6

5/1/2008 10:22:51 AM

auslogics disk defrag is a great tool, since vista's defrag sucks donkey balls

http://www.auslogics.com/en/software/disk-defrag/download

5/1/2008 12:10:34 PM

had that weird "can't delete icon from desktop" deal happen today

refreshing the desktop is silly

5/1/2008 1:45:55 PM

Had my new laptop w/ Vista for about a week so far. No problems yet...

5/3/2008 1:44:20 AM

does anyone know how to created the unattended setup in vista where it will set the "my documents" (equivalent) to be on a separate hard drive...in XP you could just right-click mydocs and move it to another partition, but of course vista doesn't make it anywhere near as simple as that...i know i saw the how-to a few months back on how to change it, but it takes a lot of time and a lot of steps

so now i'm reformatting, and i figured while i'm at it, i'll create an unattended setup that automatically sets mydocs to where i really want it...i just don't know how to do it and i think i'm looking for the wrong thing in google

5/31/2008 5:52:37 PM

http://www.msfn.org/board/Unattended-Vista-f149.html

I honestly don't know your answer ... but that looks like a good place to start.

[Edited on May 31, 2008 at 6:12 PM. Reason : .]

5/31/2008 6:03:50 PM

Disable the windows search/indexing service.

Got a major boost in performance on my machine.

Disable Windows Defender.

Got another major boost in performance.

Sorry if none of that is new news.

6/1/2008 8:49:38 PM

does the indexing service store the index on the drive it is indexing? i.e. will encrypted drives store the indexing on there, or on a potentially unencrypted C drive?

6/3/2008 10:42:31 AM

anyone here use V-Lite with any sucess? Any recommendations before installing or tweaks to use in the program? http://www.vlite.net/

6/3/2008 10:49:31 AM

so I had Vista running on 3 different machines for a while, no problems whatsoever.

I just recently built another machine, all new parts, and this one crashes pretty consistently. It does the (apparently common) "display driver quit responding" thing and resets the display driver to what looks like 16-bit color. I have to restart to get it back to normal.

It seems to be a software thing because it does NOT crash when I'm playing games, or watching hidef material in Media Center.

The ONLY time it's crashed on me is when I'm watching something in Media Player.

Anyone have any ideas? I definitely don't think anything is wrong with the video card itself. It's 64-bit Vista with a Gigabyte P35-DS3L mobo.

6/3/2008 12:02:15 PM

had it for a couple of months now, no problems... like it

6/3/2008 2:37:58 PM

Quote :

"Disable the windows search/indexing service. Got a major boost in performance on my machine. Disable Windows Defender. Got another major boost in performance."

disabling windows defender is a bad idea

6/3/2008 2:40:58 PM

and i doubt it has much overhead... especially NOTICEABLE overhead.

6/3/2008 2:43:16 PM

Quote :

"anyone here use V-Lite with any sucess? Any recommendations before installing or tweaks to use in the program? http://www.vlite.net/"

i tried it and didn't care for it...i didn't do enough research to see if it's by the same guy who did nLite (which i loved before i found autopatcher), but it seems like a lot of the settings are counterintuitive (and it's stupid to have an "apply" button that, if you forget to hit before generating your ISO, will not apply those settings)

Quote :

"o I had Vista running on 3 different machines for a while, no problems whatsoever. I just recently built another machine, all new parts, and this one crashes pretty consistently. It does the (apparently common) "display driver quit responding" thing and resets the display driver to what looks like 16-bit color. I have to restart to get it back to normal. It seems to be a software thing because it does NOT crash when I'm playing games, or watching hidef material in Media Center. The ONLY time it's crashed on me is when I'm watching something in Media Player. Anyone have any ideas? I definitely don't think anything is wrong with the video card itself. It's 64-bit Vista with a Gigabyte P35-DS3L mobo."

what video card is it (ATI or NVIDIA)? i haven't looked up your board, but is it one with an NVIDIA chipset? i've seen some issues between ATI video cards and NVIDIA motherboards

also, did you disable the onboard video? i've seen issues when running a video card and onboard video at the same time

[Edited on June 3, 2008 at 4:07 PM. Reason : .]

