Is Vista Worth it?

[SwamiJi]

I've heard some mixed reviews about whether making the switch to Vista is worth the effort. A friend of mine who owns a small business was complaining that they have already found some network vulnerabilities that weren't apparent with the old OS scheme (XP on workstations and Server 2003 on servers). He didn't mention any problems with individual machines running Vista.

I have 2 machines running XP and I'm thinking about making the switch. Does Vista use a vast amount of resources (to the point that it noticeably slows your machine down)? My first machine is a 2.65GHz P4, 1GB RDRAM, 256MB video card...etc etc. My second is a Dell 700m (meant for mobility). It has 1.8Ghz Pentium M, 1GB DDRRAM...and overall it runs XP very smoothly. I'm just worried that Vista might slow it down significantly.

I'd like to get some opinions of people who have upgraded to Vista on mobility machines similar to the 700m. Has it worked well for you? Are you frustrated and wish you never switched?

Thanks in advance!

 

[MrChad]

If XP works for you, why change?

Vista is going to go through some growing pains over the next 6-12 months, as all new operating systems do. You may encounter buggy drivers and application compatibility issues until software developers and hardware manufacturers work out the kinks. Unless you want/need to stay on the cutting edge, I would wait for the dust to settle a bit before making the switch.

 

[Quinton McLeod]

Depends on what you do on your PC. If you just run Microsoft Word and the like, then you won't notice a difference. However, if you run CPU intensive applications and/or games, then you will notice a drastic difference.

Don't listen to people when they blabber on about SuperFetch and the like. SuperFetch is nothing more than technology that has been given an upgrade from all the previous versions of Windows. It simply loads programs you normally use in Memory based on the time you normally load them. This is simply for LOADING programs. Not running them! ReadyBoost is a technology that places the page file on your USB flash disk. This is infact SLOWER because you're now running virtual memory on a slower bus than your actual HDD with runs MUCH MUCH faster. This can also kill your USB drive because your memory cells can only be refresh so many times before they die.

So, be careful. If you don't need to spend the money, then stick with Windows XP. If you just don't care, go ahead with Vista.

 

[Griffinhart]

Readyboost isn't slower by any means. It's not as fast as just adding more RAM, but it does increase system speed since Vista will use it over your HD to cache stuff. since Flash RAM is accessed much faster than a hard drive it's is quicker.

As for your laptop... The Pentium M 1.8 is a pretty good processor and will have zero problems running Vista. 1GB is also enough RAM. That said, depending on your Video, you may not be able to run Aeroglass, but Vista itself will work very well. If you have a decent video chip on your laptop it won't be a problem. An ATI mobility 300 w/ non shared RAM will handle Aero no problem.

Beware Quinton's Vista info He's already demonstrated himself to be an Anti-MS guy with very little accurate info when it comes to the OS. This Thread is a great example: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=34&threadid=1984841&enterthread=y

 

[loup garou]

SwamiJi:
I am planning on upgrading my 700m with the same specs to Vista Business (I may upgrade to 2GB first though) in the next week. I will give you firsthand accounts of how it works out.

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Don't listen to people when they blabber on about SuperFetch and the like. SuperFetch is nothing more than technology that has been given an upgrade from all the previous versions of Windows. It simply loads programs you normally use in Memory based on the time you normally load them. This is simply for LOADING programs. Not running them! ReadyBoost is a technology that places the page file on your USB flash disk. This is infact SLOWER because you're now running virtual memory on a slower bus than your actual HDD with runs MUCH MUCH faster. This can also kill your USB drive because your memory cells can only be refresh so many times before they die.

You've already been schooled on these subjects repeatedly, yet continually repeat the same misinformation. Now that you're taking your trolling into people seeking advice's threads, I think the mods need to give you a warning. We understand you don't like Vista for whatever reason. There's no reason to make stuff up to discourage others' use of it.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Depends on what you do on your PC. If you just run Microsoft Word and the like, then you won't notice a difference. However, if you run CPU intensive applications and/or games, then you will notice a drastic difference.

