Curse

Senrath · Oct 08, 2008, 10:30 PM // 22:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief

By "as useful", you of course meant completely useless. The resources Vista uses to enable and run the service typically outweigh the performance gain from said ReadyBoost. Funny enough, this is another reason Vista is bad. Vista cannot handle FLASH memory without treating it as low speed memory. GG?

Well, yeah. I was saying that I wish that it was worth using.

Apok Omen · Oct 08, 2008, 10:39 PM // 22:39

In conclusion, Vista Sucks.

ALF71BE · Oct 08, 2008, 11:07 PM // 23:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkNecrid

Vista uses most of your RAM at any one time. This is a feature called SuperFail. What it does is optimize the use of your RAM, catching programs you use often to improve loading times etc.

SuperFix'd.

If Vista didn't sucked that much, it wouldn't have the need to optimize the RAM.

Don't you also hate when it asks you to confirm, twice, to do anything?

Senrath · Oct 08, 2008, 11:14 PM // 23:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALF71BE

SuperFix'd.

If Vista didn't sucked that much, it wouldn't have the need to optimize the RAM.

Don't you also hate when it asks you to confirm, twice, to do anything?

Um, it's not doing anything that XP doesn't already do to some degree. Vista just does it on start-up, and a bit more intelligently.

I Dont Do Coke · Oct 09, 2008, 12:24 AM // 00:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkNecrid

Yes, it is sad you don't understand how Vista works.

Vista uses most of your RAM at any one time. This is a feature called SuperFetch. What it does is optimize the use of your RAM, catching programs you use often to improve loading times etc.

It frees up the RAM it uses (exactly enough at any time, instantly) whenever you actually run anything.

The program isn't LITERALLY using all your RAM, Vista is using Super Fetch & giving you exactly enough RAM for the game you are running.

If you're going to bad mouth Vista you could at least get a clue about one of it's most basic features. Vista sucks balls, I use it (the 64 version is way good tho, worse than XP but it just came out gotta give it time to catch up, XP sucked balls on release too.) tho. But at least I know how it works.

So what you're saying is that 2GB on a Vista system is more than enough and that I wouldn't need anymore, huh?

Do you even know what I run and the memory it requires? You thought I was running Guild Wars, did you?

russiansteven · Oct 09, 2008, 02:10 AM // 02:10

Really funny! I laughed but I seriously doubt it will take you more than 20 minutes

DarkNecrid · Oct 09, 2008, 03:46 AM // 03:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALF71BE

SuperFix'd.

If Vista didn't sucked that much, it wouldn't have the need to optimize the RAM.

Don't you also hate when it asks you to confirm, twice, to do anything?

Yes, because doing something better and on startup than a previous OS = fail.

Windows XP has the exact same feature except it doesn't do it automatically and it does it a lot stupider than Vista does.

SuperFetch does nothing to harm your system or your RAM in any way, basically you just called one of the few things that puts Vista way ahead of XP technology was as fail, which is the stupidest thing I've seen someone say in a long time.

Basically you're being rather unintelligent because you think it uses the RAM to optimize your RAM, when all it does is decrease loading times of everything you use, make search 1000000000x faster than Windows XP's search, and improve information cache gathering speed. This allows you to load any program, find anything on your PC, and do anything with specific information in a second compared to the long amounts of time it can take Windows XP.

But yes, it's fail, if Vista wasn't optimized so bad it would jsut magically know every file on your system and search would take an instant because it'd magically search your entire freaking hard drive in 0.00001s, and unicorns exist too.

Please don't speak about stuff you don't know man. You don't even know what SuperFetch does. Also it's obvious you don't even realize it takes a whole 2 seconds to disable that much touted complaint at the bottom of your post. No more confirmations! Hooray!

I seriously hope you realize there is absolutely no bad sides to SuperFetch at all. It literally is a rather flawless system that only helps the OS.

Quote:

Originally Posted by I Dont Do Coke

So what you're saying is that 2GB on a Vista system is more than enough and that I wouldn't need anymore, huh?

Do you even know what I run and the memory it requires? You thought I was running Guild Wars, did you?

2GB is more than enough for Vista if you are not running the Ultimate Aero theme in combination with excessive RAM using gadgets. If you are doing either, disable gadgets before playing RAM intensive games, or use a less RAM intensive theme.

The game you play doesn't matter as long as it is within specifications Vista will by default allot you the correct amount of RAM from its SuperFetch feature and always give you a reading similar to the one you have received no matter the game.