6/3/2008 4:05:03 PM

besides vmware server being slow as balls

I don't have any complaints. I switched to ultimate after I got it for free at the heroes happen here deal.

6/3/2008 7:29:58 PM

Quote :

"disabling windows defender is a bad idea"

Why so?

6/3/2008 7:34:36 PM

go read what windows defender does. and bous is right, it doesn't have much overhead anyway

6/3/2008 8:07:37 PM

if I haven't posted this already, I would just like to say Vista sucks balls

6/3/2008 8:44:58 PM

runs like crap on my gf's T60 (though that could also be from the ton of ibm/lenovo crap they put on there... (standard:# Processor: Intel T2500 2.0GHz Core Duo
# Motherboard Chipset: Intel Calistoga i945GM/PM
# Hard Drive: 100GB 5400RPM SATA (Hitachi Travelstar HTS541010G9SA00)
# Memory/RAM: 1GB (1,024MB) (configurable up to 4GB) crap on it)

she probably just needs new ram (faster HD would be nice but power is already a issue i think) / clean install of windows (she doesnt add crap just to get rid of the ibm gunk) / windows XP....

6/4/2008 8:57:18 AM

^ 1gb is not enough to run vista well...2gb is the minimum...pick up a 2gb stick for $20 (or 4gb for $50) and do a fresh install (make sure you install SP1, too) or spend a good deal of time cleaning up the crap

2gb for $20: http://www.frys.com/product/5284707
4gb for $50: http://www.frys.com/product/5284717

also, download auslogics disk defrag (free) and use that instead of the vista craptastic defrag tool:

http://www.auslogics.com/disk-defrag

6/4/2008 9:47:13 AM

I think 8 gigs is good for vista. Then you can disable the page file and save your HD a little.

6/4/2008 10:11:49 AM

I just placed an order for 4-2GB sticks....

I hope it works out well....so far I love Vista...I need to get back into ripping movies and music.

6/4/2008 10:20:26 AM

^assuming you're running 64 bit?
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/vista-workshop,1775.html

6/4/2008 10:26:00 AM

yeah I'm rolling 64 bit here...with some raid....

which is kinda hot.

6/4/2008 10:31:36 AM

I'm running an ATI HD3470. Yesterday I disabled Aero and it seems to have fixed the problem so far. I'd really like find a proper fix though. I like my eye candy, damnit.

6/4/2008 12:53:37 PM

Got a new quad core computer w/ Vista 64 a couple of weeks ago. Runs smooth so far, and have only had a few hangups with some of the 32-bit applications, especially coming back from sleep mode.

6/4/2008 1:27:58 PM

Which quad core cpu? I've been wanting to get a quad core but i'd need a new motherboard because the nvidia 680 series doesn't support the new quad cores and i don't want an older q6600 now.

6/4/2008 1:37:01 PM

Q6600

6/4/2008 1:57:27 PM

ouch i'm sorry. Shoulda gotten the Q9300. It's only like 40-50$ more expensive and it's much faster and clocked higher.

6/4/2008 2:20:54 PM

I have the Q6700 from the intel retailedge deal....it's hot. I may be swapping it out with the newer processors that are coming out!

6/4/2008 5:00:51 PM

^i'll take it! My crappy 680 board can't run the 45nm quad cores.

6/4/2008 5:09:53 PM

Arab13

Yes, the preloaded stuff is wasteful. Boot to the rescue and recovery environment and do a factory reset but there should be a wizard where you deselect any preloaded stuff you don't want. Worked for me.

My t61p freakin' flies Home Premium.

6/4/2008 9:37:25 PM

Quote :

"runs like crap on my gf's T60 (though that could also be from the ton of ibm/lenovo crap they put on there... (standard:# Processor: Intel T2500 2.0GHz Core Duo # Motherboard Chipset: Intel Calistoga i945GM/PM # Hard Drive: 100GB 5400RPM SATA (Hitachi Travelstar HTS541010G9SA00) # Memory/RAM: 1GB (1,024MB) (configurable up to 4GB) crap on it) "

It runs like a dream on my X61, with 4gb of ram though, running Vista Enterprise. I actually run all my VM's on my laptop because it's so much faster than on my 3.06ghz P4D desktop.