Don't listen to people when they blabber on about SuperFetch and the like. SuperFetch is nothing more than technology that has been given an upgrade from all the previous versions of Windows. It simply loads programs you normally use in Memory based on the time you normally load them. This is simply for LOADING programs. Not running them! ReadyBoost is a technology that places the page file on your USB flash disk. This is infact SLOWER because you're now running virtual memory on a slower bus than your actual HDD with runs MUCH MUCH faster. This can also kill your USB drive because your memory cells can only be refresh so many times before they die.

So, be careful. If you don't need to spend the money, then stick with Windows XP. If you just don't care, go ahead with Vista.

Quinton you have done NO reading on readyboost have you?

Your statement about readyboost killing your USB drive has a speck of truth in that flash memory has a finite number of writes. However, between readyboost taking this into account and the MTBF being so high, the drive will be obsolete before it is worn out.

Your statement about where the page file is placed is completely false. What sort of retarded speed boosting feature would slow things down???


Readyboost is the tiniest portion of Vista and the majority of people won't use it anyway. Base your opinion of Vista on something else and please stop spreading FUD.

 

[Quinton McLeod]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Depends on what you do on your PC. If you just run Microsoft Word and the like, then you won't notice a difference. However, if you run CPU intensive applications and/or games, then you will notice a drastic difference.

Don't listen to people when they blabber on about SuperFetch and the like. SuperFetch is nothing more than technology that has been given an upgrade from all the previous versions of Windows. It simply loads programs you normally use in Memory based on the time you normally load them. This is simply for LOADING programs. Not running them! ReadyBoost is a technology that places the page file on your USB flash disk. This is infact SLOWER because you're now running virtual memory on a slower bus than your actual HDD with runs MUCH MUCH faster. This can also kill your USB drive because your memory cells can only be refresh so many times before they die.

So, be careful. If you don't need to spend the money, then stick with Windows XP. If you just don't care, go ahead with Vista.

Quinton you have done NO reading on readyboost have you?

Your statement about readyboost killing your USB drive has a speck of truth in that flash memory has a finite number of writes. However, between readyboost taking this into account and the MTBF being so high, the drive will be obsolete before it is worn out.

Your statement about where the page file is placed is completely false. What sort of retarded speed boosting feature would slow things down???


Readyboost is the tiniest portion of Vista and the majority of people won't use it anyway. Base your opinion of Vista on something else and please stop spreading FUD.

Stop making me laugh so much! lol

USB 2.0's transfer rates are 480Mb/s. So that's roughly 60 Mega Bytes per second. Your average HDD with an RPM of 7200 is 400 Mega Bytes per second. So, your average HDD is roughly 6 times faster than your USB 2.0 drive. Why in the world would you want to put your page file on something that slow? That will not speed up your PC. It will slow it down!

 

[stash]

Dude, you're a tool. The page file doesn't go on the flash drive, it's a cache. If it isn't in the cache, the system will fall back to the drive.

Why don't you read up on how it works before you spout off and look like an ignorant troll: http://blogs.msdn.com/tomarcher/archive/2006/06/02/615199.aspx

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
USB 2.0's transfer rates are 480Mb/s. So that's roughly 60 Mega Bytes per second. Your average HDD with an RPM of 7200 is 400 Mega Bytes per second. So, your average HDD is roughly 6 times faster than your USB 2.0 drive. Why in the world would you want to put your page file on something that slow? That will not speed up your PC. It will slow it down!

Stash correctly noted that you're a tool. You're also wrong.

No one (except you) gives a rat's posterior about theoretical transfer rates. Today's fast hard drives may average 60 MB/sec sustained transfer rates, while today's fast USB flash drives may get 20MB/sec at most. However, the caching that is done depends on fast random access, NOT fast sustained transfer rates. Since flash drives can have much higher random access times than could ever be imagined with physical platters as in hard drives, they are used for the caching where hard drives would not work.

