Like others on here, I recently bought a laptop with Vista pre-loaded, and as I have discovered over the brief few days I've been using it.... Vista is one of the worst operating systems ever created by man.

What are my options? How easy is it to go back to XP? Will I still be able to find and install all my drivers that came loaded with Vista? Why are the evil corporations punishing us by forcing Vista upon our poor and shattered lives?

There's no reason a new laptop with 2 gigs of ram and a dual core processor should be running this SHITTY!

11/5/2007 8:44:49 AM

you've probably realized that your laptop just isn't beefy enough to run it smoothly.



If you want, we can try to work out your problems.




else, check with your manufacturer about installing XP. Some new hardware is incompatible with the legacy OS.



Try disabling Aero, or otherwise optimizing your OS. I'm betting monies that you've got shared video ram?

11/5/2007 9:06:56 AM

Just from personal experience,

- Disable Windows Defender (Your hard drive will not stop spinning if this service is left on. I suggest you disable it and get a "real" anti-spyware program)
- Disable System Restore (You should really be using a 3rd party back-up solution if you really care about your data)
- Disable Aero (I know, it won't look as pretty)

11/5/2007 10:19:08 AM

Heh, I don't give a shit about Aero. I'll definitely disable that sucker.

Defender is disabled as well.

What I thought was an independent ATI GPU was actually onboard graphics. I'm so mad at myself for not paying attention, and now I'm paying the price. Yeah, shared video ram. *slams head against desk repeatedly*

I'll see about disabling system restore as well.

Honestly, I'm using the notebook to write papers, surf the web and play WoW. The end. The first two happen fairly well, but wow's performance is slightly depressing. Hince why I thought about going back to XP, but now I'm beginning to doubt the lighter OS would help.

11/5/2007 10:32:07 AM

I had framerate problems with WoW on my desktop system when I tried vista.



Make sure your drivers are up to date (ATI and nVidia release new drivers periodically)


Then take a look at the services running on your system. go to the "run" window and type "services.msc"


This will list all the services that are and aren't running. You can disable quite a lot of crap, especially if you arent sharing files over a network or using the laptop for printing.

http://tweakhound.com/vista/tweakguide/page_7.htm

Give that a good read. Pages 7 and 8 seem fairly comprehensive. Start disabling services and see if that helps your case any.


If you're not comfortable doing this, try downloading a 3rd party windows optimization program. If you know how to torrent, this should be cake.

[Edited on November 5, 2007 at 10:43 AM. Reason : window]

11/5/2007 10:43:05 AM

You know it was odd for me:

My games ran faster when I switched to Vista.
BF2 & BF2142

11/5/2007 11:41:08 AM

last time i tried was about 4-5 months ago.


there have been improvements, im sure.



plus, im a framerate/resource nazi.

11/5/2007 11:45:58 AM

^^No way ... BF2 definitely has given me nothing but problems when playing under Vista.

It's been one of my biggest gripes about Vista. However, it's looking like NVIDIA's graphics drivers were at fault as I'm having fewer issues with newer drivers ... but no other games gave me issues, so ... go figure.

(Yea, I have other gripes about Vista too, but it plays older games horribly in my experience)

[Edited on November 5, 2007 at 12:00 PM. Reason : .]

11/5/2007 11:59:11 AM

Granite, nice link on that optimization guide. I went into services and disabled a lot of their suggestions.

Is there a third party optimization tool you'd recommend?

Additionally, is there any way to boost graphics performance for WoW? I know integrated graphics sucks, but it seems like there should be enough RAM and processing power available to share the load.

11/5/2007 12:10:04 PM

^ WoW eats RAM like it's going out of style. Without a dedicated GPU, you're never going to get anything good FPS wise. Get more RAM, lower your settings, and pray for the best.

11/5/2007 12:46:13 PM

Yeah.. I'm discovering this. It plays ok with moderately decent settings. If I was really craving smooth play guess I could turn everything way down..

ugh.