Windows is well known for being more Power User than Macintosh. If you aren't willing to be a power user and disable the super fluous crap that actually causes Vista to use more RAM than it's Windows XP counterpart, then please stop using the Windows OS.

You should be able to play Crysis at appropriate settings for 60FPS at the exact same level you would on Windows XP. But you have to build it that way, which really is no different from Windows XP. A bit more super fluous crap here or there, but having to configure the god awful default Windows XP networking settings was terrible just to get the most out of my network on it speed wise, changing the completely terrible default theme, tweaking default settings, etc. But as a Windows user I (and everyone else who uses it) should expect the need to tweak stuff if they want to maximize performance. My Crysis actually runs faster in Vista than it does in Windows XP on my 2GB RAM spare PC, so if you're having problems its because you don't take the time to tweak your own PC.

man i hate vista so much but if you're going to complain about it at least know what you're talking about and have ACTUAL COMPLAINTS THAT MAKE SENSE AND ARE EDUCATED. at least rahja's reasons would be educated from a technical standpoint and actually right.

I Dont Do Coke · Oct 09, 2008, 04:20 AM // 04:20

Crysis doesn't make my mem' usage roof, even with only 2GB, so that's not a problem for me. With Crysis running, I've seen my system memory usage go up to 80% at most.

Thanks for the advice on disabling Vista's crap, DarkNecrid. I don't need to do that with 4GB of memory though. And having to skin Vista down to barebones is going to further remind me how bloated Vista is and how it .

Lord Sojar · Oct 09, 2008, 04:54 AM // 04:54

Is there still some reason this discussion is continuing? I could have sworn I dropped a thermal nuclear warhead on Vista love.

Senrath · Oct 09, 2008, 04:59 AM // 04:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rahja the Thief

Is there still some reason this discussion is continuing? I could have sworn I dropped a thermal nuclear warhead on Vista love.

I really don't know. He even says that he hates Vista and admitted that your points are accurate, but he keeps on defending it.

DarkNecrid · Oct 09, 2008, 05:48 AM // 05:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senrath

I really don't know. He even says that he hates Vista and admitted that your points are accurate, but he keeps on defending it.

I am defending it from stupid points that are not accurate at all. SuperFetch and high (misleading cause of SuperFetch) RAM usage is not faults in Vista, it's part of what makes it good. UAC is easily disabled. Bloatedness is easily fixed. 2GB is more than enough for Vista.

None of those are applicable complaints and are rather stupid ones from lazy users or ones who aren't educated on the intricacies of the system (to the point that they say Vista fails because it has one of the best technologies for utilizing your RAM today, yeah ok.)

I won't defend Vista if people give applicable complaints that are true and educated (because there's a lot of very good applicable complaints you could choose from here...), but I do fully believe in giving correct information to the right people, even if those right people say rather silly things. Because the latter are going to tell people the same stuff, even though its completely wrong, and spread bad words that aren't right to other people.

Misinformation is baed. I'll defend stuff I hate if there is misinformation going on.

That said, Vista is a pretty bad OS right now that I would only suggest you get because it'll be better than Windows XP down the road eventually, but get the 64-bit version not the 32-bit one.

What happened to when Microsoft could make good OS's out of the box, like say, Windows 98?

fenix · Oct 09, 2008, 05:54 AM // 05:54

Vista will NEVER be better than XP, because Windows 7 will come out and Vista will become the Windows Me.

As for 32bit vs 64bit. You don't need 64bit, because you don't need more than 3.5gb of RAM.

Senrath · Oct 09, 2008, 06:00 AM // 06:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkNecrid

Bloatedness is easily fixed.

But you shouldn't have to fix it. If I buy a new car, I shouldn't have to unclog all of the hoses and clean out the air filter. The same applies to an operating system. If I buy a new operating system, I expect it to work pretty much right out of the box, close to how it's advertised.

True, in both cases you could technically leave it alone, but then you're robbing yourself of performance.

pamelf · Oct 09, 2008, 12:34 PM // 12:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkNecrid

None of those are applicable complaints and are rather stupid ones from lazy users or ones who aren't educated on the intricacies of the system (to the point that they say Vista fails because it has one of the best technologies for utilizing your RAM today, yeah ok.)

You're right, most people aren't educated on the intricacies of the system; nor should they have to be. The whole point of it is to be a user friendly interface good for the casual users rather than the professional people who used to use Mac's (i.e. oldschool mac's for graphic designers and video editors). PC's and their corresponding OS's were designed to be used by the average joe. Vista is not average joe friendly and that is its downfall. I shouldn't have to have an IT degree just to make my computer work...

