if anything Vista is slower, needs at least 1gig ram etc. The first build I put in was a real dog and it came back out the same day. FWIW I am running it on a AMD 2400 and did bump the ram to 1 gig on a WD SATA 250gb drive. All of my systems are behind the power curve, <:-|
successive builds have gotten a lot better and there are a few things I like ( and some I do no not ) They even inspect your system and adjust the extra slow down crap accordingly sort of like games do. INstall routine is more mature. That said, I see no improvement in Vista for getting actual work done ( like they claim ) Best I can say is right now making a backup bootable clone is difficult. I am beta testing standby disk and it works on the x86 version but IMO Vista is more about piracy then anything else. I would say to MS the same thing I say to phone company's, make the product better,. I need to be able to backup my system and/or at least be able to move it to a new HD when that need arises. fp At 11:14 PM 10/7/2006, Raul Limos Poked the stick with: >>Veech wrote: >>I guess what I'm asking is, is Vista going to demonstrate a big improvement >>in >>performance over XP Pro? > >Looks like not yet, see: >http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2850 -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- If the family skeleton must remain, make it dance.
