Is it wise to use Vista yet?

[Deviate]

Well if you want to explain how to get rid of the slow file copy bug that thousands of people are having, we'd appreciate it

Vista sets 2007 land-speed record for copying and deleting | The Register
Re: calculating time remaining moving, deleteing, copying files verry slow - TechNet Forums

It sounds like SP1 fixes that particular issue.

* Improve by 25 % local file copying on the same disk on the same machine
* Improve by 45 % the speed of copying files from a remote non-Windows Vista system to a SP1 system
* Speed up by 50 %, the rate of copying files from a remote SP1 system to a local SP1 system

Microsoft publishes detailed Vista SP1 “changelog” - istartedsomething

[Agent]

It sounds like SP1 fixes that particular issue.


Microsoft publishes detailed Vista SP1 “changelog” - istartedsomething

Plenty of people are still having it, even with SP1
So annoying!

[d3fiant]

that certainly is a weird bug, on my old system Vista exhibited the much seen move/copy delay, sometimes it was unworkable, so much so that I had a dual boot XP for that and a few games.

However my new system copying/moving matches XP and in most cases exceeds with my Vista build. I would say its more a driver issue than an OS issue as some systems are fine others are not

[Splash]

Plenty of people are still having it, even with the beta of SP1
So annoying!

Fixed that for you

[Zadock]

You find it patronising and restrictive without having switched to it? Are you sure you're not just repeating things you've read elsewhere?

I'm running it (x64) and gaming on it is absolutely fine. There was a quote elsewhere on these forums suggesting that any hardware or software older than about 18 months just won't work, which is cobblers frankly. The only software I've struggled with getting working properly so far is the F@H SMP client.

Splash... I have used it/ switched to it, I have a copy on my shelf here got it OEM with my system. I used it for about a month and then switched back to XP because I hated it. The main reason is I like my dark engine games and had real problems getting system shock 2 to work.

Also I was was having hellish lan problems with IPV6 but I think that was more to do with my router.

[Blitzen]

You find it patronising and restrictive without having switched to it? Are you sure you're not just repeating things you've read elsewhere?

I'm running it (x64) and gaming on it is absolutely fine. There was a quote elsewhere on these forums suggesting that any hardware or software older than about 18 months just won't work, which is cobblers frankly. The only software I've struggled with getting working properly so far is the F@H SMP client.

SO am i.
All my games ruin fine and i cannot see the big fuss regarding poor gaming performance because it DEFINITELY isnt a problem for veryone.

Personally i think 90% of the people moaning about Vista either:
a). Havent given it a proper chance.
b). Have NEVER even seen it and are just jumping on a bandwagon.
c). Too tight to buy it and are trying to put others off because of it.

The ONLY problem now is the file swapping and SP1 solved that for me.

Also I was was having hellish lan problems with IPV6 but I think that was more to do with my router.

Almost certainly.

[bedrock1977]

I have Vista Ultimate on my system but having tons of issues with it and it does perform slower for some reason then within XP. 3DMarks gives me a score of around 12000 in vista, in xp I get almost 16000. Thats without SLI mode turned on as thats another nightmare. :/

[Lucio]

I have Vista Ultimate on my system but having tons of issues with it and it does perform slower for some reason then within XP. 3DMarks gives me a score of around 12000 in vista, in xp I get almost 16000. Thats without SLI mode turned on as thats another nightmare. :/

And I suspect the fact that you know the difference is possibly why you're having trouble. A lot of people I know who have problems with Vista are those who have used XP on the same system, leading me to suspect the upgrade install is the issue.

Even if you do a "clean" install, unless the HDD is completely blank, I think the Vista installer has a bug or two in it which leads to the ongoing performance issues. I could be completely off the mark, but there does seem to be far more people complaining "my system worked fine under XP" than there are people who just say "Vista doesn't work on my brand new machine".

[bedrock1977]

And I suspect the fact that you know the difference is possibly why you're having trouble. A lot of people I know who have problems with Vista are those who have used XP on the same system, leading me to suspect the upgrade install is the issue.