JupiterStarWarrior · Oct 09, 2008, 03:48 PM // 15:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkNecrid

...get the 64-bit version [of Vista] not the 32-bit one.

Question: if I have a 32-bit system, why should I get the 64-bit operating system?

legless477 · Oct 09, 2008, 05:04 PM // 17:04

To the idiots who think that vista is bad.

When your computer is upgraded to the needed specs 64bit vista is THE BEST OS you can buy.

If your computer is crashing when you have the needed hardware it means you have a Trojan that vista blocks and the Trojan RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOs your comp up but vista wont let that happen to it restarts or freezes your computer to prevent damage.

Vista Is the Best. You are at fault if your comp screws up. You downloaded the virus and/or don't have the right virus protection software. You bought the product without having the correct hardware. Don't call vista bad because you are a idiot. pce

Senrath · Oct 09, 2008, 05:30 PM // 17:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by legless477

To the idiots who think that vista is bad.

When your computer is upgraded to the needed specs 64bit vista is THE BEST OS you can buy.

If your computer is crashing when you have the needed hardware it means you have a Trojan that vista blocks and the Trojan RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOs your comp up but vista wont let that happen to it restarts or freezes your computer to prevent damage.

Vista Is the Best. You are at fault if your comp screws up. You downloaded the virus and/or don't have the right virus protection software. You bought the product without having the correct hardware. Don't call vista bad because you are a idiot. pce

Did you even read what Rahja the Thief posted? All of those are reasons why Vista sucks. And I don't think anyone listed vista crashing as a reason why it sucks.

DarkNecrid · Oct 09, 2008, 07:10 PM // 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenix

Vista will NEVER be better than XP, because Windows 7 will come out and Vista will become the Windows Me.

As for 32bit vs 64bit. You don't need 64bit, because you don't need more than 3.5gb of RAM.

64-bit has other benefits besides the RAM limit factor.

Quote:

But you shouldn't have to fix it. If I buy a new car, I shouldn't have to unclog all of the hoses and clean out the air filter. The same applies to an operating system. If I buy a new operating system, I expect it to work pretty much right out of the box, close to how it's advertised.

True, in both cases you could technically leave it alone, but then you're robbing yourself of performance.

Cars are built to run perfectly on Day 1 for the average driver.

Windows OS's are built to run perfectly on Day 1 for the average user.

The "average user" is not a performance gamer who will want to get every ounce of power out of the OS. They are not built for them, just like your average car is not built for the sportster.

Also if you expect a Windows OS to work perfectly right out of the box, you're smoking something that I want.

Quote:

You're right, most people aren't educated on the intricacies of the system; nor should they have to be. The whole point of it is to be a user friendly interface good for the casual users rather than the professional people who used to use Mac's (i.e. oldschool mac's for graphic designers and video editors). PC's and their corresponding OS's were designed to be used by the average joe. Vista is not average joe friendly and that is its downfall. I shouldn't have to have an IT degree just to make my computer work...

I completely disagree, I believe people should be educated about something if they are going to make a complaint about it. You're misconstruing what I said, I believe people should be educated on the intricacies (ie: at the least knowing what SuperFetch does and why your RAM usage is so "high", this is a touted feature of Vista here...) if they are going to make formal complaints or say why something sucks.

I could tell you why I think the Lebanese Government is terrible, unfortunately I don't know anything about the Lebanese Government so doing so would be rather stupid of me, no?

Quote:

Question: if I have a 32-bit system, why should I get the 64-bit operating system?

Well, Vista 64-bit is just faster and better than the 32-bit version in every way, and that's not including the benefits of a 64-bit system (additional RAM is read beyond 3.5GB (the limit in a 32-bit system), etc.).

Rikku Fantasia · Oct 09, 2008, 07:54 PM // 19:54

ahem if you know how to tweak vista it runs fairly well gg. im running it with 3 gigs of ram 2.9 dual core and running 75-80 fps in game on highest settings

Senrath · Oct 09, 2008, 08:00 PM // 20:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarkNecrid

Cars are built to run perfectly on Day 1 for the average driver.

Windows OS's are built to run perfectly on Day 1 for the average user.

Yeah, but Vista doesn't run perfectly on Day 1 for the average user. For the average user, they will find that a lot of their programs don't work, that Vista boots up slowly, and, if they have a lot of pictures or other large files, that Windows Indexing will really slow things down.