BajaNomad - Baja Vista verses Baja XP

Baja Vista verses Baja XP

comitan - 2-18-2008 at 11:00 AM

Read and weep Visters.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=1332&page=2

El Caballo Muerto

MrBillM - 2-18-2008 at 12:53 PM

I found out awhile back that it is pointless to bring this subject up.

Although there are numerous tech articles in various publications aimed at the consumer market with 25 years of experience to draw on, including PC Magazine and PC World, nothing said will convince others who consider themselves more educated on the subject.

Even the fact that PC World found as a result of Whetstone and Dhrystone Benchmark tests that Vista (even with sufficient RAM) was notably slower on single apps, although quicker on multi-threading, was shrugged off by other users as invalid.

Good Luck, though. People will believe whatever they want to.

Al G - 2-18-2008 at 01:53 PM

Has anyone ever known a windows product that was not doubted, trivialized, or Appleized....I thought not. :lol:

In this case I would hope Vista falls on it's bloated face....("bloated" now where have I heard that word before:lol

...XP is the last OS I will learn :lol:

also said that 3.0...3.1...6.22...well you get the picture :lol:

CaboRon - 2-18-2008 at 02:05 PM

Al G,

I have Vista and have been loving it. Perhaps the problems are with persons who try to use it with not enough dual core RAM.

And, support from Microsoft for the XP platform (which I used with great satisfaction) is dwindling.

Perhaps, many people would feel more comfortable not having to learn a new Operating System, but believe me it is worth it.

CaboRon

Limited Vistas

MrBillM - 2-18-2008 at 04:03 PM

A recurrent theme among skeptics which I agree with is that, although they don't Hate Vista, they see no reason to upgrade from XP. IF XP is doing well all of the things you do, then it makes no sense to change. For me, that's true. None of the tasks I need or use a computer for are suffering from any problems in XP. For that matter, MOST of those tasks were done well in 98SE. The best change in XP over 98SE was the improved ability to recognize and load device drivers.

If you ask advice on the desirability of Vista over XP, Immediately reject those who can only reference the "Cool Aero Look".

http://vistasucks.wordpress.com/2007/07/31/acer-hates-window...

http://aabs.wordpress.com/2007/04/18/why-i-hate-windows-vist...

http://www.ihatethis.org/2007/04/16/5-things-i-hate-about-wi...

http://www.pacificviews.org/weblog/archives/002884.html

Mainstream Tech Support for XP will continue for at least another year into early 09 per Microsoft. After that, extended support will continue for Security Updates until early 2014. Any computer in use now will be pretty obsolete in five years.

David K - 2-18-2008 at 04:13 PM

When Windows 2000 came out, they all said it sucked, use Windows 98!

When Windows XP came out, they all said it sucked, stick with 2000!

Windows Vista is out, they say it sucks and stick with XP!??

I am seeing a trend here! :lol:

Except

MrBillM - 2-18-2008 at 05:29 PM

That the sales figures show a substantially higher percentage resistance to Vista than any previous version resulting in the FIRST EVER concession by Microsoft to continue offering the XP system AND reversing course on Service Pack update and continuing support.

Those are FACTS which cannot be denied.

BTW, the critics were well-founded when it came to 2000 which I became more familiar with (Professional and Server) than any system since 3x having taken and passed the Microsoft Certified Professional course on both versions. The most irritating problem with 2000 was the VERY poor certification for Legacy drivers. In that respect, XP was much better. I've used peripherals in XP that wouldn't work with 2000. I actually bought a copy of 2000 Professional at the school discount rate (half-price $75) and never used it after loading the trial version, staying with 98SE until moving on (except for one current Laptop) to XP. I have to admit to not having to work through XP's early trials for that reason. By the time I switched, SP2 had already been issued.

Windows 7's accelerated development schedule (due to Vista questions) may bring it to market by early 2010 or sooner. However, Microsoft has never met a target date yet so we'll see.

To each their own. Vista will get better, but may be orphaned by Win7. Time will tell.

CaboRon - 2-18-2008 at 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrBillM
Vista will get better, but may be orphaned by Win7. Time will tell.

