Re: [H] Vista install question
I thought you had to edit (or delete???) one file to get a menu to select from. I use Vista, but had three different types of the correct disks. Rick Glazier From: Thane Sherrington Subject: [H] Vista install question Am I right in remembering that I can use any version of Vista to install any other version? (So I can use a Vista Business CD and if I enter a Vista Home Premium COA number, I'll end up with Vista Home Premium?)
Re: [H] Vista install question
On W7 media, you simply delete ei.cfg from \sources. -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Rick Glazier Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 2:07 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista install question I thought you had to edit (or delete???) one file to get a menu to select from. I use Vista, but had three different types of the correct disks. Rick Glazier From: Thane Sherrington Subject: [H] Vista install question Am I right in remembering that I can use any version of Vista to install any other version? (So I can use a Vista Business CD and if I enter a Vista Home Premium COA number, I'll end up with Vista Home Premium?)
Re: [H] Vista batch file elevation
Thane Sherrington wrote: Is there a way to have a batch file launch a second batch file at an elevated privilege level? I have a batch file (named runme.bat) that calls a batch file that does some registry changes, and I'd like the runme.bat to call the second at an elevated privilege level (and ask the user once to allow the elevation rather than multiple times.) I tried: runas /user:administrator fixit.bat but then the system asks for an administrator password and there isn't one. I know that I can right click on RunMe.bat and choose Run as Administrator, but that's a bit clunky. T http://jpassing.wordpress.com/2007/12/08/launch-elevated-processes-from-the-command-line/ seems to do what you want - UAC is disabled on this machine so I can't easily check it out. Jamie -- Jamie Furtner ja...@furtner.ca I aim to misbehave - Malcom Reynolds (Serenity movie) It's not safe... For them. - River Tam (Serenity movie)
Re: [H] Vista batch file elevation
At 04:17 PM 06/07/2009, Jamie Furtner wrote: Thane Sherrington wrote: Is there a way to have a batch file launch a second batch file at an elevated privilege level? I have a batch file (named runme.bat) that calls a batch file that does some registry changes, and I'd like the runme.bat to call the second at an elevated privilege level (and ask the user once to allow the elevation rather than multiple times.) I tried: runas /user:administrator fixit.bat but then the system asks for an administrator password and there isn't one. I know that I can right click on RunMe.bat and choose Run as Administrator, but that's a bit clunky. T http://jpassing.wordpress.com/2007/12/08/launch-elevated-processes-from-the-command-line/ seems to do what you want - UAC is disabled on this machine so I can't easily check it out. Thanks Jamie - I was trying to use the steps here: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/2007.06.utilityspotlight.aspx?pr=blog and they work, but it's a lot more effort. Your solution is much more elegant. T
Re: [H] Vista SP's redist's?
I'm assuming that you mean standalone, not redist... SP1 x86: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=B0C7136D-5EBB-413B- 89C9-CB3D06D12674displaylang=en SP1 x64: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=874A414B-32B2-41CC- BD8B-D71EDA5EC07Cdisplaylang=en SP2 x86: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=a4dd31d5-f907-4406- 9012-a5c3199ea2b3displaylang=en SP2 x64: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=656c9d4a-55ec-4972- a0d7-b1a6fedf51a7displaylang=en These are all 5-language versions (English, French, German, Japanese, and Spanish) -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Joe User Sent: Monday, June 08, 2009 2:17 PM To: The Hardware List Subject: [H] Vista SP's redist's? Hello, Anyone know where the Vista 'redist' SP's are? Nothing came up when I searched Microsoft. I want 1 and 2. (I am a collector) -- Regards, joeuser - Still looking for the 'any' key... ...now these points of data make a beautiful line...
Re: [H] Vista SP's redist's?
Hello Greg, Monday, June 8, 2009, 3:03:18 PM, you wrote: I'm assuming that you mean standalone, not redist... Ohhh maybe my terminology was in error, no wonder I couldn't find them. Thank you very much for your time and effort. I just wanted to store them on my file server so I don't have to DL them every time I need them. -- Regards, joeuser - Still looking for the 'any' key... ...now these points of data make a beautiful line...
Re: [H] Vista SP's redist's?
