i'd rather use x64 version of vista

heh both of them sux
even a winxp x64 is better than any vista version
maybe in far future vista will become good but for now
VISTA IS STILL A WINDOWS MILLENNIUM 2

oh please.. rage... you sound like your reading from one of the typical "lets bash vista" news articles written up by people that don't have a clue...

If vista was ME2.... there wouldn't be a service pack in production...


Vista by far, the most reliable, most stable, the most excellent OS release that Microsoft has ever done, not only that.. but it has a habit of performing several task MUCH faster then windows XP could never do...


Hell, ATI's Crossfire + Vista is a match made in heaven even....

wtf ******* ****** i have vista x32 and x64 ultimate all betas and final ones
any way vista is for shit
there is no point to install vista until patch(SP1) come and there is still lack of drivers for it
people who buys builded PCs format their disks and install winXP sp2
i see that every day
and what is a point of their delay for sp1 ??? 7 months have past when they announced that sp1 will come in 1Q 08 or 2Q 08 year. if you are smartest one here can u tell me that (why people change their os and rest of that)???

I didn't say i was "smart"

I simply stated the comment made by you was no different then the rather stupid ones that can easily be googled and then proved incorrect....


Why do people install windows xp on a machine preinstalled with windows vista?

lets take the following for example:

Manufacturers for example, HP/Toshiba....etc..... have a nasty habit of SCREWING with the orginal OS... disabling microsofts own services that are working just fine, intergrating thier own system, usually one that while kinda worked on windows XP doesn't work worth a shit on vista.... Followed by any combination of applications that haven't been ungraded/updated since thier orginal release, STILL requireing .net 1.1 and whatnot. Basically you buy a computer with a bagged, beaten and brused version of windows vista and a number of garbage programs bloating up the system. Just to add salt to the wounds, some of these companies start preloading other software like norton 2007/2008 which causes even MORE grief, double security issues occasionally pop up, windows may be trying to allow it, but norton.. or any other program like it starts to play the "lets screw with the user till they pull thier brain out from thier own hair roots...."

A step further, Alot of these manufacturers don't even seem like they even thoroughly tested the product, they basically take an older model they have..... slap a slight model change on it, preload it with vista instead..... and volla, you have poorly working hardware and drivers jammed into vista onto a laptop that has lacking support already....

Course this all applies to a number of manufacturers of desktop computers.... Identical problems...


I've had a pile of these machines come in... initially they wanted windows XP back on it.... which i can do.. have done because some insist... but i've also converted a few people after saying, "give me a few with this machine, i think i'll have all your problems solved"

Shortly after removing the bloated garbage from the machine, and resetting vista's Defaults back, handed it back, they haven't had a single hitch since...


Now Programs, People seem to be bitching about VISTA's incapatibilities.... while sure, bitching may relieve a bit of stress, doesn't mean they are accurate in thier statements..

i wouldn't doubt it nearly all the programs that don't work with vista, are specifically due to the developers dropping the ball in programing one correctly OR in many cases, taking shortcuts that only a previous OS had available, and the new OS doesn't.

MOST of the programs available work outa the box..... and the ones i've had complaints about with vista usually are OLDER then even windows 2000/ME..... WTF do you expect when your using a program built for those system on a OS that's new.... 8 years is a long bloody time.... shit, upgrade already... if you went as far as to get vista.. you can bloody well upgrade to the newest quickbooks or microsoft office.

Personally, i've YET to run into a major application that doesn't work with Vista. And out of all the machines i've built, i've yet to have a machine come back due to a vista capability issue.

Anyone that is asking to upgrade or is planning on a new machine, i thoroughly instruct them to RESEARCH all the programs and hardware they already have and confirm IF it'll work or not with vista..... It's not microsofts fault or vista's fault if the consumers are stupid.

All the scanners/cameras/printers/ everything i've plugged in via firewire/usb/etc. have all worked.

Tell me what SP1 should be bringing to the table..

and also tell me specifically what's wrong with vista....

And all consider it all....

But don't pull the "it's windows ME II", "it's shitty driver support", "It's just sux" None of which are true...

You want shitty support... look at windows XP x64..... there is more support for vista NOW then there has been for xp x64 since it's launch years ago now.

I preferred xp x64..... but i'd easily take vista 32bit over it now. It's for lack of a better word...... BETTER

it might be ok if you have the latest hardware

it didn`t work my usb modem

sound blaster live card (forget it )

and thats just the stuff i have here .that made it unusable for me

company`s forcing us to update

oh and any os that does not like daemon tools is on my shit list!!!

blocked product list (big bro is watching)

What problems are you having with deamon tools.. works flawlessly here

Creative... well that's just a POS company that's been going down the tubes for years... but people still bought thier crap...

Dial modems, are, unfortuneatly becoming obsolete... specially with 3com/usr dropping completely out of the picture...

USB modems for cable and whatnot, that's motorola's faults (or whomever's providing the modems).... but i know that vista works with motorola's more recent docksys (docksis?) 5xxx series modems.....

Every company is going to "try" everything they can to get you to pay more, buy more, upgrade more... that's just typical marketing... However no one is FORCING you to do anything... it all goes hand in hand... buy vista, expect to have more recent hardware running it..

but i can debunk quite a bit of it.

Windows Vista will run flawlessly... and just as good if not better on a intel PIII 833mhz with 512mb of ram and a radeon 9500, then windows XP.

actually is a quite good d-link dsl modem

and it tells me daemon is a blocked or bad product when i try too install it

also the drivers and interface suck for my blaster audigy4

i have a duel boot system set to boot into xp after 2 seconds

the blasters days are numbered im sure

im switching too one of those asus xonar soon as i can

I'm just a slave and even I know Vista is a piece of shit.

Funny how the commments about vista have zero weight though...

quit stating something as if it were fact.... when it's clearly completely untrue....