EVERY operating system will be orphaned by the next one in line. And there will always be a next OS because that's how marketing works. You always need new product to generate new money.

CaboRon

Roberto - 2-18-2008 at 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CaboRon
Perhaps the problems are with persons who try to use it with not enough dual core RAM.

What is that?

Al G - 2-18-2008 at 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Roberto

Quote:

Originally posted by CaboRon
Perhaps the problems are with persons who try to use it with not enough dual core RAM.

What is that?

I was wondering myself...I have a dual core processor, but not ram. It sounds logical maybe so I swallowed hard :lol:

RAMming

MrBillM - 2-18-2008 at 06:05 PM

Dual Core Processors.

DDR RAM.

But we know that. It's easy to get the Acronyms cobbled.

And, I was using the word "Orphan" thinking of what happened with ME rather than the natural progression.

Windows ME 09/04/00 -10/25/01 RIP
------------------------------------------------
Called the "Mistake Edition" in the PC World article 'Top 25 Worst Tech Products'.[9] He declared Windows Me the fourth-"Worst Tech Product of All Time" (after AOL, RealPlayer, and Syncronys SoftRAM) because of various technical issues and bugs.[9] "Shortly after Me appeared in late 2000," the article states, "users reported problems installing it, getting it to run, getting it to work with other hardware or software, and getting it to stop running." It was also criticized for its instability and unreliability, due to frequent freezes and crashes.[citation needed] It has a larger number of bugs than its predecessor, Windows 98 SE.[citation needed] The System Restore feature in Windows Me is notorious for archiving computer viruses that cannot be removed by an anti-virus program.[10] The only way to delete the virus is to disable System Restore, which will result in losing all saved restore points, or simply wait until Windows deletes the restore points to make room for new restore points.

[Edited on 2-19-2008 by MrBillM]

CaboRon - 2-18-2008 at 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Roberto

Quote:

Originally posted by CaboRon
Perhaps the problems are with persons who try to use it with not enough dual core RAM.

What is that?

Dual core RAM is two processors in the same chip. The job is broken into two streams (simplistic explanation) that are processed simultaniously.

The next operating systems will use the Quad Processors that have been coming out of R&

.

As an example the Cray (was the worlds fastest main frame) processor uses 32 or 64 processors crunching the same job at the same time.

Great for any kind of batch work and especially for crunching big math problems such as you would encounter in astrophysics for example.

CaboRon

CaboRon - 2-18-2008 at 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Al G

Quote:

Originally posted by Roberto

Quote:

Originally posted by CaboRon
Perhaps the problems are with persons who try to use it with not enough dual core RAM.

What is that?

I was wondering myself...I have a dual core processor, but not ram. It sounds logical maybe so I swallowed hard :lol:

Yes Al, you do have RAM (Random Access Memory as opposed to Virtual Memory which is in your outboard devices such as your hard drive.)

When they refer to one gig or two gig, etc. it is a reference to RAM.

CaboRon

Time to Stop Digging

MrBillM - 2-18-2008 at 06:16 PM

The hole is already too deep.

Dual-Core Processors, Quad-core Processors, whatever are not to be confused with RAM (Random Access Memory).

Roberto - 2-18-2008 at 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CaboRon
Dual core RAM is two processors in the same chip. The job is broken into two streams (simplistic explanation) that are processed simultaniously.

The next operating systems will use the Quad Processors that have been coming out of R&

My dear Cabo Ron - you obviously don't have the first clue what you are talking about. You are confusing RAM with processors. What is particularly funny is that you feel the need to explain it simplistically to those less technical than you. :lol:

I suggest you look up RAM and Dual Core in Wikipedia and report back.

As far as Quad core - this may be what you're thinking of: http://www.intel.com/technology/quad-core/index.htm. They have been available for a while and Linux, Windows, etc. use them just fine. Operating systems don't know or care about that level of hardware implementation, for the most part. As far as the OS is concerned, there are 2/4 actual processors there, not one with multiple cores.