6/4/2008 10:15:45 PM

What's everyone's problem with VISTA? I've scrolled through the thread and it sounds like it just runs slow.

Is that it?

I ask because I am having to either put Windows XP Pro or Windows VISTA on my laptop for work. Right now, I just have Windows XP and I have never had any problems with it.

6/9/2008 8:07:08 AM

i think it's gaudy, ugly, and the interface is way too busy and cluttered

6/9/2008 8:13:48 AM

^but that's just the new interface. Switch to XP style if you really care. I really like the new interface. I can't switch back to XP now, because I think XP is gaudy and ugly compared to vista. Although i just use a windowsblinds program on xp anyway.

Quote :

"Is that it? "

The only issues i've had with vista have been people complaining about installing it on older hardware and having it run slow with like 1 gig of ram. As long as you have 2-3 gigs+ of ram the "running slow" shouldn't be an issue. People have also mentioned networking troubles but i have yet to have any. I had more trouble getting XP machines networked than getting the 4 vista machines in our apartment networked and shared. I had some issues with a linksys usb wireless G card but that was more driver support than vista. Also pre-sp1 the network transfer times were sometimes off, but that was fixed.

6/9/2008 9:56:24 AM

explore crashes a lot for me i've noticed. it just crashes where the folders disappear, not the start menu too.

6/10/2008 6:04:33 PM

Quote :

"i think it's gaudy, ugly, and the interface is way too busy and cluttered"

Gaudy and ugly, maybe. That's personal taste (though I'd challenge you to provide justification for either, especially Gaudiness)

But busy and cluttered? HUH? If anything you can fault Vista for hiding/simplifying TOO much.

6/10/2008 6:16:40 PM

I still don't like Vista

Can't really put my finger on why to be honest, but I gave it about a month of actually using it all day everyday and never could get used to it... Finally went back to XP

Ah well, what's coming out next from MS?

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 6:41 PM. Reason : ok i'll play nice]

6/10/2008 6:40:26 PM

XP style? i still run Classic style

6/10/2008 9:47:20 PM

yeah, i run classic style in XP

6/10/2008 9:55:26 PM

I think the vista look is way better than xp. my vista hardly runs any resources and I have 2 GB.

I reformatted after I got it and it runs PERFECTLY.

the only complaint I have of vista is the administrator confirmation everytime I want to move something or install something. it gets annoying. im sure theres some way to disable that but I don't know

6/10/2008 10:04:10 PM

that got so annoying:
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/disable-user-account-control-uac-the-easy-way-on-windows-vista/

6/10/2008 10:34:26 PM

i prefer this:
http://www.tweak-uac.com/

6/10/2008 10:48:12 PM

Quote :

"Gaudy and ugly, maybe. That's personal taste (though I'd challenge you to provide justification for either, especially Gaudiness) But busy and cluttered? HUH? If anything you can fault Vista for hiding/simplifying TOO much."

i've only worked with Vista for maybe a total of 1 hour, spread out over several sessions on multiple computers, so most of my thoughts would still be considered first impressions, so maybe I would see things differently with more usage as I got used to it. Also, I don't want to turn this into a Mac vs. PC flamewar, but since I've been using Mac exclusively at home for 3+ years (still stuck on Windows 2000 at work.... wtf) a lot of my thoughts come from compare and contrast with Mac.