 

[Quinton McLeod]

Q: How much of a speed increase are we talking about?
A: Well, that depends. On average, a RANDOM 4K read from flash is about 10x faster than from HDD. Now, how does that translate to end-user perf? Under memory pressure and heavy disk activity, the system is much more responsive; on a 4GB machine with few applications running, the ReadyBoost effect is much less noticable.

How many people have this issue? When your memory is being all used up and your HDD is paging crap like crazy? Probably many right? This happens when you're running a program that is eating memory or doing something intensive (like compression files or encoding). The question here is... How much of a increase in performance will you see? Also, if you're in a business, what the heck are you doing running compression programs or encoding video?!

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Depends on what you do on your PC. If you just run Microsoft Word and the like, then you won't notice a difference. However, if you run CPU intensive applications and/or games, then you will notice a drastic difference.

Don't listen to people when they blabber on about SuperFetch and the like. SuperFetch is nothing more than technology that has been given an upgrade from all the previous versions of Windows. It simply loads programs you normally use in Memory based on the time you normally load them. This is simply for LOADING programs. Not running them! ReadyBoost is a technology that places the page file on your USB flash disk. This is infact SLOWER because you're now running virtual memory on a slower bus than your actual HDD with runs MUCH MUCH faster. This can also kill your USB drive because your memory cells can only be refresh so many times before they die.

So, be careful. If you don't need to spend the money, then stick with Windows XP. If you just don't care, go ahead with Vista.

Quinton you have done NO reading on readyboost have you?

Your statement about readyboost killing your USB drive has a speck of truth in that flash memory has a finite number of writes. However, between readyboost taking this into account and the MTBF being so high, the drive will be obsolete before it is worn out.

Your statement about where the page file is placed is completely false. What sort of retarded speed boosting feature would slow things down???


Readyboost is the tiniest portion of Vista and the majority of people won't use it anyway. Base your opinion of Vista on something else and please stop spreading FUD.

Stop making me laugh so much! lol

USB 2.0's transfer rates are 480Mb/s. So that's roughly 60 Mega Bytes per second. Your average HDD with an RPM of 7200 is 400 Mega Bytes per second. So, your average HDD is roughly 6 times faster than your USB 2.0 drive. Why in the world would you want to put your page file on something that slow? That will not speed up your PC. It will slow it down!

The actual page file remains on the disk. Do you every actually read or do you just make crap up all the time??


Oh wait. A 7200rpm hard drive spitting out 400MB/sec... Yeah you just make crap up. hahaha.

Quick, maybe someone doesn't yet realize you're a fool. Open your mouth again and help remove all doubt!

 

[harpy82]

I wish i have a 400MB/sec 7200rpm harddisk. too bad it doesn't exist.

 

[Arkaign]

no unless you're building something new

 

[jlbenedict]

Its worth it when you get it for free.
Thank you to the poster that posted in Hot Deals!

Loaded Vista Business up today. Nice!
Still haven't figured out what the fuss is about. Its no more bloated than Windows XP, on the initial install.

 

[slpaulson]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Depends on what you do on your PC. If you just run Microsoft Word and the like, then you won't notice a difference. However, if you run CPU intensive applications and/or games, then you will notice a drastic difference.

Don't listen to people when they blabber on about SuperFetch and the like. SuperFetch is nothing more than technology that has been given an upgrade from all the previous versions of Windows. It simply loads programs you normally use in Memory based on the time you normally load them. This is simply for LOADING programs. Not running them! ReadyBoost is a technology that places the page file on your USB flash disk. This is infact SLOWER because you're now running virtual memory on a slower bus than your actual HDD with runs MUCH MUCH faster. This can also kill your USB drive because your memory cells can only be refresh so many times before they die.

So, be careful. If you don't need to spend the money, then stick with Windows XP. If you just don't care, go ahead with Vista.

Quinton you have done NO reading on readyboost have you?