Wouldn't it be funny if the reason you think it's a POS is because your running on an nforce 4 590 board...... wouldn't surprise me at all.. or nvidia's drivers for that matter...



Morbo


Hopefully dlink get's thier act together and releases a damn vista driver then.... but knowing dlink.. they tend to throw you a vista exclusive product in your face, and demand you to upgrade.. instead of just making a driver that'll work...

Creative has sucked since the day they released the 5.1 sound blasters... Hercules 7.1's were vastly superoir... even they have better vista drivers...

Auzentech has a serious card... very impressive..

btw about deamon tools... not sure what's up for you, but i can download it.. run it.... course i have to allow it to proceed.

lol judas(fitting name btw) do you even know what your talking about m8? cuz vista really is crap, its a bloated, slow resource hog which is only media hyped and is forcing people to switch with their "intergral" dx10 component, if they didnt make dx10 vista only then NOONE would use it, because its crap m8, though im sure you and bill gates can go have a hug once this is all said and done.

I think these kinds of posts belong here.

you have point unix

JUDAS pull your head out of your ***
i have friends in microsoft and i am a beta tester and rest
nt6.0 is still unstable and it will not work properly just because of their expermient with dx10 and 3d desktop (they dident make it properly)
i get some info about new os that is coming (end of 2008(beta) and 2009(final))
wait for that one
i see that you know how vista works maybe you are their programmer LOL???
maybe you made vista by your self or maybe bill gates is your student , maybe you Learned bill everything he knows ??? heh
IF NOT: please dont sell that bullshit here
we are not stupid

Unix you'r a bad man

No one deserve this


Anyway I won't try Visa before a long long time for one reason:

It's just to f*cking expensive.

Wth do they need all that money?

And if Vista's is shit,I can't even afford myself to make my own mind

i've YET to hear a reason from any of you in HOW it's bad.. other then restateing "it's shit...." etc.

Prove it how it's a resource hog, how it's unstable, PROVE it....

I could care less who has friends where.... is that sapposed to confirm one thing or another..


I know bloody well what i'm talking about, but it seems none of you seem to.

heh no comments on that i need to prove something
if you wonna prof buy Vista x64 ultimate
try to run cross on it ,try to install aditional devices like tv card , audio card , controlers like sata ata or raid, some old devices like old usb sticks or printers, modems, dsl or any other that is made for usb
old ata hdds (from some unknown reason it make shity errors that hdd is damaged and show you BSOD )
need to think about will you make update drivers like chipset and gpu drivers
need to think will vista stand some DDR2 moduls(like kingmax when u set it to dual chanel it show u some error with ddr damage or somthing <-this is not mbo related) or if you run nvchipset on sli it will crush on boot (cant understand it have seen it but it just make shit)
you cant add most of devices on instald os (every time u change some shit on your pc like pci cards you need to reinstall os)
laptops allso show bsod-s without any good reason
some software is made for vista but it can also crush system (also without any good reason)

.................................................. ............................. list dose not ends
every vista update make some progres in their work but when u take a look on time that passed u see that vista will only be good to look at it from distance


maybe you have a point, let force people to buy os that cost ~450$
yeah let force people to buy os that cant stand most of hardware
let force people to spend 4000-6000$ for new pc that cant guaranty that vista will work on it
LET US ALL BUY A VISTA

i don't care what anyone thinks, vista works for me, have had no problems, but that may be luck, who know? if i could find a good XP pro BIOS activation crack i would have it too.

don't flame me, i would not say it is a flawless OS, not even XP was flawless when it first hit the market, Microsoft need real world testing to work out bugs.

ps, if this will help, i wiped my HD every 6 months on XP, just to keep performance up, but in vista, i have had the same installation for 8 months and have not noticed any lag, it is not a professional evaluation, but i like to share my info.

also i have an old Hauppauge winTV tuner card, and it worked fine once i found a tv program, and the card is from 1998. (windows update found a driver in 3 mins)

it is very true that vista need horsepower to run, my machine had 2GB ram, and it uses 1GB just for backround serives

so i would say stick with XP unless you want the AERO display. and if you want your wallet full (or go the other way if you know what i mean

gen.rage

great...

already running windows vista basic/home premium/business/ultimate and all it's 32bit and x64 flavors across about 50 different systems.

Ranging from nearly 5+ years old.. and some devices being older yet without a hitch of glitch.


Right from a HP 800/900 series printers, to the business jet multi function printers, to the scanners and whatnot from lexmark/epson/hp/connon (aside from the products that even they don't provide xp drivers for, but work in xp and vista as well)

Even installed it on a machine with a radeon 9000 mobility, although no advanced gui, but forcing a radeon 9000 series driver via vista's own driver librarries works excellently.


Never had better raid/sata support thus far.

Old ATA drives? seriously even following the vista's guideline for no less then 20gb, (trusty Maxtor 20gb ATA100 drive sitting here yet) work beautifully...

WTF with your issues other then i'd have to say obviously SHITTY hardware... i've had so many horrid issues with nforce boards, they are so tedious, so picky and so unreliable that "as a manufacturer" i can't even warranty any of the boards at all, they simply are completely unreliable... why? because it's pretty sad when the company that produces the shipsets for these boards basically tell you to STFU and GTFO.....

Nvidia Nforce 4 boards having massive issues with SATAII drives (even though they "state" support for it.... quite a number of these boards were plagued with major sataII issues... Couldn't even get windows XP to load correctly)

I've already stated that Nvidia + Vista is pretty much, EVEN today, a chancey way to go, meanwhile i'm having a great time using intel/AMD/ATI combinations that are working with zero hitches..

I'm running windows Vista x64,

actually the system running the UT3 server i'm providing is running x64 ultimate..... it's been running it stable since UT3 beta was released... course the beta server is known to have the occasional glitch and UT3 crash, vista just hauls along with zero issues.

ATM, i can actually purchase windows vista home premium for LESS then windows xp home.... and in either x64 or 32bit flavors with pretty much zero dollar difference.