So as far as busy and cluttered - here are the two windows I've worked in mostly when on Vista. Explorer and Control Panel:




In my opinion, there's just too much going on here. Windows Explorer is trying to be the end-all-be-all, and it makes it harder to accomplish anything. For example, too many arrows - solid arrows, hollow arrows, sideways arrows, vertical arrows, diagonal arrows, circular arrows, double arrows. I know they all have different meanings and I know the different meanings, but are they all necessary? Is it really necessary to have arrows between each folder in the address-bar so you can jump to any of the sub-folders anywhere on the computer? Is it necessary to turn what was the menu bar into a strange mishmash of buttons and dropdowns (like they did in IE7)? Do I really need sliding panes (Folders, Favorites) moving around on the left side?



here's the control panel:


now this sounds like a nit-pick, but there's just too many words there, and for some reason every time I see it it takes several seconds to get adjusted and to figure out where everything is. Are the links under the headers all that is included in that category? Or are those just examples? If I click "System and Maintenance", will that take me to another screen where I get more options? etc. (these are rhetorical questions, just the kind of thing that flits through my mind when I first view this window)

ok, granted, anything is better than the "Classic View" with its jumble of un-sorted, un-categorized icons:


I have to throw in the Mac System Preferences (control panel) for comparison. All the preferences are separated into nice categories, they have attractive and helpful icons, there is not an abundance of verbage, they are set up in a nice grid, etc. Then icing on the cake, when you open one, the preference pane opens smoothly in the same window with a nice, unified theme, not some abortion of Windows 98-style forms and black tansparency and blue arrows that you could end up with on any given Vista control panel option.



My 2nd main point on the gaudiness is mostly taste, but I think again, Vista just overdid it on "style". They tried to stylize everything. Too much glass, too much reflection, too much transparency, too many big round bubbly buttons, etc.

Some common (fanboy) criticisms that I heard of Vista before ever using it was that MS just ripped off Apple and tried to make Vista look like OS X. Well, the first time I sat down with Vista I knew that the people who say this are completely off the mark. Either that, or if MS was trying to copy Mac, they failed miserably. There is nothing "mac-like" about the interface at all. People give Apple shit for making eye-candy or emphasizing form over function. There are certainly examples of this, both good and bad. The 10.5 Dock is clearly eye candy and usability sacrifices were made and the Apple Human Interface Guidelines were ignored, just to make a flashy shelf-like Dock (that's why I use the horizontal one, where it is 2D again). On the other hand, the whole Time Machine interface is also clearly eye-candy, but I think it generally serves its purpose well, which is to make backing up your machines something "fun" to do.

But for the most part, Apple adds just the right amount of razzle-dazzle to their interfaces. Just like the iPod and iPhone, most interfaces are stripped bare then only the required features are added back on to create clean, uncluttered and easy to use interfaces. Vista, though, started with an already busy interface, then attempted to throw style and visual panache on top of it. e.g. they started with an overly-functional Windows Explorer, then started adding shading and 3D gradients and 3d icons and bubble-buttons and redundant icons and labels to it in an attempt to make it look modern and sexy, but instead made it too flashy and too busy.

I think the Vista interface is quite analogous to this [old] parody, "what if Microsoft designed the iPod packaging"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=aeXAcwriid0

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 10:57 PM. Reason : .]

6/10/2008 10:56:01 PM

^that's not at all how the zune packaging is. I see the comparison though.

But yes i agree Microsoft did go a little overboard with the interface with windows explorer. I've never actually used windows explorer. I use total commander:
http://www.ghisler.com/

Everything is simple and gives me only what i need. I've never actually used the built-in windows documents folder either. I always just make my own directories. C:\kevin\music...etc. I can't stand how windows organizes shit. Plus i love the 2 panel layout of total commander.

-i mean to be fair you are showing the "large icon view". I switched it to details a long time ago. It gets rid of basically everything you mentioned and simplifies it down to folders. It's just like in OSX, you turned off the 3d dock and changed it to 2d view. It's not like you HAVE to keep it on large icon view.

[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 11:29 PM. Reason : ..]

6/10/2008 11:16:35 PM

Quote :

"i mean to be fair you are showing the "large icon view". I switched it to details a long time ago."

Actually, i wasn't really referring much to the actual folder-pane, where the big icons were. I was mostly focused on the address bar, menu bar, left pane and preview pane.

Quote :

"^that's not at all how the zune packaging is. I see the comparison though. "

yeah, i know - it was a parody of the Windows and Office packaging, and it (the video) came out before the Zune. Obviously, MS learned something from Apple about how to package consumer electronics when they released the Zune, and it looks like the Office guys got the memo too

from


to


[Edited on June 10, 2008 at 11:42 PM. Reason : .]

