The Vista Challenge..

[kirk jim]

If you want Vista, you have to get the hardware on which it is designed to

be run..

Baloney! XP can run faster on that same hardware you claim is designed for
vista!

But since you insist...
the hardware needed for vista to "run" is:
a 100 core CPU
Solid state hard disk drives
A graphic adaptor that is dipped in to liquid hydrogen to keep cool,
and 1 terra byte of ram...

then it might be enough for the horrible sluggy vista to match the speed of
xp...
on a single core with 1 gig of ram..

LOL

 

[Jeffrey S. Sparks]

Baloney! XP can run faster on that same hardware you claim is designed for
vista!

But since you insist...
the hardware needed for vista to "run" is:
a 100 core CPU
Solid state hard disk drives
A graphic adaptor that is dipped in to liquid hydrogen to keep cool,
and 1 terra byte of ram...

then it might be enough for the horrible sluggy vista to match the speed
of xp...
on a single core with 1 gig of ram..

LOL

And I suppose you really believe all that?

Jeff

 

[Justin]

Ok, I'll do this. Right after you install Windows XP on a 386 and show me
it runs faster then Win98.

If you can't then you better be using Win98. Right?

 

[Justin]

Or the fact that it uses a paging file in the file system rather than a
seperated partition that doesn't suffer from file system overhead.

Because the average person doesn't need it. A separate "drive letter" WOULD
confuse the average person. Plus it needs to be adjustable.

You can move the page file to another drive. It's recommended as a
performance increase.

 

[Justin]

This is true, but it is also true that it just ain't very bright
to intentionally piss off your installed base with no good reason
other than MS's desire to amortize its investment faster. That
said, nobody can make an XP user upgrade, so the discussion for
one with a stable machine, as mine is, is both academic and moot
for the time being.

I don't understand your change in direction. I thought it was up to each
individual to decide that? It seems your saying here that as long as
someone "like you" has a stable machine then there is no reason to upgrade?

There are plenty of "discussed" reasons to upgrade. Nothing moot about
them.

Nothing moot about upgrading an R/T to an SRT8 either Or owning an R/T
to begin with.

I asked this before: what is the price/gig of solid-state right
now? HD is under 50 cents, maybe 2 bits or even less. I cannot
imagine solid state within an order of magnitude of that economy.

There is no fixed rate per gig for either of them (dollar per horse power?).
Of course solid state is more expensive. It's new technology. However the
price is rapidly coming down. I can't wait to play with a new hybrid drive.
I've been tracking their progressing and between hybrid drivers and lithium
ion batteries, laptops are going to get a whole new lease on life.

 

[kirk jim]

nah.. just exaggeration to get my point across :0)

 

[Alias]

If you want Vista, you have to get the hardware on which it is designed
to be run..

Which is one of the reasons to wait as hardware will get cheaper.

Alias

 

[Justin]

Which is one of the reasons to wait as hardware will get cheaper.

You have to cut the cord sometime. If you wait for pricing to stop moving
then you'll wait forever.

 

[Alias]

You have to cut the cord sometime. If you wait for pricing to stop
moving then you'll wait forever.

I didn't say wait "forever", Justin. Now, the new hardware is, well,
new. When newer hardware appears what is new now will be old and
cheaper. That will also allow time for Vista drivers to come out and for
MS to fix some of the bugs like hypersensitive reactions to hardware
change leading to unnecessary reactivations and the UAC.

Alias

 

[Christopher L. Estep]

And I suppose you really believe all that?

Jeff

Jeff: Either he truly believes it (in which case, he really needs to do
some research) or he is a troll.

Oh....I happen to be running Vista Ultimate on a P4 2.6 (Northwood-C) with 1
GB of RAM.

Christopher L. Estep

 

[Christopher L. Estep]

Because the average person doesn't need it. A separate "drive letter"
WOULD confuse the average person. Plus it needs to be adjustable.

You can move the page file to another drive. It's recommended as a
performance increase.

That was recommended as far back as Windows NT (the original one) for the
exact same reason, and has nothing to do with the operating system (it's
recommended in Linux and UNIX as well, for the same reason); to decrease I/O
bounding (hardware, not software).


Christopher L. Estep

 

[Adam Albright]

Which is one of the reasons to wait as hardware will get cheaper.

Alias

Vista is too damn stupid to know what to do with some drivers. See my
seperate post that details how truly stupid Vista can be. Two SATA
drives, one it "sees" the other it can't. That rules out any driver
issue since both hard drives are the same make (Seagate) and both
access the same exact driver. Yet Vista being exceeding stupid
stumbles and tries to add phatom IDE channels to control the larger
drive in spite of it being plugged into a SATA channel on the MB, then
fails in the attempt of course, because there already is a IDE
controller, but damn dumb Vista just keeps trying to add more IDE
channels to run a SATA drive from and no surprise won't let me delete
the bogus entries from Device Manager. That boys and girls is about as
stupid as you can get.

 

[Adam Albright]

You have to cut the cord sometime. If you wait for pricing to stop moving
then you'll wait forever.

