Vista is SO SLOW

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Maybe but Iv looked at the power settings and everything is on high
preformance. The HD is set to spin down after 20 mins but maybe its not
working. Iv looked thru the other power options and so far it doesnt explain
preformance this poor. Either this computer is skrewed or vista wont run on
it.

Im going to get the guy in the shop to show me vista running on another one
and if it just turns out to be this pc then Ill get a replacement. Otherwise
back to XP.
 
Mis-read the fact about the BMW, and yes you are in the 90% category and
someone has to spank your Monkey, but at least you can do it. I am
surprised that after spanking the Monkey, you have time to get on the
computer !

and you have a myspace page. So does my teenage daughter !
 
I am on the computer when I spank my munky... thats why I got it, lol.

Its not MY myspace, its OUR myspace. Me and my buddy make tunes. Its to get
our music out there, not to say "hi im melanie, I like beachball and am a
size 44d". Maybe you should take a look, you might like our music...
 
i don't think vista is the culprit here:

athlon xp 1700+ (barely the same processor power you have)
896mb ram (had 1gb but one chip died a few time ago), sdram 133 mhz (im not
joking you know)
gf 7600 256mb

vista is running, even if a bit slower than xp was, absolutely flawless and
surprisingly fast (rc1 in this very machine was pretty slow), with all bells
and whistles activated

and no, really, only a bit slower, it is not running much slower like many
ultra-idiotic-fanatic people may say, maybe some OLDER PROGRAMS may REDRAW
slower due to the changes made in that area (e.g. corel 9, some cad
programs, etc), but PROCESSOR and overall computer power is obviously the
very same... games should be affected also, until manufacturers give us
better drivers (e.g. nvidia speeds and ati opengl)

i've read that you will go to the store to check a live demonstration, i
think it is the way to go, if it is that much slower something is not right,
either in the crapware installed by the oem (try uninstalling every piece of
the stupid software oem used to install by default, this worked already in
some people i know for slower hd transfer rates they had), or either bad
hardware combination/support/drivers/health

another possibility may be software compatibility, but if even your notepad
will open slow, then it is not (over 1sec or less here, INCLUDING the
opening animation)

anyways, if unsure, you can try reinstalling vista, if it is still slow,
right to the store and get it changed
 
I'm using an eMachines pc with Vista Home Basic on a Celeron(R) D CPU
3.46GHz, 3458 Mhz, with 512MB RAM, about $499 at WalMart.

It takes only a fraction of a second to open a text file, up to 10 seconds
for some programs, but not until I removed the OEM McAfee and replaced it
with Avast4 (free) and made adjustments and tweaks. Out of the box, it took
four times as long to restart as it does now. YMMV

Some software is Vista compaible, others only "work on Vista" but not very
well, and some just will not install even with 'compatibility' and 'run as
admin' options.

It's a learning experence that takes time. I think most people would be
better off using their old XP machines for work until they get their new
Vista computers running the way they want them, because most OEM systems are
not very well configured yet. IMHO

KB

"AnaLoGMunKy" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
 
AnaLoGMunKy said:
Maybe but Iv looked at the power settings and everything is on high
preformance. The HD is set to spin down after 20 mins but maybe its not
working. Iv looked thru the other power options and so far it doesnt explain
preformance this poor. Either this computer is skrewed or vista wont run on
it.
Click to expand...

If you're running an antivirus program on your machine, check whether
that is not the cause of slowness.

Marco
 
you girls wanna have a cat fight, take it off line.
do not like the broken finger nails all over my screen.



(e-mail address removed)



Total nonsensical statement. Oh wait, it's only Jupiter, that's the
only kind he ever makes.

MVP = Mostly valueless Poster
Click to expand...

There he goes again!
Open with an insult!
You're out of control georgie boy. You need to step away from your
computer and get control of yourself.
Your worthless bandwidth sucking gibberish will no longer be tolerated
in this ng.
Frank
 
And here you go stalking me again.
Apparently your only purpose was to attack what I said while
contributing NOTHING useful for the OP.
When the subject is beyond your abilities, you seem to need to insult
others.
Very typical for you.
 
mikeyhsd said:
you girls wanna have a cat fight, take it off line.
do not like the broken finger nails all over my screen.




(e-mail address removed) <mailto:[email protected]>





There he goes again!
Open with an insult!
You're out of control georgie boy. You need to step away from your
computer and get control of yourself.
Your worthless bandwidth sucking gibberish will no longer be tolerated
in this ng.
Frank
Click to expand...


