Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Stay Away From Microsoft VISTA

<< < (13/19) > >>

Innuendo:
f0dder, it's not my PC that's the problems. I didn't run the tests. Lots of people all over the internet have, though. I doubt they *ALL* have 'additional problems' with their PCs, especially since there are very reputable people who have conducted these tests and revealed their findings. And as for it being easily fixable, Microsoft has stated that this behavior is by design. So much for a fix coming anytime soon. People have tracked down which service is causing this slow-down. Disable the service and you can't perform any media playback at all. A retarded implementation does look like an accurate assessment at this point, IMHO.

You keep mentioning this is a good idea for HD video content. While I agree, why does this thing kick in when someone plays an MP3...a task that takes up 0.02% CPU load on a modern system? Or when someone plays a 320x200 resolution video file they downloaded off the net 5 years ago? Or...and this may be a more telling question, why am I able to download HD video trailers from the internet, play them, and my network speed isn't affected at all? Microsoft tried to fix something that wasn't broke.

While you are apologizing for MS, though, would you mind letting us in on what happened to that "instantaneous booting" technology Vista was supposed to bring us as well? I can cold-boot an XP system, wait for it to reach the desktop, wait for all my system tray apps to load, and then shut the XP system down and it'll shut off before a Vista-based system cold-booted at the same time will reach the desktop. Of all the new technologies Vista was to bring us & Microsoft promised us all we got was a pretty desktop.

No, while there's a lot right with Vista, there's a lot wrong with it, too, and the complaints about it on the internet go beyond the usual complaints that are common when MS releases a new OS.

f0dder:
Innuendo: by "additional problems", I meant with the service, not people's computers. Easy fixable should perhaps be "easy to workaround", just increase the rate interrupts are being throttled at (I wouldn't be surprised if there's already a hidden registry entry to control this). Yes, would be better only to do the throttling if it's necessary (measure if video isn't decoded fast enough), but it's a nice feature to actually have.

You keep mentioning this is a good idea for HD video content. While I agree, why does this thing kick in when someone plays an MP3...a task that takes up 0.02% CPU load on a modern system?
-Innuendo
--- End quote ---
Because the thing wasn't designed well enough (seems to be a reocurring event with Vista), and probably because the designers didn't think people running fileservers would use the fileserver for media playback :P (with normal framesize, it really shouldn't kick in unless you're on a >100mbit connection, so there's "something wrong" either with people's frame size or the ndis code handling throttling).

why am I able to download HD video trailers from the internet, play them, and my network speed isn't affected at all?
-Innuendo
--- End quote ---
Well, try full 768p or (ouch!) 1080p H.264 playback... that's a bit different from the normal HD trailers, especially if it's a full-quality codec being used... apperantly the commercial (and fast!) CoreAVC codec does some tricks that speeds up stuff massively, but reduces quality somewhat.

No, while there's a lot right with Vista, there's a lot wrong with it, too, and the complaints about it on the internet go beyond the usual complaints that are common when MS releases a new OS.
-Innuendo
--- End quote ---
I fail to see much of what's right with Vista, to be honest :) - I'd love to have some of the kernel improvements, but all the extra crap they added... well...

Lashiec:
Regarding HD video, the new chips built into the Radeon 24xx and 26xx (Universal Video Decoder) and the GeForce 84xx and 86xx (PureVideo2) contribute in a BIG way to reduce CPU usage when playing high definition video. Particularly the Radeon achieves really low figures without sacrificing quality. And no, their high-end brothers lack this kind of acceleration.

Innuendo:
f0dder, you and I seem to be saying basically the same thing just in different ways. I think the problem with Vista acceptance is a serious one. In times past when MS released a new OS there were always the grumbling curmudgeons stuck in the past who didn't want to do things the new way. This time around teh people grumbling are the programmers (a la Mouser) and the 'experts'.

What disturbs me the most of all the reactions to Vista is my own. I started out with MS-DOS v4.01 and come every MS OS released I upgraded the first day it was available. In some cases I was a beta tester for their OSes and I stuck with the 'new stuff' all through the beta cycle. I love new programs & adore new OSes. In times past I was the guy you'd see on the forums on the net championing MS's latest release. Not with Vista. I tried Vista Beta 1. Then Beta 2. Then RC 1. Then RC 2. Then the release version. Each time Vista has lasted less than 48 hours on my hard drive before I went back to XP. No one wants to love & champion Vista more than I do. I just can't do it. Microsoft has missed the mark this time.

Don't even get me started on pricing. No way is Vista in its current form worth what MS is charging for it.

I've got high hopes for SP1. I hope they fix all the problems & I will be able to back to telling people that Microsoft's latest & greatest is truly the latest and the greatest.

scancode:

I bet this pic explains it all... [source: uncyclopedia]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page