The blind leading the blind.

 

[Puppy Breath]

It's definitely faster in the sense that you can get to things more quickly,
things open more quickly, and the whole experience is just smoother and
quicker. This based on over a year of using both Vista and XP and many
different apps with it.

Old hardware is totally irrelevant.

 

[Justin]

I didn't say wait "forever", Justin. Now, the new hardware is, well, new.
When newer hardware appears what is new now will be old and cheaper. That
will also allow time for Vista drivers to come out and for MS to fix some
of the bugs like hypersensitive reactions to hardware change leading to
unnecessary reactivations and the UAC.

Alias

Of course you didn't say wait "forever". I did. You said to wait for
hardware to get cheaper. That never stops. So where do you stop?

It's another issue altogether. When someone asks if they should buy a
computer now and are told to wait because current hardware will "get
cheaper". It's never ending.

 

[Just FYI]

Those solid state drives are still considered "specialty" items and will
remain pricey for a while I think. But like anything else, it's only a
matter of time before they're just another commodity. In the meantime SATA
300 with ReadyBoost on the motherboard is cheap and will get you impressive
performance.

 

[HEMI-Powered]

Today, Justin made these interesting comments ...

I don't understand your change in direction. I thought it
was up to each individual to decide that? It seems your
saying here that as long as someone "like you" has a stable
machine then there is no reason to upgrade?

Get straight the difference from my personal views of MS and
their business view of themselves. They are not mutually
exclusive nor did I change my tune.

There are plenty of "discussed" reasons to upgrade. Nothing
moot about them.

What are they? It is academic AND moot because I ain't gonna
upgrade anytime soon. Thus, I will listen, comment occasionally,
and keep my ear to the ground. You, the MVPs, and the vast
marketing engine of MS ain't nearly enough to make me do
something I believe is dumb - for me.

Nothing moot about upgrading an R/T to an SRT8 either Or
owning an R/T to begin with.

Again, it is for me - end of the discussion. I ain't gonna pay
MSRP $46K for a car I can only drive on dry roads.

There is no fixed rate per gig for either of them (dollar per
horse power?). Of course solid state is more expensive. It's
new technology. However the price is rapidly coming down. I
can't wait to play with a new hybrid drive. I've been tracking
their progressing and between hybrid drivers and lithium ion
batteries, laptops are going to get a whole new lease on life.

A Swag would be fine. I would expect the price/gig to at least be
in the range of RAM, maybe less because it doesn't have to be as
fast. So, for example, how much might a 200 gig solid state
"disc" cost right now?

 

[Puppy Breath]

Old hardware is irrelevant as a measure of speed and performance. Whether or
not it runs within X-meg of RAM has nothing to do with it.

Also, when you invest billions of dollars producing 50+ million lines of
code, you can't be thinking in terms of how things are now or how they used
to be. You have to design for current and future hardware. Anything else
would be technological and financial suicide.

As far as speed of an OS goes, obviously no OS can run any given piece of
hardware faster than the hardware can go. Most of what you experience in
terms of "speed" from an OS has more to do with the general experience. How
much time you spend navigating to and finding things, how long it takes for
things to open, the little lags within programs caused by fetching from the
paging file. Those things are definitely improved in Vista.

Clearly it makes a lot more sense to use solid-state flash memory than hard
disk storage for all the paging stuff, because hard drives are notorious for
bad random I/O. The hard drive is one of the biggest (if not thee biggest)
bottleneck in the whole system.

Also, "fast" depends a lot on how you use your computer. If you load up one
game and play it for hours, that's one thing. If you're constantly opening
and closing things, inserting files, flipping among open apps, and so forth,
that's something entirely different.

 

[Justin]

*****That said, nobody can make an XP user upgrade*****

Get straight the difference from my personal views of MS and
their business view of themselves. They are not mutually
exclusive nor did I change my tune.

I believe is dumb - for me.

That's perfectly valid. However, I was addressing the above comment in *'s.
I wasn't aware by "XP user" you where addressing yourself only. Nor can I
find the connection between "making a user upgrade" with "stable machine".
I guess I just do not understand what you're saying.

A Swag would be fine. I would expect the price/gig to at least be
in the range of RAM, maybe less because it doesn't have to be as
fast. So, for example, how much might a 200 gig solid state
"disc" cost right now?

If you can't justify the SRT8 then you can't justify that disk either.
That's why we're going the hybrid route until pricing comes down further.

SanDisk released info about a 32GB SSD for ~$600

Something to drool over:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/peripher...-state-drive-sees-the-light-of-day-231693.php

 

[Alias]

Of course you didn't say wait "forever". I did. You said to wait for
hardware to get cheaper. That never stops. So where do you stop?

It's another issue altogether. When someone asks if they should buy a
computer now and are told to wait because current hardware will "get
cheaper". It's never ending.

Note I *also* said to wait for drivers and for MS to patch up the bugs
and holes. I would say about this time next year would be the end of
"forever" but that's a guesstimate because neither you nor I can know
now what MS will do.

Alias