I don't fight with drunks!
Frank
 
What do you mean by "completely under-equipped."
When Windows XP was originally released, many computers sold by the
OEMs came with 64 MB RAM which is the minimum for Windows XP, but
"completely under-equipped." for many users.
The first thing many needed to do to get the desired performance was
increase memory.
Some also needed more powerful video cards.
Many issues raised today with Windows Vista are similar to those when
Windows XP was released almost 6 years ago.
 
Robert;
Microsoft is stuck between a rock and hard place.
If the minimum requirements are left as they are, you get complaints
as seen in this thread.
If the minimums are raised, Microsoft will be accused of helping the
hardware manufacturers since less current hardware would be compatible
and users would be forced to upgrade more hardware.

Perhaps more emphasis should be place on Recommended.
No matter what would have been done, there would have been complaints
from somewhere.
 
Jupiter said:
Robert;
Microsoft is stuck between a rock and hard place.
If the minimum requirements are left as they are, you get complaints as
seen in this thread.
If the minimums are raised, Microsoft will be accused of helping the
hardware manufacturers since less current hardware would be compatible
and users would be forced to upgrade more hardware.

Perhaps more emphasis should be place on Recommended.
No matter what would have been done, there would have been complaints
from somewhere.
Click to expand...
There always are such complaints. In hindsight, do you think that vista
could have been designed to be as capable as it is with lesser hardware
requirements?
 
AnaLoGMunKy said:
hey peeps..

Vista is slow... there is no two ways about it... I congratulate you If
your one of the lucky ones who has it working nice with everything.

Specs for this pc - compaq laptop, 1.7 celeron,
Click to expand...


A celeron? Vista's fine, it's your computer that's slow.




--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell
 
If the minimums are raised, Microsoft will be accused of helping the
hardware manufacturers since less current hardware would be compatible and
users would be forced to upgrade more hardware.
Click to expand...


I'd think differently. As long as Moore's Law is well alive (which it is at
this time), one can get a much better hardware/system with the same amount
of money spent 2-3 years ago.

Therefore, I don't see the problem for raising the system requirement bar a
little bit to match the evolution of hardware. On the other hand, any
person with reasonable computer knowledge will know that it can't be true
for the minimum system requirement so that puts the company's statement into
questionable.

My "speculation" is that the purpose is to create an illusion for the
"minimum costs" of the system and/or OS for most people tend to think about
purchase cost only.

I definitely agree that they should put more emphasis on recommended system
requirements.

IMHO, the whole problem is IT industry wishes to positioning computers as a
home appliance and push it into every living room (at least this company
wishes to) but still can't come up any product including OS that even close
to a TV set in terms of usability and the best thing they (the entire
industry) can do is to create an illusion for the pricing factor which also
failed in most cases.
 
AnaLoGMunKy said:
hey peeps..

Vista is slow... there is no two ways about it... I congratulate you If
your one of the lucky ones who has it working nice with everything.

Specs for this pc - compaq laptop, 1.7 celeron, 256mb graphics, 1gig ram,
came from the shop with vista enabled etc.

So far it takes ages to do everything. Im not interested in upgrading, why
would I want to when I have a desktop pc with bout same specs along with
my
buddies laptop of same specs also running XP home edition on both.... AND
BOTH BEAT THE CRAP OUTTA THIS VISTA OS ON *EVERYTHING*.
Click to expand...


Got Vista running on a Dell XPS Gen 2 with a P4 3Ghz, 256MB video and 1GB
RAM. Runs fine here. Games and everything.

Lang
 
Now here's a surprising sequence of events - asking a bunch of people who
make their living from selling computer hardware for advice on how to speed
up your computer, and strangely enough ending up being advised to go back
to the computer shop for a replacement. How could that possibly happen ? ;-)

BTW I have Vista flying in a virtual machine here, on top of XP and on a
five year old machine.
 
I agree, it's rediculously slow. Now I'm in a predicament, i need to buy a
new laptop but everything out there has this trash preinstalled. How do i get
anything nowdays that doesn't have Vista on it??
 
Go to Windows Explorer, right click "Computer" and check the Rating: Windows
Experience Index. If this shows less than 4.00, then it's your computer that
is not up to running Vista with any kind of zest. I reckon all computers
need at least 4.5 to operate at an acceptable level with any version of
Vista and higher the version the higher the rating needs to be. I don't
think manufacturers should sell computers with less than 4.0.

Take a look here for more info.
http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/pages/458117.aspx

Ed
 
Back
Top