So from what i've gathered from you STILL proves nothing aside from your misfortune of having apparently hardware that just doesn't plaining work outa the box like it should. Sorry for your purchase.....

And btw, no one in the right mind NEEDs windows ultimate.... home premium is all anyone typically should ever need or want...... it's considerably less.


Next time, perhaps try a much larger base to try vista on, or maybe perhaps check or rethink your installation methods.... although i'm not sure what your doing... something is wrong, and there is zero reasons for it to be vista's fault.

oh btw


In the consumer world, there isn't much for "force"....


by your figures are WAY the hell blown over..

Lets build a machine ... one that i recently built.. and lets quote on the HIGH side...

windows vista home premium 64bit ~ $150
AMD Athlon AM2 x2 4000+ ~ $95
1gb OCZ PC6400 Ram kit ~ $80
Asus M2A-VM ~ $90
Pioneer DVR-112 DVD-DL-RW ~ $55
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 320gb SATA II ~ $110
Coolermaster Centurion 532 ~ $100
Coolermaster Extreme Power PSU 500watt ~ $65

that build you a damn good little machine, capble of most of what people need to get done..

$745 for a damn decent machine..... that works GREAT with vista.. gives you all everything you need.. and to top it off, for another 20 bucks, you can get the HDMI version of the board.... And if you want to further improve it.. that's easy to do... as it's FULLY upgradeable to anything you want to do excluding crossfire....

hahaha thats good man, you have no clue what your talking about ,the consumer world IS force, i have degree's in business and e-commerce, if companies didnt force people to switch in one war or anyother then people wouldnt bother, the ONLY reason people are using vista(asside from the mainstream users who's computer knowladge ranges from pushing the power button and using the start menu) the only reason any serous computer users are switching is because of dx10, but there is promicing progress being made with encorporating dx10 into xp.

Microsoft is trying to force the public to swich tho their new garbage os so that they can make more money off of you, do you serously think they care about you, or anything else but the all might dollar? They want to sell you the same shit with as many different wrappers as they can so they cam maximize their profits, and people like you actually buy it. They are already working on a new os, most likely they are only releasing the vista service pack to silence complaints and buy time until their new os is ready.

Their even trying to release vista only games and soon software to further force you to switch, the pc version of Halo 3 is vista only, but why you might ask? the graphics in the game are garbage and dated, there is nothing in the game that makes it have to run on vista but they did it so that you HAVE to switch to vista.

vista IS crap, i have actualyl ran vista and xp on the exact same system configs and vista always is aproximatly 10-20% slower then xp, as for stability, xp has is issues and so does vista, but i have had this xp install on here for 5 years now and i have not had to format or had any serious problems with it, and im a pretty heavy user, i push this thing alot, run a huge range of software and games and it never fails me. Seriously if you were atleast backing a good product and a respectable company but your trying to side with douche bags that only care about ripping you off and takeing every last dime from you for unfinished, mediocre programs that should have stayed in development for another year.

Seriously man if you wanna preach your biased opnions, just because you wasted your money on vista and now you feel you need to defend it to humor your pride and justify your desicion, then you found the wrong audience, toms hardware is clearly the place for you.

i got nforce 4 SLI board with 4 SATAII hard drives going and vista, maybe i should go into a passionate argument about it

judas
all i am saying that for normal users that cant afford best equipment vista is not for them
yes prices have gone down for now but think about it
when the price in america is 100$ it is 150-200$ in europe (because of fucking tax and shipment and rest of that shit)
Vista is not for normal users
there is 10-15% of people that can buy good(best) system in the world 40% can buy a normal one and rest of them cant even a buy a pc (not including poor country's)
large companys like dell, asus, .... are forcing people to buy vista .why??? they get provision from microsoft
when they make good operating system we will buy it
until then i dont recommend anyone to put vista on their PCs (except ultimate rigs that cost few thousands dollars)
have u been on microsoft forum??? check it you can find there allllllllll errors LOL (if they dident delete it)

most selling PC here

amd 3800+
ddr2 1024Mb 667
asus m2n-mx /asrock (also)
ati/amd 1650Pro or nv7600GS/GT
hdd 80GB/120Gb
............

can this one stand a vista properly without drop down of performance
or with full driver support ???? NO IT CANT
i am sick of vista and slow systems but companys are forcing vista on that kind of systems
check how many users have changed their OSes from vista to xp or even a linux

Well I haven't tried Vista and have no intentions of doing so it still lacks a lot of driver support as far as I am concerned BUT some people have had good luck with it. I cannot say anything Pro or Con about it because I haven't tried it and I won't for a while until it is a little more established and used.

One thing that seems to be mentioned over and over again and its something that I want to correct for some here that don't seem to know. Judas is not a 15 year old sitting in his parents basement playing with the puter he managed to put together over the summer funded by his paper route. He is the owner of an established business in Saskatchewan and thats actually where my mobo came from lol. He doesn't test this stuff on one or 2 systems and actually might see more systems in one day than we will period ... I think that should be pretty evident from his system specs

Just something I had to say let the debate continue

MAC i havent say that he dont know but he cant tell that it works on all systems
i would be happy when all people would have enough money to buy best systems so it can run vista without issues
i am runing system that have issues with vista but maybe one day vista will work properly with older systems
but until then we are stuck with XP
Vista is first os that dose not use same base and it is full of bugs
next version of that os will be better i think they will remove all problems
one more thing mac i work with PCs all the time
i also use a older laptop with vista on it

last 2 days i was working on new Asus Laptop (rund by vista)
so Judas sorry if i insulted you
i was mad on that laptop and vista(not oem vista, it is original one)
and i recommend that people should avoid vista until SP1 comes



p.s.Mac about Judas age : I have first checked him before i made first post
take a look on my nick he is thinking that i am born in 1991 hehehhee

LOL no worries Bro was just a general statement ... let the debate continue I'm making popcorn

sorry no.... i haven't stated that vista is the end all.... and i don't think your were born in 1991..... actually i've seen kids at the age of 11 come up with some brilliant concerns and logical answers to some things...


