Is it good to use Vista ?
-
Unless you're using 64 Bit it doesn't use more then 3Gb Ram - so anything over 3Gb is just a waste of cash (as far as Vista goes) "the maximum memory available in 32-bit versions of Windows Vista is typically 3.12 GB." from http://support.microsoft.com/kb/929605[^]
Take a chill pill, Daddy-o .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
maxxx# wrote:
so anything over 3Gb is just a waste of cash (as far as Vista goes)
You mean you can't tweak around with it like XP to get the full 4GB? :suss:
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
Mohammad Dayyan wrote:
it's good to use Windows Vista now ?
Yes. It was always good if you had a powerful enough PC
Mohammad Dayyan wrote:
Why?
Because it is better than XP. It is faster than XP (it shifts a lot of the graphics processing onto the video card, which XP never did, freeing up the process to do other things). It has better memory management (it caches things more effectivly so that your programs respond quicker). If a hardware driver fails it just keeps on going by restarting the driver, or failing over into a default driver. Wireless networking is much easier. Power management is easier. There are, however, caveats. Read two of my recent blog entries about Visual Studio and SQL Server on Vista. Visual Studio / SQL Server install order[^] and Installing SQL Server 2005 on Windows Vista[^]. Also, from some time ago, Visual Studio 2005 on Vista[^]. Also, I don't know if this was fixed in SP1, but the original Vista installer didn't like multiple monitors being plugged in at installation time.[^].
Recent blog posts: *SQL Server / Visual Studio install order *Installing SQL Server 2005 on Vista *Tip of the Day - SysInternals * Meme My Blog
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
It was always good if you had a powerful enough PC
True, but my laptop I am running it on isn't the most powerful machine around, but gutting out the junk services I don't use, it works well.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
maxxx# wrote:
so anything over 3Gb is just a waste of cash (as far as Vista goes)
You mean you can't tweak around with it like XP to get the full 4GB? :suss:
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
AFAIK you can only get it to DISPLAY the amount of memory correctly - but it still won't be using that extra above 3Gb. Can you actually do that on XP? I didn't think Xp could see more than 3Gb either? Always made me wonder why they sell machines with a 32 bit OS and 4Gb or more of Ram
Take a chill pill, Daddy-o .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
AFAIK you can only get it to DISPLAY the amount of memory correctly - but it still won't be using that extra above 3Gb. Can you actually do that on XP? I didn't think Xp could see more than 3Gb either? Always made me wonder why they sell machines with a 32 bit OS and 4Gb or more of Ram
Take a chill pill, Daddy-o .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
Haven't tried it myself, but I've read before that you have to use the /PAE switch when starting up Windows. And a few other things to get it to work with all 4GB... This for example, http://www.ocmodshop.com/ocmodshop.aspx?a=989[^]...
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
I am running Vista perfectly happily with just 2Gb of RAM.
Recent blog posts: *SQL Server / Visual Studio install order *Installing SQL Server 2005 on Vista *Tip of the Day - SysInternals * Meme My Blog
My dual core 1.6ghz laptop with 1.5gb ram is running Vista Ultimate smoothly. VS2008 seems to run no faster or slower than it does on my XP machine.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
Haven't tried it myself, but I've read before that you have to use the /PAE switch when starting up Windows. And a few other things to get it to work with all 4GB... This for example, http://www.ocmodshop.com/ocmodshop.aspx?a=989[^]...
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
AFAIK these 'hacks' can give you access to about an extra 512Mb of the 'mising' 1Gb - not to be sneezed at, I guess, but I also understand that the access to this extra memory is slower, and possibly only works with certain motherboard chipsets. Maybe I'll try it on my office PC and see what happens. If I don't reply, you'll know all didn't go well ;)
Take a chill pill, Daddy-o .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
AFAIK these 'hacks' can give you access to about an extra 512Mb of the 'mising' 1Gb - not to be sneezed at, I guess, but I also understand that the access to this extra memory is slower, and possibly only works with certain motherboard chipsets. Maybe I'll try it on my office PC and see what happens. If I don't reply, you'll know all didn't go well ;)
Take a chill pill, Daddy-o .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
I've always wondered and may be upgrading to 64 bits anyways.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
I've always wondered and may be upgrading to 64 bits anyways.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
If you go 64 bit, just make sure you're not developing with people rnning 32 bit! We have one developer in our team runnng 64 bit (long story) and the amount of angst it causes (3rd party tools not available, specific code in project builds to decide which machine it's being built on etc.) outweights its usefulness (in fact, I haven't seen and good side to 64 bit vista at all, frankly, in what we laughingly call the real world)
Take a chill pill, Daddy-o .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
-
If you go 64 bit, just make sure you're not developing with people rnning 32 bit! We have one developer in our team runnng 64 bit (long story) and the amount of angst it causes (3rd party tools not available, specific code in project builds to decide which machine it's being built on etc.) outweights its usefulness (in fact, I haven't seen and good side to 64 bit vista at all, frankly, in what we laughingly call the real world)
Take a chill pill, Daddy-o .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
maxxx# wrote:
If you go 64 bit, just make sure you're not developing with people rnning 32 bit!