Even if you do a "clean" install, unless the HDD is completely blank, I think the Vista installer has a bug or two in it which leads to the ongoing performance issues. I could be completely off the mark, but there does seem to be far more people complaining "my system worked fine under XP" than there are people who just say "Vista doesn't work on my brand new machine".

Mine was not an upgrade. I am dual booting my system and can switch between the two. I know the difference between a clean install and an upgrade.

[Splash]

Based on the hardware that was available at the time XP was released guess which OS performed better, Win2k or XP? You got it...

If you install a brand new OS on hardware that has effectively been superseded you will see that the older (ie more optimised for older hardware) OS performs better. Believe me, I stuck with Windows 2000 until XP SP2 was released for these exact reasons. I could afford to build a machine to take advantage of the newer features of Vista using current hardware and I can have no complaints. Vista x64 outperforms XP 32 bit (I know, an unfair comparison but there's a lot of it going about) on my hardware.

[crazyfool]

I've got vista on one computer and xp on my new build and i would say stick with xp. Vista runs much slower, both old and new hardware have driver issues in vista, and for any gaming I use xp all the way. I've installed games on vista where the game cannot load the second level because vista crashes it everytime. I've even got games where vista wont actually run the setup no matter what i try so i cant even install it.

[Blitzen]

I've got vista on one computer and xp on my new build and i would say stick with xp. Vista runs much slower, both old and new hardware have driver issues in vista, and for any gaming I use xp all the way. I've installed games on vista where the game cannot load the second level because vista crashes it everytime. I've even got games where vista wont actually run the setup no matter what i try so i cant even install it.

There is something you havent got right then.
Vista doesnt run much slower. If anything, its quicker (except for file transfers).

If you are having games not loading levels then i doubt thats Vista related. Unless of course the games are very old. I have gone back as far as Return To Castle Wolfenstein (nearly 7 years old) and that runs great.
I find it odd you have games that wont even install. The only time i have seen that happen in Vista is when you have downloaded an ISO illegally and the ISO was created in XP. If you buy games then there is no explanation for them not installing.

Lastly, in the last 10-11 months all mainstream hardware has been supproted from what i have found.

[Agent]

If you buy games then there is no explanation for them not installing.

Unless its because its an old game using a 16-bit based installer. These won't run under Vista

[dangel]

Unless its because its an old game using a 16-bit based installer. These won't run under Vista

Or older versions of installshield which detect windows version 6 and basically freak out.

Not really Vista's fault tho

I find it odd you have games that wont even install. The only time i have seen that happen in Vista is when you have downloaded an ISO illegally and the ISO was created in XP. If you buy games then there is no explanation for them not installing.

Well aside from the above, them not being certified to run on Vista or crackpot protection schemes that pee off us legit game purchasers.

[Agent]

Does the compatibility mode worth with them dangel?

[Lucio]

Mine was not an upgrade. I am dual booting my system and can switch between the two. I know the difference between a clean install and an upgrade.

Sorry, I wasn't implying you didn't know the difference and I wasn't implying it was your fault either.

However you DO have a copy of XP on the same system as Vista and I think that the Vista installer does something funny when that happens (such as borrowing a DRM file or something, without going through a lot of tests and source code, this is just a hunch), even on a dual boot system Vista still has to look at the copy of XP and I think that is at the heart of the majority of Vista woes.

I'm also not claiming that Vista is perfect, there are definately some issues but IMO there's no more of them out there than there was with XP a year after launch. I also remember that when XP launched, I swore that Windows 98 was the operating system for me and there was no way I'd be changing over to something that looked like it was coloured by the Teletubbies!

This time around, I learnt from my experiences and have given Vista a go, it's good enough that I've still got a copy of XP Home OEM waiting to be installed (wish I hadn't opened the shrink wrap!), even the applications that I was told wouldn't run, have run fine (though admitedly in admin mode only).