I'm not sure if anyone actually fully read through my above comments but maybe i'll simplify it for everyone...


I'm not here to PUSH vista, however i'm extremely happy with it. I am HERE to try an make it clear that it isn't CRAP like quite a number of people have been stating.

And genrage, you just proved that it's not Vista's fault that manufacturers are pushing a product out on hardware that doesn't support it.... ASrock imo is pretty poor quality to begin with.

I mentioned the SATAII NF4 issue because it was widespread enough that nvidia had made not only a faq, but a "plausible" fix for it that was basically telling people to upgrade to thier more recent boards.... i haven't checked back in quite awhile.. so who knows it's probably gone now.. but when you've got about 10 different branded SATAII drives that simply cause nothing but problems with it... it's fairly obvious that theres a chipset issue, considering they all worked in other machines.

It's also not vista's fault that manufacturers are stuffing vista onto a machine/laptop that doesn't work outa the box either.... that's quite obvious. While another machine (i've prefferred ACER for awhile now) with the same hardware will work, it's usually due to some manufacturers SCREWING with the hardware at some lvl to causing the issues in the first place.

Without getting into physcology and whatnot, the consumers are the force, but no one is holding a gun to anyones head and saying "BUY THIS, USE IT, ACCEPT IT". And that's as far as i'm going to take it. If you don't have the will power to justify it all by yourself without having someone else make the decission for you... you have some problems to sort out, don't blame a company or a product.

Really i could care less who is what age, who has WHAT certificates, how much someone makes, how GREAT or poor of a computer builder they are, you could be a rocket scientist and still be wrong. But Spreading blatent and unjustified LIES about a product is utterly rediculious. No offense taken, and i don't mean to offend anyone else.... But don't ignore everything.... i sure don't...

Lets point out some other very basic facts.

Currently Microsoft doesn't ACCEPT any driver for WHQL certification without having BOTH 32bit and x64 versions available to them to test at the same time (This is an obvious bonus, as the 64bit crowd doesn't get a beating like they still do and likely will get worse for windows xp x64)

I proved that windows Vista works on a number of OLD and NEW machines without a hitch/glitch or slowdowns. However yes, in some cases, specially on unsupported hardware or poorly supported hardware, it's obvious that there would be some performance degradation. But this is no different then when we saw windows XP's launch, took companies awhile to fix thier own support for the product. However i applaud ATI's commitment to providing a fully fuctioning Vista Driver AT launch.... if ATI can do it, any company should be able to do it, and frankly i find it pretty sad for ANY company that couldn't do it or finds excuses not to be able to do it, utterly horrid and sad. I mean not only did the general public have access to vista several months before official launch, but it's been in RC and BETA for AGES.

Vista isn't DX10, it incompasses a WHOLE hell of alot more, please, don't push that kind of misinformation as well, alot of people seem to be thinking that vista = dx 10, aero = that's it... it sucks. The underlying work and systems that vista has are utterly excellent. A number of major changes and improvements while may not be obvious, do show some serious bonuses. I'm pretty impressed with the superfetch and precacheing. Works quite well after a good solid week of consistant use.

There are a whole wack of reasons why vista is worth while step up.

But i'll admit that the vista capability tests are horridly inacccurate....


IF you want to try vista, leave your XP install alone, Pop in the vista disk, even without a cd key you can still use it for nearly 4+ months with ANY version, (basic through to ultimate). TRIAL it. if it don't work for you, simply remove it when you wish, and try again at a later date hoping that the manufacturers of your hardware have stepped up since.

Once again, ANY machine i've built with or upgraded to windows Vista, has yet to come back to me since. And all the responces from people that have used vista after i've set it up for them, has been that it's great. Meanwhile i still have a bunch of fence sitters that are making thier judgements based on what they've seen on the news/radio/and from other people that got machines from DELL or whatnot. Course those same machines with XP have had horrid issues to.... so the judgements are very inaccurate.

I gotta go, so i kinda cut the post short.

At this point, I am considering Vista as a failure because the operation system is not supposed to be bloated and to take so many resources. As a Vista user, there are too many useless services enabled by default (Table service for example). The Aero gimmick takes too many resources and even with classic mode and disabled services, games and applications are running slower then Windows XP. When it comes to stability, I do not see any benefits since I am getting more BSODs on Vista then XP (HL2 Episode 2 for example). I don't know if the blame is on the drivers, or the OS, but still, I don't care, this is unacceptable.

Vista is far from being perfect. However, a smart man (VP of Software department in one of the leading graphic chipset manufacturers) once told me: “Everyone said the same about Windows XP; they said it’s bloated and slow, we will never upgrade and etc... but everyone is using XP now”. So I believe Microsoft will improve Vista, and the drivers will improve with time, so in a year or two, you will use Windows Vista, if you like it or not. This is just a matter of time until DirectX10 will be required to play PC games.

Microsoft is making the standards, if you like it or not. We will have to use Vista eventually, it is really a horrible OS in my honest opinion, but it will get better with time. I am using it myself, and very unhappy with it (Performance and stability issues mostly). ATI’s driver is not bad but still not perfect, and the X-Fi Vista driver is a sad joke (BSODs). Anyway, I am forced to use it thanks to DX10-based reviews, and I cannot revert because it takes too much time (I have too many applications and stuff). If you want my advice, stick with XP SP2 x86 for now and upgrade only when everyone will drop DX9 and general XP support.

About all the ‘Vista sucks comments’, I’ve to understand these comments since Operation System suppose to help your system operate, and let you run games and applications, not to take all the juicy resources for itself. I do not understand why some shitty glass effect takes too many resources. I do not understand why Microsoft is claiming that Vista is the most stable/secured OS ever, they release security updates every week and users still get BSODs and errors. At this point, Vista is not 100% stable, the drivers are not 100% ready and there are too many issues to address, so yes, these ‘Vista sucks comments’ have a lot of base. It is like an almost year now since the official release, and the OS is still far from perfect.

regen

I've had 3 A8N32-SLI boards here, all of which BSOD with XP as well as Vista (vista however recently has been less)....