That's true. Not really conceptually any different than when I started doing software development, I got to see the transition from 16 bits to 32 bits, and it is pretty much the same idea all over again. While most folks were running 16 bits with 80286's and 80386-SX, I had a 32 bit 80386-DX and had to be careful about porting down to 16 bits from 32 bit development.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
Chris Maunder wrote:
At a fundamental level it's more advanced and secure than XP
In which way is it more secured? Is it the continues popup you get - what is even the name of that feature? Vista is a new OS and not yet really field tested, so the least we want to hear is that more secure stuff. Last year I upgraded my internet to broadband, my provider was advertising "more secure" on the TV. I ordered the upgrade just to be sent Mcfee anti-virus CD as the "more secure". To me buying a new PC with Vista might make sense, but to pop it on a current PC, there seems to be no reason. Best regards, Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
-
Hi there. I'm using WinXp SP2. I'd like to know , it's good to use Windows Vista now ? Why? What are your reasons ?
I Installed Vista on a 15GB partition and in two months it grew so much so that now there are only 500MB free on that drive. All other software I am using is on a different partition so those 14.5 gigs are just for OS! For one thing it constantly updates and requires restart. But the big problem right now is that I can't install SP1 because it requires 2GB of free space! I tried freeing up some space but didn't manage to get enough. Turns out that the Winsxs folder takes nearly 8GB, and there is nothing one can do about that. Unfortunately repartitioning is not an option at this point. So the only thing I can do is create a new Vista CD with SP1 integrated and reinstall. :wtf: This is my first experience with Vista, draw your own conclusions. If I were you I would definitely stick to XP.
-
Hi there. I'm using WinXp SP2. I'd like to know , it's good to use Windows Vista now ? Why? What are your reasons ?
I have been running Vista Ultimate as my main development platform for several months now. I wouldn't go back to XP for anything but that having been said - Vista is a resource hog. I run it on my Dell Inspiron 9200 also but it is definitely slow. This machine sports an Intel Quad core processor and 4 GB of memory so Vista practically screams. One thing - USE UAC - it will save your life so to speak. I run Windows OneCare so virus scanning is always on but I've had no viruses because I have to give them permission to run. At first it got under my skin but now I wouldn't have it any other way. It will grow on you I guarantee!
-
Hi there. I'm using WinXp SP2. I'd like to know , it's good to use Windows Vista now ? Why? What are your reasons ?
Yes, it is, in the beginning the where lots of driver issues those are solved now. However, if you have a slow machine/less than 3 GB ram you might consider the 32 bit version of Vista because it’s faster on those kind of machines and maybe even remove the Vista Aero stuff. Vista got a lot to offer beside Aero, it really enhances my productivity, its faster to navigate around in the file system, I can run commands directly from the start menu, and it obviously is much safer than XP. I don't use Vista myself, instead I use Windows Server 2008 as a Workstation but I am running Vista at work and am very satisfied with it now. Now I am not saying that there want be a transitioning period for you, there will be, but I am sure it will be a short one and you will be very satisfied once you get to know Vista. Cons? Today? Hmm there aren't really any unless of course you don't have at least 2GB ram and a dual core CPU, but hey, who doesn’t have that today?
-
My work laptop is XP2 so I switched my personal laptop to Vista so I can be prepared in case the eventual switch ever occurs. I think some of the WPF things are neat, however, when I look at how much juice is draws from the laptop I wonder if companies have looked at the overhead cost of even developing in Vista. If your PC is drawing 200W/hrs to run a simple business app * 200 users that is a lot of power compared to the low draw that can be achieved with SP2 and an LCD. Heck, most of my apps business apps run near idle. But yet, I run Vista, no real reason.