11/5/2007 2:43:00 PM

i messed around with vista today...i was on a 1.7ghz amd dual core laptop...i was amazed at how long it took to restart and boot the computer...i was very disappointed...i want xp forever

11/5/2007 4:47:08 PM

shit... i love vista but then again my new laptop is a dual core with a clock speed of twice what my desktop's single core is .. and the 2 gigs of ram helps too i'm sure... i've noticed with barely anything running it uses about 40% of its memory

11/5/2007 6:07:52 PM

exactly the reason I took it off my ThinkPad...Core 2 Duo and 2 gb of ram, and vista business was fucking idling with 900mb and nothing else running

XP idles at ~325mb on the same damn machine

11/5/2007 7:59:39 PM

I heard somewhere that large idle memory usage might have to do with it caching some programs and things that you use frequently for faster load times, but I don't know if that's true and don't really care enough to research it, hah

11/5/2007 9:20:15 PM

does microsoft let you trade vista for xp if you want to?

11/5/2007 9:25:13 PM

Quote :

"What I thought was an independent ATI GPU was actually onboard graphics. I'm so mad at myself for not paying attention, and now I'm paying the price. Yeah, shared video ram. *slams head against desk repeatedly*"

ouch

11/5/2007 10:15:46 PM

maybe try out ubuntu + wine? not sure if WoW runs under wine, but it'd be easy to find out. there's no excuse for an OS to bring a dualcore 2GB (or even 1GB, or even 512 MB) machine to its knees.

if I had to name one of the biggest difficulties of switching to linux, it's not that there's a lack of info, it's that there's too much info. The trick is researching till you find what you need to know (and taking notes). but pretty much anything you want to do has been done by someone already.

11/6/2007 3:17:16 PM

Quote :

"exactly the reason I took it off my ThinkPad...Core 2 Duo and 2 gb of ram, and vista business was fucking idling with 900mb and nothing else running XP idles at ~325mb on the same damn machine "

Vista manages memory differently. If you've got oodles of spare RAM, it's going to use it. And isn't that the way it should be?????? You're saying you'd rather have all that RAM sitting there doing nothing instead of improving your system's performance?

I mean, I guess I understand being a resource nazi but... you're doing it wrong.

11/6/2007 3:23:57 PM

I don't see how taking LONGER to load programs is "improving my system's performance". I'd rather have that extra 550mb back to do with it what I want rather than let vista decide and fuck it up, since my XP install runs faster, smoother, and better than that piece of shit vista install.

11/6/2007 3:41:17 PM

Quote :

"I'd rather have that extra 550mb back to do with it what I want rather than let vista decide and fuck it up"

Since when are you better at deciding how your computer should use its RAM than the OS is?

I actually am not sure how Vista manages RAM, but it might be something more along the lines of how OS X does it. When you look at a Mac RAM chart, it shows you 4 states of the RAM, instead of 2 states like Windows shows you (used or free). here is how Mac delineates RAM usage

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=107918

Quote :

"Wired memory This information can't be cached to disk, so it must stay in RAM. The amount depends on what applications you are using. Active memory This information is currently in RAM and actively being used. Inactive memory This information is no longer being used and has been cached to disk, but it will remain in RAM until another application needs the space. Leaving this information in RAM is to your advantage if you (or a client of your computer) come back to it later. Free memory This memory is not being used. What does all this mean? This means you shouldn't worry when the Free memory is low. The only time Free memory should be high is right after the computer starts up. As you use applications or services, memory is used and transitions to Inactive. Applications that need more memory will take from the Inactive, but the Inactive is there just in case you need it again. If the combination of Free and Inactive is very low, then you might need more memory."

maybe Vista does something more like this, but only shows it as "active" memory instead of "active" vs. "inactive"

11/6/2007 4:03:21 PM

I dunno.



maybe i just do too many different things for vista to keep up.



I'm not going to be elitist about it, but I'll stick with XP. Microsoft will get another chance after SP1.

11/6/2007 4:05:18 PM

there's no doubt that Vista is way less than optimal.

But I think agentlion's got the right idea.