Your statement about readyboost killing your USB drive has a speck of truth in that flash memory has a finite number of writes. However, between readyboost taking this into account and the MTBF being so high, the drive will be obsolete before it is worn out.

Your statement about where the page file is placed is completely false. What sort of retarded speed boosting feature would slow things down???


Readyboost is the tiniest portion of Vista and the majority of people won't use it anyway. Base your opinion of Vista on something else and please stop spreading FUD.

Stop making me laugh so much! lol

USB 2.0's transfer rates are 480Mb/s. So that's roughly 60 Mega Bytes per second. Your average HDD with an RPM of 7200 is 400 Mega Bytes per second. So, your average HDD is roughly 6 times faster than your USB 2.0 drive. Why in the world would you want to put your page file on something that slow? That will not speed up your PC. It will slow it down!

Hard drives do not get anywhere near 400MB/s sustained.
You are also forgetting, or just plain didn't know, that random access times for a hard drive is going to be in milliseconds, while flash memory will be in nanoseconds.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Just a personal observation but vista ultimate, like xp pro, gets faster the more times you use it as it adjusts to you. You see what I'm using in my sig and at first vista was dead dog slow but is steadily getting faster just like xp pro did for me. The one thing that I don't like is how vista hogs system resources all to itself but then again every ms os I've used has done the same thing. I'm thinking about dedicating a 2gb corsair usb flashdrive to the readyboost to see if it really does improve performance.

 

[Quinton McLeod]

Originally posted by: cRazYdood

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
Depends on what you do on your PC. If you just run Microsoft Word and the like, then you won't notice a difference. However, if you run CPU intensive applications and/or games, then you will notice a drastic difference.

Don't listen to people when they blabber on about SuperFetch and the like. SuperFetch is nothing more than technology that has been given an upgrade from all the previous versions of Windows. It simply loads programs you normally use in Memory based on the time you normally load them. This is simply for LOADING programs. Not running them! ReadyBoost is a technology that places the page file on your USB flash disk. This is infact SLOWER because you're now running virtual memory on a slower bus than your actual HDD with runs MUCH MUCH faster. This can also kill your USB drive because your memory cells can only be refresh so many times before they die.

So, be careful. If you don't need to spend the money, then stick with Windows XP. If you just don't care, go ahead with Vista.

Quinton you have done NO reading on readyboost have you?

Your statement about readyboost killing your USB drive has a speck of truth in that flash memory has a finite number of writes. However, between readyboost taking this into account and the MTBF being so high, the drive will be obsolete before it is worn out.

Your statement about where the page file is placed is completely false. What sort of retarded speed boosting feature would slow things down???


Readyboost is the tiniest portion of Vista and the majority of people won't use it anyway. Base your opinion of Vista on something else and please stop spreading FUD.

Stop making me laugh so much! lol

USB 2.0's transfer rates are 480Mb/s. So that's roughly 60 Mega Bytes per second. Your average HDD with an RPM of 7200 is 400 Mega Bytes per second. So, your average HDD is roughly 6 times faster than your USB 2.0 drive. Why in the world would you want to put your page file on something that slow? That will not speed up your PC. It will slow it down!

Hard drives do not get anywhere near 400MB/s sustained.
You are also forgetting, or just plain didn't know, that random access times for a hard drive is going to be in milliseconds, while flash memory will be in nanoseconds.

This is true...
But the USB 2.0 Bus is limited as compared to the HDD's Bus. I may have been wrong about the sustained HDD speeds. However, principal is that HDDs have a much higher bandwidth than the USB interface.

 

[stash]

This is true...
But the USB 2.0 Bus is limited as compared to the HDD's Bus. I may have been wrong about the sustained HDD speeds. However, principal is that HDDs have a much higher bandwidth than the USB interface.

Dude. Just stop. For your own sake.