6/10/2008 11:40:51 PM

Ok so i've been having this problem for a while. Somehow newsleecher's window disappeared. Like if it's maximized it fills the screen, but when i click the little middle double box icon it goes away. So i have to always run it maximized. I don't know if it's off the screen or what. Is there a way to restore the window to the primary display? This has really been bothering me.

-i changed it to start maximized every time so i can still use it, but uninstalling or, or updating it doesn't change the fact that i can't run it in "normal mode" and it has to be maximized. I've even tried the cascade/tile window functions when you right click the taskbar and it still doesn't show up. And the only way to get it to run maximized again is to right-click, close, then start the program maximized.

This is the only thing i can find, and it's not in vista:
http://www.computing.net/answers/windows-95/program-only-visible-maximized/116617.html

But it doesn't have a move option in normal view. It only has close, minimize, and restore is faded out.

I think i'm just fucked.

[Edited on June 11, 2008 at 8:21 PM. Reason : ..]

6/11/2008 8:00:12 PM

^ok sorry for the double post, but i fixed it. I found one forum where they said do "alt-space-m" to open the file menu, then do the move command. Then you use the arrow key, then the mouse can pull it back into view. I don't know why i didn't think of that before.

6/11/2008 8:42:11 PM

Just to chime in response to agentlion,

Quote :

"i've only worked with Vista for maybe a total of 1 hour...Also, I don't want to turn this into a Mac vs. PC flamewar, but since I've been using Mac exclusively at home for 3+ years (still stuck on Windows 2000 at work.... wtf) a lot of my thoughts come from compare and contrast with Mac. "

You've used it for an hour, and not as your own machine? How can you turn it into a Flamewar, when you have never used the competition long enough to form a legitimate opinion?

I've been using both platforms side by side for better than 10 years. They both have fundamental gripes and tradeoffs. Vista is MUCH more productivity efficient than OSX, and OSX is much less intimidating, has a much shorter learning curve and more simplified interaction model than Vista.


1) Turn off Aero, the Gaudiness is gone, and you are left with clean
2) You grabbed random screenshots off the internet as comparion shots?

Here's some screens for you to actually compare. The GOOD thing about Vista is that it is configurable. Unlike the Mac, you can actually tailor it to your own working style. OSX is definitely less cluttered, but it's also far less efficient as a working environment.

Quote :

"Is it really necessary to have arrows between each folder in the address-bar so you can jump to any of the sub-folders anywhere on the computer? Is it necessary to turn what was the menu bar into a strange mishmash of buttons and dropdowns (like they did in IE7)? Do I really need sliding panes (Folders, Favorites) moving around on the left side?"

Necessary, no. I use that ALL the time though, it's fast, it's compact and very lightweight. There is still the menu-bar, it's just hidden by default (which I don't think is a good thing). The bar you speak of is a context bar for organizing and taking action on the folder's contents. Notice in my screens how it changes based on the folder. Again, VERY handy, especially the Views slider/button. No, you can turn off all the sliding panes if you don't need them. Being that I have to keep up with several dozen network shares, they are a lifesaver for me.

Quote :

"For example, too many arrows - solid arrows, hollow arrows, sideways arrows, vertical arrows, diagonal arrows, circular arrows, double arrows."

The only arrows you have to deal with are Forward, back and shortcuts. Turn it off if you prefer minimal to functional. The "cluttered" explorer screenshot you posted is a worst case scenario. By default on most folders you get 4 columns - Name, Type, Date, Size. And you can change those or just switch the folder view if it's too much for you.

Here's your OSX Control Panel:


Clean Explorer with no Arrows on the Tree View (they autohide when the window is not in focus):


The view toggle, along with my personal folders view, which happens to be nice and clean:


Ability to set the columns shown on details views:


Hiding the navigation pane completely - a la classic folders style:


On a side note, the new Microsoft Jewel cases are beautiful, but they are also one of the worst functional designed packaged ever created. Average time to open one: over 20 minutes.

6/11/2008 9:48:12 PM