[Edited on 2-19-2008 by Roberto]

bajabound2005 - 2-18-2008 at 06:36 PM

I was listening to a program on NPR a few weeks about and they were talking about "the credit crunch", how it was affecting people, how so many people were over-extended, etc. This guy calls in and is talking about how he lives totally within his means, has no credit cards, etc. Then he goes on to talk about the quality of goods and how thing are manufactured today to basically be thrown away. Cell phones were an example he gave. Look how the technology has changed over the past few years in cell phones...so the one you spent a couple hundred bucks on a few years ago is almost rendered useless in today's wireless world. And as the technology changes so quickly the quality of the project deteriorates; no one wants to put their R & D $ into something what will so "last year" in such short time. MS comes out with a new OS every few years...just when you're starting to learn the current one, bang! Here comes a new one. Better? Who knows? Better for MS? Yes! Better for MS stockholders...maybe?

[Edited on 2-19-2008 by bajabound2005]

wiltonh - 2-18-2008 at 06:54 PM

The people I know that like Vista the best, started by selling or giving away their old machine and all peripherals including printers and scanners.

They then purchased all new stuff. These people do not have all the legacy driver problems that happen when peripheral manufactures do not update their drivers to the new OS.

Most corporations will not start using Vista until it reaches at least SP1.

I know of some Fast Fourier Transform routines that take 10 times longer to run under Vista. They were just moved over with out any optimizations.

Roberto - 2-18-2008 at 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wiltonh
Most corporations will not start using Vista until it reaches at least SP1.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/bb738089.asp...

Quote:

Originally posted by wiltonh
I know of some Fast Fourier Transform routines that take 10 times longer to run under Vista. They were just moved over with out any optimizations.

This is interesting - there must be more info than this. How were the FFTs written (language)? Once in a tight compute loop, unless the system is thrashing, it's hard to come up with a reason for such a difference in performance.

wiltonh - 2-18-2008 at 07:23 PM

I do not have a lot of detail since I was working on the hardware not the software. I believe the library routines being used needed to be updated for Vista.

The same issue applies if you are running a dual core and the software application only knows about one core.

CaboRon - 2-18-2008 at 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Roberto

Quote:

I suggest you look up RAM and Dual Core in Wikipedia and report back.

Before you get on your high horse.... I do know what I am talking about.... RAM is the type of memory that is in your central processor.... is that so tough to understand. And virtual memory is the type that is in your hard drive.

CaboRon

Roberto - 2-18-2008 at 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by CaboRon
Before you get on your high horse.... I do know what I am talking about.... RAM is the type of memory that is in your central processor.... is that so tough to understand. And virtual memory is the type that is in your hard drive.
CaboRon

Oh, ok.

Back to Wikipedia for you! :lol:

And, when you want to upgrade the RAM in that processor, good luck.

[Edited on 2-19-2008 by Roberto]

Iflyfish - 2-18-2008 at 08:28 PM

wiltonh

I know of some Fast Fourier Transform routines that take 10 times longer to run under Vista. They were just moved over with out any optimizations.

QEEG?

My Toshiba Laptop crashed on the road and I had to go to Visa, kicking and screaming I might add. I find it slower and that if I move to fast that it tends to lock up much more than my XP ever did. That being said, my neurology adapts.

Iflyfish

El Camote - 2-18-2008 at 09:10 PM

Genitalmen,
I sincerely hope the following link will resolve and put to rest the ongoing technical discussion regarding Vista. This is well researched and documented information you can pack away in your pocket-protected front shirt pocket.

http://www.blip.tv/file/340692

Thank you for your attention.

[Edited on 2-19-2008 by El Camote]

bajadogs - 2-18-2008 at 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Iflyfish
My Toshiba Laptop crashed on the road and I had to go to Visa, kicking and screaming I might add. I find it slower and that if I move to fast that it tends to lock up much more than my XP ever did. That being said, my neurology adapts.
Iflyfish

Is Mrs. Iffyfish smiling smugly behind her Mac while your neurons short circuit?
:smug:

Heading South

MrBillM - 2-18-2008 at 09:56 PM

Well, the last thread on this subject went South pretty fast, too, so this is no surprise.