The Creative Support has gone well... to the dogs, been doing that for YEARS now....

While there are several things in vista i disable emdiately, One being the gadgets (that thing annoys the living crap outa me... but alas.. i don't complain about it as it's completely disabled.. and easy to disable... and i know alot of people love it) I don't disable any of the services.


On a resource hog issue, Disabling the aero frees up considerable amount of resources. Yes i do agree that it needs to be addressed, but ATM, it's NOT a major concern as vista's Memory management is pretty damn impressive. I've watched programs load and vista let loose on much of it's hands on resources emediately, the precache/superfetch is usualy mistaken as vista sucking up the ram, which is quite incorrect, as it's actually preloading several of the programs you most use. And it's pretty neat how vista is able to dynamically change it's precaching and superfetch due to how the user uses the machine.


I don't ignore that there are some issues with vista... Alot of these issues have been submitted and should be addressed with SP1.... But the list isn't ALL that large.

regen, With that motherboard.... you shouldn't have a single BSOD if you yank out that X-Fi card and run the onboard sound (which yes, is CRAP because it's the ALC850 series which isn't HD at all, but has pretty damn good support... gotta love realtek )

Course i'm not sure what else you running in that machine. But running that motherboard has always had it's hitches for me. Some that show up under xp with the bios setting used, and if you get xp stable, the same settings just don't seem to work under vista... it's really "strange" and annoying as hell.


I'm not denying that some of the "sucks" comments have SOME base.. but most are directed at the WRONG place.

so microsoft has a deal with your shop eh? do you also get paid for only selling intel?

Er?

don't make accusations your completely ignorant about.

Microsoft doesn't give a shit about me...

Intel doesn't give a shit about me


I only recently started building Intel due to thier higher performance.... was building AMD rig nearly exclusively because they were better.

Hell i even posted a price of a simplified amd rig above for a vista setup...

No deals at all, actually you can get vista cheaper online then i can get it in....

nice we have one more builder here
how nice
all i can say is that every one has his opinion about vista and hardware (non)support
and i know that is not easy to stay with building crappy systems that cant provide enough power to run vista
it is easy to build pc that cost few thousands of dollars for vista
but most large firms are using crappy systems with vista on it
and tell me how to explain people why their os crush ???


p.s.i am not man of big words like you or rege not because i dont know wth am i talking about it just i dont have strength to talk about something that i see we will never agree
you have your opinion i have my
i am saying that vista is good looking os but nothing more than that
if i wonna good looking os i would buy a MAC G5 or something like it
anyway vista is over rated
that os is bad maybe they will fix it (MAYBE)


i am building amd-s and intel-s based systems and some times they run on Vista(on demand) but i dont guaranty that os will work properly on requested systems
you dont need to explain why you are building those systems it is on demand

Last time I checked Bro Microsoft produced both XP and Vista

Customer demand is customer demand Bro. Lets say someone who is not familiar with drivers or resources or services buys a computer from a shop .... a single mother perhaps . What OS is she going to want ? Hmmmmmm I guess what she has seen and read that is new ... Vista.


Some of us can try things and dismiss them if they don't work and some of us are obligated to research and solve the problems because we have to. Not defending Intel or MS here trust me because no one hates Microfook worse than me just being realistic.


Price a system anywhere with XP as an OS .... not that easy a friend of mine in Louisiana had to order it with Vista and make a special request to have XP Home installed. And as I said initially both OS's are dollars in the MS bank account and anyone defending XP regarding Vista is giving Microsoft free advertising

You've had a lot better luck then than I have. I have two USB devices that will not work under Vista Home Premium.

The first one is a UMAX Astra 4000U legal-size scanner. UMAX has opted to NOT make drivers for the device.

The second one is a LexMark X83 Printer/Scanner/Copier combo. LexMark has opted to NOT make drivers for the device.

So, if you can tell me how to get around these problems, I'd love to hear the solutions.

BTW, during beta testing of RC1 and RC2, the LexMark worked just fine. I'm using Home Premium 32-bit OEM. Installed just one week ago.

As for comments about Vista vs. XP: I was really, really slow to migrate to XP. I HATE...literally HATE!...the activation scheme. Not just with the OS, but all these newer games and other apps coming out requiring some kind of authentication in order to use what was legally purchased. However, in many ways, I can understand WHY the developers have to have some kind of method to keep the piracy at bay.

Once I did migrate to XP, I really have enjoyed it. In fact, I've got XP Pro on a different HDD on this system so that I can easily switch boot drives and go right back to XP within a few moments.

BUT, for the experience I've had with Vista this week, I can see they've come a good ways from the betas we were testing last year. I only wish that vendors of USB (Universal Serial Bus) devices were REQUIRED to provide support for their products. After all, when USB came into use, it was stated that the devices would WORK universally on any system supporting USB. This lack of support now for the two devices I have has given the industry a big black eye as far as I'm concerned. AND, it's NOT Microsoft's responsibility to provide drivers for every device that other manufacturers put on the market. I DO, however, believe Microsoft should put some pressure on the vendors to keep these devices updated for the enduser.

Also, and finally, I'm actually quite happy otherwise with the experience I've had this week with Vista. I couldn't pass up purchasing the OEM for $79.99 while it was on sale. Many people would pay almost that much for a GAME.

unfortuneatly i guess i've been thoroughly lucky... but alot of people don't mind having to change over to a newer printer or scanner, specially when they are getting very old..... Lexmark has never impressed me.. there driver support has always been iffy.. and Umax... i'm not familare with at all...

