Sprocket sashays...

[Detale]

Damn I need to follow those steps my vid score still sucks ass

[clocker]

By all means, do it.

Now.

[lynx]

Hi lynx, long time no see.
How did we reach that conclusion?

It's simply that, except for necessary scheduling tasks, any OS should give up it's cycles when an application needs them.

The fact that you needed to disable features of the OS to make them available for the application indicates that it is unable to give up those cycles when required.

Not that I'm surprised, Microsoft have always been masters of inefficient bloatware, so there is no reason why that aspect would not intrude into their OS design.

[clocker]

So it's not just "Vista sucks", it's "all MS OSs suck", then.

That may be true but oddly enough, Vista will install onto a RAID array with no fuss and will use my X-fi soundcard with a few mouse clicks- things Ubuntu won't do (at least not that I can figure out).

[lynx]

When I was talking about bloatware, I was talking about their applications such as Office, the overloaded type of features of which now seem so be appearing in Vista much more than they have ever done in previous versions to their operating systems.

I don't subscribe to the view that just because a few unusual combinations of hardware don't seem to work currently with one particular OS (in your case Ubuntu) that we should accept systems which are flawed in their very concept. I'm reasonably confident that the problems with Ubuntu will be overcome if there is sufficient demand (either from users or from the manufacturers). At the same time I'm sure that the basic design flaws present in Vista simply can't be corrected.

This would not be a problem but for the fact that Microsoft intend to cease production of XP in the very near future. Given the current level of investment in Microsoft products it is not reasonable to expect corporate users to switch to non-Microsoft offerings overnight. Consequently current users have a right to expect that the replacement for XP offers at least similar levels of performance, and in this respect Vista clearly fails.

Improvements in hardware should be resulting in better performance, the reality is that Vista absorbs all those improvements leaving the end user no better off.

Sorry, didn't really mean to hijack your thread.

[kaiweiler]

I will argue that Vista does indeed require more resources then all previous operating systems from Microsoft, however the resources are available with up to date hardware.
The reason Vista requires more resources is because it's UI is enhanced, giving the user a flashier and "nicer" interface. The resources have not simply been wasted, they have gone towards making the product more appealing to the end consumer. Of coarse providing they have the means by which to power it. It is of no fault to Microsoft if people are still using 10+ year old hardware in their homes.
XP is being discontinued because it is old, as simple as that. XP was released in 2001, it's about time they came out with something "new".
With all the new hardware developments since 2001, it would be selfish of Microsoft not to release a new OS.
So the new OS may be slower then XP, but it is more appealing to the majority of consumers. Do you think that most people care about framerates in games? Or how many seconds faster they can transfer a file? No, most do not. If it works, they are happy. And Vista works.
With that being said, just wait until Windows 7 Estimated to launch in the next year or two (anywhere from 2009 to 2011), then you'll see eye candy.
I guess to sum it up, it's not all about speed. It's about being visually pleasing as well.

[lynx]

I have to disagree with your basic premise that the majority of buyers want extra eye-candy.

Corporate sales are, by a long way, the largest part of Microsoft's market. What they want is a system which will allow them to process information, with applications such as spreadsheets and databases, both quickly and efficiently. They don't require all the flashy visual effects, and they most certainly do care about how long it takes to transfer that file, or how long it takes to process that spreadsheet.

As long as the extra eye-candy doesn't interfere with the smooth running of the applications there's no problem. Unfortunately, as you've demonstrated, that simply isn't the case with Vista. Indeed, Vista tunes itself to make maximum use of your hardware. That, by definition, means that there are less resources for the applications.

If Vista came pre-configured for best performance and with the eye-candy disabled I could just about agree that it is a worthwhile update. But it doesn't, and when you've got to make those changes manually to every single pc you install, trust me when I tell you it makes the job a real ball-ache.

[clocker]

Well, I certainly can't argue that Vista is the raving success that MS was hoping for but I won't jump into the "Worst OS since ME" boat either.

If anything, Vista points up how great the divide has grown between the PC's original target market- business, and the force that now drives the industry- the home user.
It's silly to try and configure one OS to conform to the needs of both markets.

Business is inherently conservative, and the larger the business the more conservative they are. Their needs/requirements change slowly and deploying new hardware/software is not only a financial burden but a physical one as well.

On the other hand, the home user wants- or at least thinks they want- the latest and greatest.
The looming recession may put the kibosh on that particular fantasy...time will tell.

Word has it that the new MS offering -MS7?- will be modular (in great part to satisfy the hammering re:monopoly that MS has suffered at the hands of the EU) and different modules will be bolted to the kernel to satisfy different user requirements.

Sounds like a good thing to me.

[Detale]

Ah Jesus! so what the hell am I doing wrong, I changed Graphics booster to Turbo like you said K and upped my GPU clock to 700 but my vid scores actually went down by 1%



I am at a loss also I have to do something bout my HDD score also anyone have any I ideas? I don't have any Raid configured but If I have time I might look into it as well. DAMN DAMN DAMN. Why do you too always get 5hit to work seemingly easy and I have trouble almost always? Damn smart K and C!

[clocker]

Calm, D., calm.

You still have the visual styles turned on.
Go to Control Panel> Performance Information> Advanced Tools (in the righthand pane)> Adjust the appearance and performance of Windows> set to "Best performance".

Edit: You can go here and grab the reg files to automatically set your services (both the "tweaked" and the "minimal" set will disable the Themes service which in effect does the same as the above.
I'm running "minimal" ATM and it cut the number of services to 30 (with FF open) and trimmed RAM usage from @750MB to @475MB at idle.