Need a C# Consultant? I'm available.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know. -- Ernest HemingwayIf you’re using too much juice remove Aero that will reduce power consumption and speed up slow machines quite dramatically. That’s the quick fix, a better way is of course to disable all the services you don’t need and if that’s not enough, remove Aero, because Aero is really the guilty part in using resources. I personally use Aero, but hey, I have a 45nm Quad core Xeon so…
-
I Installed Vista on a 15GB partition and in two months it grew so much so that now there are only 500MB free on that drive. All other software I am using is on a different partition so those 14.5 gigs are just for OS! For one thing it constantly updates and requires restart. But the big problem right now is that I can't install SP1 because it requires 2GB of free space! I tried freeing up some space but didn't manage to get enough. Turns out that the Winsxs folder takes nearly 8GB, and there is nothing one can do about that. Unfortunately repartitioning is not an option at this point. So the only thing I can do is create a new Vista CD with SP1 integrated and reinstall. :wtf: This is my first experience with Vista, draw your own conclusions. If I were you I would definitely stick to XP.
Well folks for you who have a 40 GB hard drive and only a 15 GB system partition, single core or less than 2 GB ram stay away from Vista. For those of us not living in the Stone Age, Vista is really great.
-
FWIW, I'm going with Windows Server 2008[^] instead of Vista for my new dev box.
I totally agree, I do the same, unfortunately at work I have to use Vista. But hey, I would not trade that for XP.
-
It's been fine for me except was a real pain to set up - had to try 5 network cards to find one that was compatible, and remove all of my PCI cards during the install.. But that was a year ago so things mught have changed now :) Regards, --Perspx
"The Blue Screen of Death, also known as The Blue Screen of Doom, the "Blue Screen of Fun", "Phatul Exception: The WRECKening" and "Windows Vista", is a multi award-winning game first developed in 1995 by Microsoft" - Uncyclopedia
Yes, they have, the driver issues are mostly solved now, even 64 bit drivers are generally available.
-
Try read this...[^] or the actual report[^] I like the conclusion in this[^] Again, until that OS is fully tested, the security thing, which even being patched every month if not week, is a simple unproven theory. Best regards, Paul.
Jesus Christ is LOVE! Please tell somebody.
-
AFAIK these 'hacks' can give you access to about an extra 512Mb of the 'mising' 1Gb - not to be sneezed at, I guess, but I also understand that the access to this extra memory is slower, and possibly only works with certain motherboard chipsets. Maybe I'll try it on my office PC and see what happens. If I don't reply, you'll know all didn't go well ;)
Take a chill pill, Daddy-o .\\axxx (That's an 'M')
These limitations are due to the Win32 memory model. Win32 memory model was concepted in early 90's, when desktop machines were delivered with 4MB; at those times, 4 GibaByte was a really huge amount of memory. Microsoft decided to divide the addressable space (4GB) in two, 2GB, sections - one for the OS, the other for applications. Therefore, no Win32 application shall access more than its 2GB share of memory. Under this model, a machine running with 4GB is using intensively the 2GB share for apps and the first giga of the OS - the second is not used, in most desktops. Microsoft has noticed exactly this: the OS rarely uses completely its share of 2GB; so, they decided to support PAE (an hardware feature), to divide memory differently in 3GB for applications and 1GB for OS. However, few applications are prepared to PAE (mostly, server applications), so, the probability of having an app using the extra 1GB is relatively small. So, under the PAE model, you usually fall on the classic Win32 model: apps using franticly their 2GB (because they were not developed to take advantage of the extra giga), and OS kernel running in 1GB.
-
Yes, it is, in the beginning the where lots of driver issues those are solved now. However, if you have a slow machine/less than 3 GB ram you might consider the 32 bit version of Vista because it’s faster on those kind of machines and maybe even remove the Vista Aero stuff. Vista got a lot to offer beside Aero, it really enhances my productivity, its faster to navigate around in the file system, I can run commands directly from the start menu, and it obviously is much safer than XP. I don't use Vista myself, instead I use Windows Server 2008 as a Workstation but I am running Vista at work and am very satisfied with it now. Now I am not saying that there want be a transitioning period for you, there will be, but I am sure it will be a short one and you will be very satisfied once you get to know Vista. Cons? Today? Hmm there aren't really any unless of course you don't have at least 2GB ram and a dual core CPU, but hey, who doesn’t have that today?
I am happy with my Vista laptop, just 2Gb /160GB HD / dual core. I have never seen my memory full working with Visual Studio or Office. You will require a least a month to tame it, but the benefits are big, as many members have exposed here. I noticed the drivers problems, every gadget I buy must be carefully checked for Vista compatiblity, but I think this is not a big issue. Buying Vista-compatible hardware is an indicator for me to have the lastest products. Of course I would never recommend to upgrade a system to Vista. I think every system must ran with the OS it was designed for. If you want Vista, sell your XP machine at ebay or a garage sale, and buy a new computer.
Best regards, Jaime.