Vista, You win

  • Thread starter Thread starter Simon
  • Start date Start date
S

Simon

It is my last time to use Vista, it slow my work, slow my life, limit my
ablility. It's time to say goodbye.

My configuration is Lenovo T61p. Luckily, Lenovo has the "downgrade" XP
recover CD, HiHi.
 
Simon said:
It is my last time to use Vista, it slow my work, slow my life, limit my
ablility. It's time to say goodbye.

My configuration is Lenovo T61p. Luckily, Lenovo has the "downgrade" XP
recover CD, HiHi.
Click to expand...


Two points..

If you have only 1gb RAM, part of that will be used for video. You need to
install another 1gb RAM. If you don't want to do that, use of a flash drive
in Ready Boost mode goes some way to aiding speed, but it is not as fast as
extra RAM would be.

Also, laptops are set NOT to run at full CPU speed in order to preserve
battery life. You may want to look at Vista's power settings..



--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
So basically Mike is saying that Vista is not advsable for use on a laptop
unless it is fully loaded with memory. what a way to promote a usless
operating system.

The reason for throttling back the cpu is to overcome battery problems NOT
operating system failures.

All the pre SP1 hype proved fuitless other than microsoft shooting its self
in its corperate foot.

When is the next version of windows going to be released so that this usless
sub standard system can be withdrawn.
 
Mark said:
So basically Mike is saying that Vista is not advsable for use on a laptop
unless it is fully loaded with memory. what a way to promote a usless
operating system.

The reason for throttling back the cpu is to overcome battery problems NOT
operating system failures.

All the pre SP1 hype proved fuitless other than microsoft shooting its
self
in its corperate foot.

When is the next version of windows going to be released so that this
usless
sub standard system can be withdrawn.
Click to expand...


The same considerations applied equally to XP. In systems where video memory
is a shared portion of the total RAM installed, unless 768mb or 1gb was
installed, XP performance was compromised. I have seen it on laptops and
desktops alike.

Video memory has increased from 32 and 64mb to 128 and 256mb. On the basis
that Vista requires at least 1gb for its own use (not shared with anything
else), you can see that 1gb is not enough in a shared video memory system.

The manufacturers should install at least 1.5gb RAM in ANY machine, but they
don't purely to keep the price down.

Laptops also have the disadvantage of heat build up, so can't use the
fastest of components. The CPU is throttled back so that battery life looks
better, XP or Vista. Laptops are and always have been a compromise, offering
reasonable performance AND portability..

And Vista is not a useless operating system, working very well for many
people.

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
I would like to know how you would install 1.5 Gb of ram as I have not see a
1.5 Gb stick or a 750 Mb stick and I kbnow not of any popular manufactura of
laptop who provides more than 2 memory slots, surely you mean that if Vista
must be installed then microsoft should only allow the install to start when
2Gb of ram is installed and the operating systen can claim 1.5Gb for its self,
I think that you have confirmed when you say:-

"> Laptops also have the disadvantage of heat build up, so can't use the
fastest of components. The CPU is throttled back so that battery life looks
better, XP or Vista. Laptops are and always have been a compromise, offering
reasonable performance AND portability.."
Click to expand...

Therfore I would like to point out that you have agreed with me that Vista
in any form or guise should not be installed on a laptop because of its
inherint problems of wishing to use ALL of the avalible system resourse's, as
it is only suitable for high end PC's what a waste of time and money MS has
made, this would explain why so many microsoft people are trying to defend
what the industry knows as substandard
 
Mark said:
I would like to know how you would install 1.5 Gb of ram as I have not see
a
1.5 Gb stick or a 750 Mb stick and I kbnow not of any popular manufactura
of
laptop who provides more than 2 memory slots, surely you mean that if
Vista
must be installed then microsoft should only allow the install to start
when
2Gb of ram is installed and the operating systen can claim 1.5Gb for its
self,
I think that you have confirmed when you say:-

"> Laptops also have the disadvantage of heat build up, so can't use the

Therfore I would like to point out that you have agreed with me that Vista
in any form or guise should not be installed on a laptop because of its
inherint problems of wishing to use ALL of the avalible system resourse's,
as
it is only suitable for high end PC's what a waste of time and money MS
has
made, this would explain why so many microsoft people are trying to defend
what the industry knows as substandard
Click to expand...


I don't know what you're talking about. Vista Home Premium is running on my
laptop beautifully. I have an Intel Core 2 Duo - and not the fastest at
that - 2GB RAM, and an integrated Intel graphics chip. System Video Memory
is 32MB, Shared System Memory is 192MB. RAM utilization during routine
tasks is under 50%, CPU use varies.

He didn't agree with you at all. You just twisted what he said around to
fit your only bias.
 
So the laptop manufacturer installs 2gb because it is known that Vista is
better for having 2gb fitted.

Nope, too easy a solution, and they will lose customers who can't quite
afford 2gb.

Then again, RAM would come down in price if more was manufactured and
installed by the OEMs

Vista performs adequately in 1gb, assuming that there is no call on the RAM
by any part of the system. In laptops, there always is, and desktops with
integrated video have the same issue. The manufacturers are quite aware of
this fact, yet they still choose to sell underpowered systems..

They did it with XP too. Remember, it is better to have sold an underpowered
system than to have lost the sale completely..



--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
I don't follow you Mike. Are you saying persons spending around $1,000 or
2,000 on a new laptop can't afford an extra strip of ram which is extremely
affordable? Have you done any pricing lately?
 
kenbob said:
I don't follow you Mike. Are you saying persons spending around $1,000 or
2,000 on a new laptop can't afford an extra strip of ram which is extremely
affordable? Have you done any pricing lately?
Click to expand...


There are people who will not go that little bit further, and those who
flatly refuse to do so because THEY don't think that Vista should have to
require more than 1gb.

I know that memory is cheap enough, but manufacturers want to catch as many
sales as they can..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
Won't work with a duo core processor AFAIK - you need two of the same...

Thanks, I really did not know that. I almost went and got myself that
upgrade... Without being to technical, can you tell me why it does not work
?
Cheers.
http://spookpaleis.myminicity.com
 
The manufacturers should install at least 1.5gb RAM in ANY machine, but
MS shouldn't have to tell anybody. The manufacturers are well aware..
Click to expand...

Yes, that is true, but I think there are more than enough MS product users
in the world to justify them making a few recommendations/insistance on our
behalf?
http://peanutpaleis.myminicity.com
 
Spook 13 said:
Thanks, I really did not know that. I almost went and got myself that
upgrade... Without being to technical, can you tell me why it does not
work ?
Click to expand...

Well it DOES work, but you don't get the best performance with a duo core
processor unless you have two identical RAM chips. AFAIK......
 
Spook 13 said:
Yes, that is true, but I think there are more than enough MS product users
in the world to justify them making a few recommendations/insistance on
our behalf?
http://peanutpaleis.myminicity.com
Click to expand...


The manufacturers are only interested in sales figures. As long as a machine
starts up and loads the OS, they do not care..

--
Mike Hall - MVP
How to construct a good post..
http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm
How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc
Mike's Window - My Blog..
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx
 
Back
Top