The Geeks (including myself) tend to get so wrapped up in the minutiae of this business and the righteousness of their respective viewpoint, that the original question tends to get muddled.

The average user here isn't a geek and most use their computers for relatively mundane tasks. That average user Browses the Internet, sends and receives E-mails, works with their Jpegs, MP3s and DVDs along with other simple Word-processing and (sometimes) business apps.

The greatest beneficiaries of the faster processors outside of professionals seem to be the gaming crowd. That's who the $3000 desktops are built for.

For the average person, the Fastest processor and how many cores it has is of little importance along with the nits and bits of how that information is processed. The bottom of the line in processors will work as fast as they can or need. That's always been the gap between the "Ideal" and actuality. Running benchmark tests on various Real-World business apps has shown time and again that the faster processing speed meant nothing.

With that user in mind, I wonder WHAT specific characteristics Vista delivers that would make it a worthwhile investment, Aero Glitz not included.

Disregarding features previously available as third-party utilities, I would venture the following:

Windows 95 brought Plug and Play.

Windows 98 finally gave us decent USB support.

Windows 2000 integrated NT features into the home platform and improved that USB support.

Windows XP improved on various 2000 shortcomings, most especially peripherals support.

Windows Vista ??

I'm always willing to be convinced.

bajadogs - 2-18-2008 at 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrBillM
I'm always willing to be convinced.

Have you tried a Mac lately? :smug:

Mike....That 'Vista Sucks' video was a hoot!...

Mexray - 2-18-2008 at 11:33 PM

...I could view the video OK, but kept getting a small window that said I was out of memory on 'line 70'....those guys really know how to get a point acorss!

bajadogs - 2-19-2008 at 12:00 AM

Can someone explain to me why this is not in OFF-TOPIC?

Best use for an apple

Al G - 2-19-2008 at 03:31 AM

Now we can go to off topic :lol:

CaboRon - 2-19-2008 at 06:34 AM

Beer from Apples ?

Mac Toys

MrBillM - 2-19-2008 at 09:53 AM

That's my next toy. Since there's finally a Mac within a reasonable price range, I've been planning for awhile now to buy one of those Mac Minis to play with in my spare time. I've blown more than $600 on other toys, so why not ?

The only thing that's holding up my adding one to my various "Test" computers was the possibility that I could pick up a decent deal on a used or refurb but, so far, the difference isn't great enough.

Completely frivolous since I still haven't devoted enough time to the two Linux systems I'm toying with, but it's fun.

As far as moving from the PC over to the Mac platform, in my case, there would be no reason. Any complaints I have over whatever Win O.S. doesn't rise above the level of minor irritation. Everything I want to accomplish, I am. The only things I have difficulty with at times (usually resolved) are a result of Copy Protection and wouldn't be solved by a MAC

We'll see when I get my Mac Toy. Stay tuned.

[Edited on 2-19-2008 by MrBillM]

rob - 2-19-2008 at 10:06 AM

Al G:

I WANT one of those! Can you feed any raw product into the intake hopper? Or does it have to be virus-free apples?

Iflyfish - 2-20-2008 at 02:45 AM

bajadogs:
Mrsfish gets real miffed when I hook up to the internet while she cannot, but that said, I love that lady and her pictures are amazing!! really amazing!

Iflyfishwhennotfightingthemacpcwars

2000 Stability.

MrBillM - 2-21-2008 at 10:32 AM

Lencho is right regarding the improvement in stability that 2000 broght about as a result of it being built on the NT kernal. Back in my GTE days, we installed NT4.0 for a lot of mangement people who became vocal with objections to 95-98. Stability got better with 2000 and better still with XP, although I've seen more than a few Blue Screens with XP. Usually a result of a third-party app, although when I bought a Dell Desktop in 2006, I was getting a Blue Screen every 25-30 boots which then cleared completely for no apparent reason (probably and update that cleared it). I haven't seen a Blue Screen error on that unit since in, probably, more than 200 boots.