I have got my new Toshiba x200 Laptop with Vista pre-installed. At first I had a little problems but now after installing SP1 all of my problems are fixed. I see a great improvement in Performance. Vista + SP1 is the way to go. You can't stick with XP any more.
LOL, this is trying to reinvent the wheel. Here is the way it has been working: you launch an application and it goes to memory. Launch another application and it goes to memory. If you don't use the first application for awhile it goes to cache memory (hard drive). If you want to use the first application again it gets loaded back to memory. Pretty simple huh?
Again, you fail to realise the merits from a technical point of view. Did you even read the article in the link? The method you describe is actually inefficient as you need to access the hard drive and get the data required and load it into memory. Wouldn't it be better if you opened an app and it started instantly as it was already loaded into memory? I am trying to keep things really simple here. If you want more details, 1st read the link posted earlier and ask here for more information if you still don't get it.
Yes this really sucks. Vista's eating lots of my space and upgrading almost everyday. To think I have 1.5 gb of space and now im running out of space just for this OS. XP is still the best. alot of programs you can run right away not requiring you to download so much just to run the one u really need the most.
Considering how cheap hard drives are, your statement is puzzling. Did you install Vista on an old machine, or one with a low space hard drive? The one thing in this thread no one has complained of is having the OS eat up all the disk space - that complaint kind of died out around when Windows 2000 came out and Hard Drive prices were tumbling.
I think you don't understand that application do load up fast. What Microsoft is doing according to you is loading up application in to memory whether you launched them or not. Wasting memory blocks that can be used by the application you are using. Ex. if I don't use Office, why do I need it loaded to memory? I don't, I just want to use Firefox. If your correct about how Vista works we have found the Achilles to it.
I disagree with everyone who says all you need is a good computer with a bit of RAM to run vista well. I have two PC's. My office PC is running Vista Business, it has 3GB or RAM, and a decent processor (Dell XPS system), and I still wonder what takes so damn long sometimes to do simple processes, and the random program crashing is very annoying. My home PC is much less powered and running XP along with most of the same programs as my office PC. It works much better and is faster overall and all around.
Your thinking process is fundamentally flawed. Explaining to you would be a waste of time to be honest. If you had read the links I posted earlier, it may have helped understanding why actually using your systems memory is a good thing. People whose technical abilities are much greater than yours have used/tested and explained why it is a good thing, yet you fail to understand (most likely never read the links). Even the fact that an earlier post mentioned that Linux does the same thing (using preload) doesn't seem to have registered in your head. As mentioned earlier, I believe you act dumb, post stupid remarks, and outdated articles/stories etc to keep this thread running. More views = more adsense shared $ for you.
I tried Vista for a while and I have a pretty good PC too. Still it felt very very slow and the support for programs wasn't good at all. Well it should be better nowadays but I see no reason to update from XP.
I don't use adsense as for explanation and your personal attacks: Truth hurts that you do not know what your talking about. The simple fact is that no matter how cheap memory gets it can never be cheaper then a hard drive. This is why virtual memory has been used since Windows 95. Where the hard drive is used as memory.
It's not the look that is the problem it's that Microsoft did not think threw how the market would react to Vista. Instead on working on the GUI they should have been working on making it more compatible, reliable, secure and safe.
Vista SP1 fails to spark migration: Microsoft's latest efforts to persuade customers to upgrade to its much-maligned Vista operating system have met with a cool response from users. http://keznews.com/4242_Vista_SP1_fails_to_spark_migration
Not yet. They will migrate when 4 GB of RAM will not be well managed by XP, when all the games will be on DX 10, when you'll really need all those processor cores. XP can't manage natively all that