which laptop will run better for Vista the Acer Aspire AS5050-5827 or the Gateway CX2620 ?

 

The public Vista trial will hopefully be up sometime in the next two weeks. Last I was told was first week of December, but it's MS so it may have been pushed back another week or so.

My brother's system is using a Corsair USB Drive, I believe -- unfortunately I don't remember exactly which one. My notebook, and my desktop system are using Sandisk SD cards for ReadyBoost. Personally, I find the SD card method much better for ntoebooks, if your system has an SD card reader, as it sits either entirely or mostly inside the machine and doesn't require lugging around an extra device.

Between the two systems, the Acer with a dual core processor will run Vista faster. The integrated ATI graphics on that machine are plenty to run aero, but it's not going to have lightning fast gaming graphics by any means.

 

I have yet to try it....

 

haven't tried it yet....I'll probably get it with my next laptop....that'll be in 2-4 years....by then they should have at least a service pack or two to get rid of the bugs it currenlty has.

 

So, instead of trying it out for yourself to learn about it (that's what the public betas were for), and just accepting what "they" say about Vista - whoever "they" are/is - you'll fall behind the curve and wait 2-4 years before giving it a shot?

Wow... that's... interesting...

 

Not, exactly....I don't have the money to buy what I need to run Vista at the moment and my system only supports 32bit and I want to get the 64bit Vista....hence the wait to buy a new laptop....and the "they" I'm refering to is Microsoft. I know that most of the bugs are fixed but like XP and all the other windows, there is a more that good chance that not all of them will be fixed when it is put on the market.

 

Hi, I am running Vista RC1 (32 Bit) and was wondering what exactly Readyboost does to your PC's performance. Does having a Scandisc Card in your machine make a big difference in performance? Also, are most of the Vista users using dual boot or do they remove thier previous OS and just use Vista? My laptop gets a Vista rating of:
Processor-4.6
Memory (Ram)-4.7
Graphics-3.6
Gaming Graphics-3.7
Primary Hard Disk-4.4

Dell E1505
Intel Core Duo T2400 @ 1.83GHz, 2GB Ram, 256 MB ATI Radeon Mobility X1400 Hypermemory, 80GB Hard Drive, Creative Sound Blaster 24bit USB, Windows XP Professional & Windows Vista RC1 (Dual Boot)

 

Please take the following with a big grain of salt as it is only my personal opinion

Vista is so bloated I will not use it until I am tied to a chair and whipped to death!

Like everything from MicroSlut, it will be loaded with undocumented features (Bugs) that will probably take them another 8 years to correct, wait a minute, they will not correct them all, they will just introduce another Window Version that will require 10 Terrabytes of storage space just to install it. For the previous version, they will delay the required patch by at least 2 years to get the people off their back and when that time ahas elapsed, come out with a Press Release Stating that they will longuer support that version.

The funny thing with the software industry, it is the only industry that can sell you something and provide no warranty whatsoever.

In any other industry, you would have all the levels of Goverment & the consumer advocacy groups on your back.

Whishing all the ordinary people get a Bill Gates Day (People would line up to kick Bill Gates behind).

I can only imagine how many computers will end up in landfill sites because of that new Window Version.

 

ReadyBoost is one of the disk-caching featuers built into Vista, to try and lessen the impact of slow hard disk performance on the system. The other, which is caching data to unused RAM is always running in the background and uses almost all of your currently available RAM to store data the system thinks you may need soon. ReadyBoost, which works with certain SD cards and USB Drives, backs up frequently accessed data from your hard drive to an encrypted file on your ReadyBoost device, and always reads that data from the ReadyBoost device if it is available.

Honestly, given your system specs, ReadyBoost won't make a night and day difference, and doesn't effect your "rating" at all, but it will speed up your access to programs and files you use frequently.

If you have less RAM (say 1 GB), and therefore don't have as much RAM free that is being used for disk caching, then ReadyBoost makes a much larger difference.

For your other question, I would say most users right now are definitely running a dual-boot configuration, at least until Vista is officially released and solid drivers are available for all our hardware.