It's really unfortuneate that other manufacturers don't support new systems or thier older products... it's never microsoft fault for that.... and i'm not sure how much pressure they can push on it... other then a LEGALLY taking something to court forcing a standardization of support for all products for a specific length of time.

i have NO issues with someone having an opinion.... so long as they don't state something as being a FACT for all, when it's for others to decide and work with. We both KNOW that some systems vista is a absalute beautiful thing to work on, nothing bad to complain about... and that there are the other side of the coin where there is a good chance that nothing will seem to work with vista. It's all possible with the world of PC's and the mass of products for it out there... can't support em all.

But really dislike it when if VISTA is mentioned, that someone that has had experience with it Tries to force an opinion on others, specially when it's not 100% true.

Just like Windows XP SP1 still had issues with serveral machines... can't blame the product.... alot of people would swear by SP1 still.


ATM, if someone wants a new machine, i intend to install windows vista. However i also explain in great details what they may or may not be able to do, at which it's the customers gamble.... Also suggest they or if they want, i can look up all thier programs they've got so far and run a check on them all... nothing helps more then a full blown research into the support. Usually a combination of VISTA + "product name" will get you a good number of results to make a thoroughly educated guess on what may or may not work.

Vista ROX!!

My XPeriance with ppl who dislike Vista, are often those with old hardware, ppl who have little knowledge of computers and listen too much to paranoid conspiracy theorists, and ppl who think that MS is the source of all evil. Cmon grow up, sure Vista isnt the revolution we thought it would be, but still it kicks XP ass if you would compare Vista with XP when XP was 1year old. Sure there are lack of drivers, but thats not MS fault, thats the hardware vendors who dont keep up. Personally I have no drivers missing so far. And today my Vista machine performs equally and sometimes even better in games than my xp machine does!? When the drivers mature, Vista will be better always. And when DX10.1 mature, XP will R.I.P.

Ps. Sure I dont like everything that MS have done with Vista, but personally my Vista experiance is great. For me Vista is more stable, secure, and is more fun to use than XP ever did. No im not lying!

If you're using Vista, make sure to throw your X-Fi card out of the window, it causes BSODs thanks to the poor CL X-Fi drivers.

I'm using the onboard RealTek HD Audio. Does me no good though, as I'm deaf.

Dude, whatever you're smoking, I want some. Vista sucks ass, plain and simple. I tried it, and then promptly reformatted.

Congradulation bulvai..... you've installed it on "one" machine and made a generalized opinion about it as a whole..... without perhaps even attempting to find the cause for it to "suck" or how to "resolve".

Judas when people buys operating system that cost from 200$(home) to 400$(ultimate) they need to get a os that works with all PCs not just new one
its not fair that only new PCs can run vista
who can we blame ??? all manufactures and MICROSOFT at first place because he is responsible for that unsupport
that is why people say that Vista Sux

yea their both made by ms but you dont have to support their extortion of users by actually switching to their all new over priced and all around crappy os.

The consumers your talking about dont know anything about windows, their not actaully choosing, they would for the most part take whichever os was on there, then theres the next level of user that goes to toms harward and thinks he's an expert because he read one article somewhere or his 'computer giruns friend' told him so, but for the seriously computer savy users ms knew they couldnt get the majority to switch to vista without actaulyl forcing them, enter dx10, they claimed that x10 was this huge integral part of windows etc etc we all know the shpeal, all in all its a pretty big lie, theres good steps being made to get dx10 support into xp. So now vista has this new "ultra(laugh)" graphics with dx10, they put out halo 3 as vista only and they totaly cut xp off, and there is how they forced people to switch, if they hadnt forced us no one thats computer savy would have ever switched to vista and it would have gone the way of ME, consumer demand no longer has anything to do with selling a product, now they just make you buy it.

If vista was in sales the failure that is it in actuallity then ms would not have made the billions, if people had been able to stay with xp (which if not for dx10 most would have) then EVERYONE wouldnt need to buy themsleves a new rediculously priced copy of ms's latest disaster, they would have just stayed with xp and not spent another dime, which as im sure you can see would not have been acceptable to ms as they clearly dont gouge us enough.

They seriously need to change their motto to "Bend Over and Smile"

blindartist i agree with you

I agree to but business is business and MS has a monopoly over the software market and has for years. Defending an aging OS that you know MS will drop support for isn't going to solve the issue is it ?


You have 3 choices ..........

1) Work with Vista or wait for them to provide service packs or whatever is needed

2) Wait for MS to release another OS in the future

3) Go to a different OS platform like Linux

Personally I have been playing with Ubuntu as well as running XP as I have been. But eventually XP will become outdated and unsupported and as much as I don't want to go to Vista we will eventually be forced to make a choice .. its a monoploy !!

I'm going to have to take issue with this comment myself.

Why is it not fair that the newer and more powerful PCs can run Vista but not the older ones? This just doesn't stand to reason at all to me.

Why is there an Upgrade Advisor if there isn't one needed?

For the record, the developers of games and other applications are working on much more powerful features than can be handled by the older PCs. That's plain and simple. Anyone who's been gaming for a few years understands the evolution of the demands vs. hardware. We've all had to upgrade our systems to be able to play the latest greatest games. (Although not all games are great. )

I'm not going to argue whether DirectX 10 is backward compatible with XP....or for that matter 98SE....or how about Windows 3.1??? At some point, the past has to be left behind and we move forward. I'm not a programmer, so I'm not in position to take a position on DX 10's Vista Only stance. But, I do know thiis much: Within 3 years we'll ALL be using Vista. Some sooner than others. But, we WILL be using Vista in some rendition of it.

I think the arguments in this entire thread have melted down to simply personal preference. And, a LOT of it is being fueled by the animosity toward Microsoft in general. Let's face it, whether we like 'em or not, MS IS the source/instigator (or however you want to look at it) of our ability right now to communicate all the way around the world with brothers and sisters of all races, creeds, nationalities, languages, etc. The world has become a lot smaller in the past several years since Windows became the major tool for PCs.