As I understand it, if a program needs the memory, it will be taken away from Vista. So Vista only gobbles up memory when it's free, otherwise lets it go.

I'm somewhat of a resource nazi myself, but if you read up on the way memory is managed in Vista you'll realize that it's all in your head.

In other words, I don't think the poor performance of Vista has anything to do with your ram, Forte. Probably more to do with graphics card and shitty code in the Vista beta final release.

[Edited on November 6, 2007 at 5:00 PM. Reason : d]

11/6/2007 4:59:19 PM

Quote :

"maybe try out ubuntu + wine? not sure if WoW runs under wine, but it'd be easy to find out. there's no excuse for an OS to bring a dualcore 2GB (or even 1GB, or even 512 MB) machine to its knee"

Wine can't deal with hardware rendering on it's own, iirc, but I know WoW runs under Cedega, at the expense of a few fps. I've never personally tried it, but I only run it in Windows because it is such a hog to begin with.

As far as WoW specific settings, turn everything down except terrain details, so you don't sacrifice draw distance. Turn off vertical sync and weather/spell effects, and run at a lower resolution. Just use the UI scale to make the bars look right again. I've gotten it to run on some pretty slim setups by removing the eye candy.

[Edited on November 6, 2007 at 5:00 PM. Reason : .]

11/6/2007 4:59:53 PM

If you buy a laptop with vista pre-loaded and downgrade to XP that voids your warranty

11/6/2007 5:25:58 PM

that sounds like a load of bullshit

11/6/2007 5:44:00 PM

It is, but it's true.

11/6/2007 7:23:07 PM

thats so very very gay

11/7/2007 5:28:52 AM

THanks for the WoW tips for fixing performance. I think I'm working out a deal that will get this POS out of my hands and gimme a laptop with an actual non-integrated GPU. Looking at Dell and Lenovo.

I'll let you know.

11/7/2007 10:42:06 AM

where do you go to disable the stuff like aero and windows defender?


i need to figure out how to change the permission thing cause its about anoying as hell

11/21/2007 10:43:20 PM

man what in the fuck

i have a hp scanjet 5300c...the motherfucker doesnt have any drivers for vista...

11/23/2007 4:25:55 PM

hah you think that's bad, try finding drivers for Vista x64

11/23/2007 6:08:50 PM

damn i bet...i dont get why hp would alienate their customers like that...


are there any type of 3rd party apps that can fix this? i think its totally bogus that they say like "hp offers many products that work with vista" like i'm just supposed to rush out and fork over more money to them

11/23/2007 6:13:24 PM

does anyone else get "(not responding)" all the fucking time? its anoying as fuck....its buggy as hell for some reason...most often its with windows media player but i got it in firefox once for opening vista.ncsu.edu, and in aim a few times

11/25/2007 7:02:30 PM

BTTT

Anybody got any more suggestions to make it run better?

11/30/2007 4:48:04 PM

^ 4 gigs of ram. Raptors in raid. 8800GTX, and an overclocked conroe. You won't have any load times for anything. Shit pops up before you bring your finger off the mouse.

On a side note, if you have older/lower-end hardware either don't get vista or turn off aero.

Mess around on here:
http://tweakhound.com/vista/tweakguide/index.htm

I tried some stuff on there and none of it made a difference. Probably due to hardware.

11/30/2007 5:08:03 PM

probably have a noob question...know how in xp if you have a folder of pictures, it will put a thumbnail of the pic as the icon if you choose to view it like that? well can you do that in vista? so far i cant...here is a pic for what i'm talking about



anyway i can view those as a thumbnail?

12/13/2007 9:47:56 PM

it does that automatically for me in vista no problem

12/13/2007 10:06:52 PM

man i bet it was when i fucked with the visual settings...i turned all that shit off so it would get more performance

[Edited on December 13, 2007 at 10:10 PM. Reason : figured it out...was totally dumb]

12/13/2007 10:09:43 PM

I'm thinking about going back to Windows 2000 Pro. Rock freaking solid.