 

[slpaulson]

Originally posted by: Quinton McLeod
This is true...
But the USB 2.0 Bus is limited as compared to the HDD's Bus. I may have been wrong about the sustained HDD speeds. However, principal is that HDDs have a much higher bandwidth than the USB interface.

Anybody feel free to correct my math if I mess this up...
I'm going to say a harddrive has infinite bandwidth, but a 10ms random access time.
I will also assume a USB flash drive has 10MB/s bandwidth, and a 1 microsecond random access time.

To fetch a 4KB page it will take a harddrive 10ms.
To fetch that same 4KB page from a flash drive it will take 1*10^-6 + (8*4*2^10)/(8*10*2^20) = 0.392ms

 

[OptyMyStix]

If you want to get everything on Windows Vista go get it.

 

[Aberforth]

Quinton ...OMG, ReadyBoost is not slow- you think developers at Microsoft are morons?? I know Ready Boost and Ready Drive (designed for Hybrid HDD's which has large buffer memory and optimized for Notebook computers) really improves the performance. Please don't make statements that you are not completely sure of.

Tom Archer's Blog: http://blogs.msdn.com/tomarcher/archive/2006/06/02/615199.aspx

From Tom Archer's Blog
Q: Aren't Hard Disks faster than flash? My HDD has 80MB/sec throughput.
A: Hard drives are great for large sequential I/O. For those situations, ReadyBoost gets out of the way. We concentrate on improving the performance of small, random I/Os, like paging to and from disk.

 

[loup garou]

Hey Swami, I actually got around to installing Vista Business on my 700m today. I forgot, I only have the 1.6GHz Pentium M and 512MB RAM (forgot I stuck my 1GB stick in another notebook). Installation took about 1 hour and was very painless. Of course Aero doesn't run on it. After install, the only thing requiring drivers was the SD Card reader, and I found these XP Drivers work fine:
http://support.dell.com/support/downloa...t=3&formatcnt=1&libid=27&fileid=186169

Popped an extra 1GB SD card in and devoted it to ReadyBoost and everything is humming along fine. Feels just as snappy as the XP Pro install it replaced. Should be even better once I swap that 1GB stick back in.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

I have the same laptop with similar configuration except for 768MB instead. I was debating whether to install it and replace my XP completely. How well does it work on your 700m without the 1GB SD for ReadyBoost? My former experience with RC2 was slow and sluggish.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: BehindEnemyLines
I have the same laptop with similar configuration except for 768MB instead. I was debating whether to install it and replace my XP completely. How well does it work on your 700m without the 1GB SD for ReadyBoost? My former experience with RC2 was slow and sluggish.

Pulled the SD card...it's a little poky, but my no means unusable. Right now WMP is populating my music library from a network share, I have 4 IE tabs open and am transferring some files I had backed up from a network share and nothing feels laggy. I don't use this machine for much more than remote admin and web browsing, so I don't expect a lot of problems. I'll probably put the SD card back in and grab that 1gb memory stick back from my boss to bump up to 1.25gb just to see what sort of difference is made.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

Originally posted by: loup garou

Originally posted by: BehindEnemyLines
I have the same laptop with similar configuration except for 768MB instead. I was debating whether to install it and replace my XP completely. How well does it work on your 700m without the 1GB SD for ReadyBoost? My former experience with RC2 was slow and sluggish.

Pulled the SD card...it's a little poky, but my no means unusable. Right now WMP is populating my music library from a network share, I have 4 IE tabs open and am transferring some files I had backed up from a network share and nothing feels laggy. I don't use this machine for much more than remote admin and web browsing, so I don't expect a lot of problems. I'll probably put the SD card back in and grab that 1gb memory stick back from my boss to bump up to 1.25gb just to see what sort of difference is made.

I primarily use it to run (from most frequent to least): Web browsing, MATLAB (numerical algebra), PSPICE (circuit simulation), and LabView (graphical data acquisition). Just one at a time, but I am wondering how well Vista would handle on the limited 700m. Which 1GB SD do you use brand/model? Thanks.