But, this thing of saying it's not fair that Vista won't run on the older PCs just does NOT make sense in any way shape or form. After all, no one HAS to use Vista if they don't want to. And those stubborn enough to still not be using it three years from now will STILL ba able to use XP just like people now can still use 98SE. I mean, gosh, people I know are atill using ME!!! (No, I don't know why, either. )

With the evolution of faster RAM, faster CPUs, faster and better video cards, the only way to make it work together is to improve upon the OS.

It'll be interesting to look back on this thread three years from now.

i am saying about midclass systems that is old 2-3 years not a one decade
vista need to be flexible like xp

i would rather wait 1-1/2 year for new os LOL

I agree vista should work half decently on slightly older systems, if it does not that only goes to show how poor of an os it really is, an os should be able to perform and deliver, if it needs a high end system then it really isnt doing that, its your hardware pushing it along.

and yea within 3 years there will have already been a new os and no one will be using vista anylonger (unless the new os is ever worse but im sure they'll find some way to make everyone switch)

I've stated this..

i've loaded windows XP on 486's running 75-90mhz, with 64mb of ram and 1.5gb hardrives.... works quite abit smoother then windows 98 oddly enough...

Now taking the jump from what the machines were orginal designed for and windows xp.... it's roughly a full 6 year jump in OSes (windows 95 which is roughly around the 1995 mark and xp which is oct 2001).

Another 6 year jump would put windows XP in the same state as windows 95 was. It's BLOODY old now... reguardless of service packs...

I CAN take a machine built in 2001 AND older and install vista without any grief at all.. it'll work JUST as well as any OLDER machine i've installed windows XP on as well.

Proving that the OS is indeed "as" flexible as windows XP....

there comes a time where there simply is nothing else you can do with an os so it doesnt matter how old it is, xp does all it needs to, does everythign vista doea except dx10 but people are working on that too, until the dawing of nano technology powered computer or quantum computers the pc platform as reached about its maximum potential, all their gonna do now is continue to make the hardware more powerful bus as far as what you can do on them it will largly remain exatctly thesame, microsoft will, however, continue to release its os's, that do everything the previous one did but has a different name and a different skin and an additional 'feature' or two to force you to switch over so they can extort you some more.

Well Gen I haven't installed Vista yet either and when I do and if I don't like it I may stick with XP and check more Linux stuff out until they have something new. Remember I am the guy that had Win95 installed for 15 minutes and went back to 3.1.1 until 98 came out

hehhehehehhe i havent use 95 but i used 98 than skiped to nt than to xp lol
about 3.1.1 i still remember one old game that i liked more than anything
it was das bot hehehehehe

Haa ......... Gen we loved the Microsoft Golf on 3.1.1 it was cool

The first PC I bought came with Windows 3.1. When W-95 came out, I was at the store at midnight (CompUSA in Sandy Springs, GA) to be one of the first to get it. I couldn't wait to play the first 'made for Windows 95' game I had bought. OutPost. Anyone remember that one?

Then, when W-98 came out, both my older son and I were at the Computer City (now defunct) to be among the first owners. I even got my mug splashed around the world on CNN holding up my copy as I left the checkout and telling the cameraman, "I've got my copy of Windows 98!" LOL!

But, when XP came along, I was just like many of you are with Vista. In fact, I still wouldn't be using Vista except for the very attractice price I got last week and for the need to have it for reviews and testing.

I will say this, though: For the past week, my biggest disappointment has been that both of my scanners are no longer supported. I really, really cannot complain a whole lot about that, though in all honesty. My legal size UMAX cost me under $50 off the bargain bin at Micro Center. And the LexMark X83 was given to me by a family member who had bought a HP combo. So, what I'm doing now is hooking them up to my second PC using XP Pro and I'll still get some good use out of them for the time being.

And, as for Microsoft Golf: I really, really enjoyed playing that game and even had my mom playing online with me for a while. She enjoyed it, too. But, that was under 98SE. I don't recall having it under 3.1.1.

You know Dyre on the acceptance on XP it is similar to Vista isn't it ? Its not the same OS but remember a few things now from back when XP SP1 was first released on another board. There was no way in hell Digi was gonna give up his 98SE huh .. LOL

Things change its a natural thing in life as well as in the industry. Suck it up or deal with it was what I was taught *shrugs*

PPS: Dyre on Microsoft Golf we used to have the "Haggis in the Fire" tournament every year just Eric , Dave and Dave ... Al Pitch, Joe Putt and Mac Chip

Sounds like a swingers club. (Yep, the pun is intended. LOL!)

Even if PAE is enabled, I think your MB has to support memory hole remap.

I know that this thread is very, very, very old. But, there is some new information I just came across that's published in the September, 2008 issue of PC Format on Page 35.

In answer to the question, "Does [PAE] work if the user installs 4GB of RAM Memory in a Vista 32-bit system?" The author has this to say:

"There are several guides on the internet that describe a process of config file tweaking that purportedly extends the address space of Vista 32-bit and reveals the full 4GB. Sadly, they are all erroneous."

The summary of the matter is that there are several requirements to make it work.

1. The motherboard chipset has to support at least 8 GB of address space;

2. The CPU must be a 64-bit capable processor;

3. The motherboard must support memory remapping;

and, finally, but most importantly

4. "an x64 (64-bit) version of Windows Vista must be used."

The conclusion:

If one wants to get the most out of 4 GB (or more) of RAM memory, one has to bite the 64-bit bullet. It won't work any other way.

x32 supports 4GB addressing, however the Physical addressing overlaps the Virtual addressing which is why you lose up to 1GB of memory, as this is assigned to Hardware.

most commonly with SLI systems you will only see 3GB - 3.25GB useable,

since i loaded service pack 1 everything including windows reports 4.00 GB of memory so you will have to pardon me if i don't understand all the arguements.......oh and my mobo does support memory remap and is a crossfire rig

Start up the Task Manager.