12/13/2007 10:15:33 PM

^Thats some elite shit

12/13/2007 10:27:18 PM

Windows Vista SP1 Release Candidate
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/windowsvista/bb969139.aspx

* Download Windows Vista SP1 RC x86 (436.3 MB)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=2FA54665-7716-47D9-B9B7-5CFDF71198CB
Direct: http://download.microsoft.com/download/b/3/c/b3cf192f-7f49-4da7-a740-07818dc8c7aa/Windows6.0-KB936330-wave0-X86.exe

* Download Windows Vista SP1 RC x64 (733.5 MB)
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=88128A77-6107-46DF-89D8-B93C248496E3
Direct: http://download.microsoft.com/download/2/f/7/2f7155c9-00f3-4bf0-be92-d308da28d69e/Windows6.0-KB936330-wave0-X64.exe

Quote :

"SP1 includes numerous bugfixes and security updates introduced since the release of Vista on November 30, 2006. Also included are improvements to ReadyBoost, increased network performance, faster file copying and stepped-up anti-piracy measures. Neowin also notes that improvements have been made to Vista's update engine including support for hotpatching: * Improves patch deployment by retrying failed updates in cases where multiple updates are pending and the failure of one update causes other updates to fail as well. * Enables reliable OS installation by optimizing OS installers so that they are run only when required during patch installation. Fewer installers operating results in fewer points of potential failure during installation, which leads to more robust and reliable installation. * Improves overall install time for updates by optimizing the query for installed OS updates. * Improves robustness during the patch installation by being resilient to transient errors such as sharing violations or access violations. * Improves robustness of transient failures during the disk cleanup of old OS files after install. * Improves the uninstallation experience for OS updates by improving the uninstallation routines in custom OS installation code. * Improves reliability of OS updates by making them more resilient to unexpected interruptions, such as power failure "

Windows Vista Performance & Reliability Update (Preview)
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=943899

Quote :

" The Windows Serviceability Team wants feedback on one such update, available for download at the Microsoft Download Center, before its expected release on Windows Update in January. This particular update improves “previous issues affecting going into or resuming from sleep/hibernate under some scenarios”, addresses “a previous issue with the disk spindown feature to improve battery life for portable systems” and supposedly has “up to 15% improved performance of disk I/O (i.e., copying/moving/deleting large files).” This is a reliability update. This update resolves some performance and reliability issues in Windows Vista. By applying this update, you can achieve better performance and responsiveness in various scenarios. After you install this item, you may have to restart your computer. This is a preview release. At the conclusion of this preview phase, the final version of the update will be released via Windows Update. This update is provided to you and licensed under the Windows Vista License Terms."

[Edited on December 13, 2007 at 10:50 PM. Reason : /]

12/13/2007 10:49:42 PM

i clicked windows update but it only found 2 optional ones for me and not that...what gives?

12/13/2007 11:24:17 PM

one is a release candidate, meaning it's not official yet

the other is a "preview" update

read the post

12/13/2007 11:33:38 PM

Vista will be pretty sweet by SP3.

you'll forget all about your troubles.

then Windows Unified 1.0 will come out and fuck you all up.

12/14/2007 12:33:24 AM

So what happens when the actual vista sp1 comes out? Can we just install this one? And then when the real one comes out it'll just overwrite it?

12/14/2007 1:08:18 AM

^ you uninstall any prior sp1 build and install the final sp1.

12/14/2007 1:19:52 AM

Quote :

"Vista will be pretty sweet by SP3. you'll forget all about your troubles."

No, it wont.

12/14/2007 3:44:46 AM

Maybe I missed it but what brand computer is this? A lot of companies (Lenovo included) offer nearly free xp installs for people pissed at vista.

Err... nevermind really old thread.

[Edited on December 14, 2007 at 4:13 AM. Reason : ]

12/14/2007 4:11:36 AM

^also depends on how much you pay, i know HP/Compaq on their lower end laptops don't support XP at all, they don't mind if you install it, but they won't support it

12/14/2007 11:38:37 AM