Click on Performance.

The first line under Physical RAM, what is the total amount?


Yes, after installing SP1, most of the system views will correctly identify that there is 4 GB of RAM installed...if that is, indeed, the amoung of RAM in the system. However, showing how much is INSTALLED is not the same as making USE of what is INSTALLED. That's where the problem lies with using 32-bit Windows.

Depending on the video card and other devices installed on your own particular system, as well as how the BIOS is setup and what motherboard you have, that amount that I asked for will likely fall somewhere between 3100 - 3500. My own shows 3326. That is the MOST amount of RAM my SYSTEM will make use of out of the total of 4 GBs I have installed. As far as the system is concerned, the balance of the 4 GB is non-existent.

So how is this 3100-3500MB physically split between say two ram modules? In a dual channel environment you'd want it split equally for optimized performance.

The way I understand it, the system reserves a certain amount of RAM for video which matches the amount of VRAM on the video card. Then you also have a certain amount of system RAM reserved for the BIOS. So, depending on how many devices are installed, that's why there's no set amount of usable RAM between that 3100 - 3500 amount.

It would seem logical then, that the system would 'split' the remainder evenly among the modules installed. Although, it might use, for example, the full 2 GB of a matched pair of 1 GB modules, and then split the other two modules evenly.

At any rate, that amount that shows up in the Performance Tab [as mentioned above] is the sum total of usable system RAM available to the PC. As far as the system is concerned, anything above that doesn't even exist.

The Amount you asked for is 4.00 GB ,like i said........do you want a screen shot?
mobo .P5K

Vista is a virus

I totally agree with Judas... Vista is a great platform when you have the correct hardware.

I consider myself a hardcore pc gamer and I work on IT department with more than 15 years experience.

I'm also running Vista Home Premium on my Asus G1S Notebook which came configured with 2 gigs of RAM (just recently upgrade it to 4 Gb just because I got a really nice deal of $30 bucks on Fry's).

I haven't got a single crash or BSOD since more than a year that I have it, and believe me, I've pushed the system to the limits!

Oh, and I've made tests by installing Windows XP on the same machine and Vista simply outperformed XP in every respect like boot times, shutdown times, gaming, rendering, etc... (at least on my rig).

Don't get me wrong... I do love XP, but Vista is not CRAP like some of you said... It used to be crap, but not anymore (since SP1).

Cheers!
Rayan

Vista is a piece of shit.

Consider it to be Windows 7 Alpha, which you were retarded enough to pay for, knowing full well that it would be replaced by a superior product, that is actually better then XP, in 2009.

The mere fact you can sit there and say Vista loads faster then XP, is a load of bullshit, and there are atleast 8 performance reviews showcasing that Vista SP1 actually boots slower then RTM.

wow u know everything god i wish i was u (vista wroks fine 4 me)

i see threads like this allot when i am serching for debuging ideas.

i think this may put the record strait for you all.

Is vista crap or god? That has to be answered on your personal experience yet bare in mind vista will perform better for some and worst for others.

the facts is that vista is the very first operating system from microsoft that actually uses your hardware yes it uses the hardware rather than just runs and forgets about all the power you have in a box.

the more power you have in your box the more vista will gobble it up and make your user experience better.

this is not opinion there the design facts.

for microsoft to do this they had to change one hell of alllot of things in the OS i hate to say it but there are so many similarities to linux/unix. hiden in vista is microsofts further developed drive mounting, since when has ntfs file system needed to be mounted against microsoft kernels. works in the background very smoothly mind you.

GUI desktop is 3d utilised not as good as linux but its good, i think its down to microsofts direct x to blame why it runs as it does which i am sure will be breathtaking on the full release of dx10.

anyway memory! computer systems no mater what make model or archetecture need memory pritty obvious yet they need memory to allocate resources such as your graphics aparture hint to this threads topic. the bios needs to reserve space mainly at the end of the memory block coming back from the end of the memory block hence you seem to loose ex amount of the end of your memory.

data stored here is graphics aparture block data, PCI device data for your pluged in hardware, you know all them irq settings we hated back in the 80's well there all dynamic allocated now thank god. its all stored in the memory.

your northbridge controlls most of that so that software knows where to look etc.
in vista all this information has become aparant when in XP it was in a way hiden from the user but then again XP left hardware to the driver manufacturers etc now windows vista seems to be handling hardware to a much higher percentage to the point everything will be from microsoft. propriatory drivers i think will becoming a thing of the past it will all be in your windows update.

the 4gb limit if anyone is woundering well it gets complicated as you have to understand logic gates silicon and memory addresing, above 4gb must be handled by modules with register buffers on the dimm to allow for the larger capacity.
This is the very big advantage of 64bit.

If you want to run a system with more than 4gb of ram let us say 8gb or even 16 gb of ram then the only and the best way is to make sure you use 64bit version of windows otherwise its waste the time as 64 bit windows systems can handle 8gb unbuffered without emulation very fast runing.
for 4gb or less the performance increase is less than 10% so its waste the time.

anyway a 4gb unbuffered system on 32bit platform is always going to show usable about 3-3.5gb because its using the rest as reserved for your devices installed, the bios usually alocates this space.

got a 256mb or higher graphics card set the aparture to 64mb you will regain more usable memory in windows! HINT

catch ya all later hope this has been informative sorry for any spelling mistakes i am half asleep lol but genrally at the price of ram today fit 4gb as standard so your system can run sweet.

more for windows/linux more for games more for apps more for reserved memory as and when your apps need it flawless

you're not telling anyone anything new.

besides, Vista uses the hardware poorly, compared to Win7

OMFG when I read You ................ hmmm phatetic

I use Vista x64 from the beging the made this windows and in my opinion there is no beter system

but

Vista need IMBA powerful machines to work stable

I use 4 cores and 8GB of ram and ofc Ati Crossfire

and its works perfect

never have problems and Im IT specialist and know what Im saying



Regards