Exactly! --Original Message-- From: Joe User Sender: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com To: Greg Sevart ReplyTo: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista SP's redist's? Sent: Jun 8, 2009 6:04 PM Hello Greg, Monday, June 8, 2009, 3:03:18 PM, you wrote: I'm assuming that you mean standalone, not redist... Ohhh maybe my terminology was in error, no wonder I couldn't find them. Thank you very much for your time and effort. I just wanted to store them on my file server so I don't have to DL them every time I need them. -- Regards, joeuser - Still looking for the 'any' key... ...now these points of data make a beautiful line... Sent via BlackBerry
Re: [H] vista 64 and Google earth
I've just downloaded, installed and run it from the Google updater without any problem (the fact it insisted on installing Chrome is a separate issue). Using Vista Business 64bit on my laptop. -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: 11 May 2009 04:32 To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] vista 64 and Google earth I am not able to install Google earth on my new build of Vista 64. It is a quadcore with 8GB of RAM and a 4970 video with raptor hard drive so performance isn't the issue. If I try to install on line it just fails, and if I download and attempt to run setup it won't even start up... anybody know why.. it is suppose to be supported? thanks
Re: [H] Vista 64 and Halo 2
LOL, or GAY-lo as I tease kid my kiddies about here when they play the old xbox version. After playing Crysis Stalker level of realism I have to laugh at them playing 1999 Quake2 level graphics unrealistic cheesed-out game play. =) Obvious start, lower all graphics settings (starting 1st with lowering rez down to 1024x768 or 800x600) to see if it improves since it could just be a combination of settings Halo2 doesn't like. If still it stutters or lags you got bigger problems. Be on the lookout for HDD thrash a common source of issues I've seen. Bobby Heid wrote: Hey, I just loaded Halo2 on my Core I7, Vista 64, and NVidia GTX 285 system and when moving the mouse left and right, it is really choppy feeling. It plays worse than on my old p4 3.0 GHz system. Has anyone else seen this? If so, were you able to correct it? As a frame of reference, I have COD WAW maxed out and it does fine. Thanks, Bobby
Re: [H] Vista Permissions
Comments in-line. Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2009 3:36 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista Permissions I am running Vista 64 Home Premium. I have UAC disabled and I have given myself Administrative privileges. Unfortunately, that isn't enough for everything, such as loading regedit which must be done by the Administrator. I there a way for me to becomethe Administrator within my user session so I don't have to log out and back in as Administrator. You can right-click on the shortcut and select Run as Administrator (or set the setting in the properties for the shortcut and run as admin). I think that either way, it will make you enter the credentials of an administrator if the current user is not one. And if I want to start loging in exclusively as the Administrator, is there a easy way to move all of windows settings from my current user to the Administrator account so I don't have to redo everything? The easiest way would be to just change your user logon to an admin account. Yeah I know, I should of popped for Ultimate, and would of if I had known the limitations but now they want way too much to upgrade from Home Premium to Ultimate, particularly so with Windows 7 just around the corner. thanks
Re: [H] Vista Permissions
You can right-click on the shortcut and select Run as Administrator (or set the setting in the properties for the shortcut and run as admin). I think that either way, it will make you enter the credentials of an administrator if the current user is not one. That does not work on some things, like for example, opening regedit. When I go to run, and enter regedit I see This task will be created with administrative privileges but when I execute I see a pop up that reads Registry editing has been disable by your administrator which I don't get because I AM an administrator! But if I log out and log back in as THE Administrator then I can use regedit. And if I want to start loging in exclusively as the Administrator, is there a easy way to move all of windows settings from my current user to the Administrator account so I don't have to redo everything? The easiest way would be to just change your user logon to an admin account. I am already an ADMIN account!
Re: [H] Vista Permissions
I am running Vista 64 Ultimate. I am using an admin account also. I do use UAC though. I wonder if turning UAC off is what is causing you issues? When I run regedit (from the search thing on the start menu), I do get a UAC pop-up. I click on continue and all is well. I misread your earlier post and thought you were not running as admin. My understanding is that when you run as admin, you are really running at a lower level than admin and the system uses UAC to elevate you to admin level. Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2009 7:10 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista Permissions You can right-click on the shortcut and select Run as Administrator (or set the setting in the properties for the shortcut and run as admin). I think that either way, it will make you enter the credentials of an administrator if the current user is not one. That does not work on some things, like for example, opening regedit. When I go to run, and enter regedit I see This task will be created with administrative privileges but when I execute I see a pop up that reads Registry editing has been disable by your administrator which I don't get because I AM an administrator! But if I log out and log back in as THE Administrator then I can use regedit. And if I want to start loging in exclusively as the Administrator, is there a easy way to move all of windows settings from my current user to the Administrator account so I don't have to redo everything? The easiest way would be to just change your user logon to an admin account. I am already an ADMIN account!
Re: [H] Vista Permissions
admin account log in vista is NOT the same as in XP. fp At 07:09 PM 3/21/2009, Winterlight Poked the stick with: You can right-click on the shortcut and select Run as Administrator (or set the setting in the properties for the shortcut and run as admin). I think that either way, it will make you enter the credentials of an administrator if the current user is not one. That does not work on some things, like for example, opening regedit. When I go to run, and enter regedit I see This task will be created with administrative privileges but when I execute I see a pop up that reads Registry editing has been disable by your administrator which I don't get because I AM an administrator! But if I log out and log back in as THE Administrator then I can use regedit. And if I want to start loging in exclusively as the Administrator, is there a easy way to move all of windows settings from my current user to the Administrator account so I don't have to redo everything? The easiest way would be to just change your user logon to an admin account. I am already an ADMIN account! __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3953 (20090321) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com
Re: [H] Vista Permissions
Sounds like a security policy of windows got set that's unrelated to UAC: Check: http://www.winhelponline.com/articles/156/1/Error-Registry-editing-has-been- disabled-by-your-administrator-when-you-open-the-Registry-Editor-in-Windows- Vista.html Eli -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2009 7:10 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista Permissions You can right-click on the shortcut and select Run as Administrator (or set the setting in the properties for the shortcut and run as admin). I think that either way, it will make you enter the credentials of an administrator if the current user is not one. That does not work on some things, like for example, opening regedit. When I go to run, and enter regedit I see This task will be created with administrative privileges but when I execute I see a pop up that reads Registry editing has been disable by your administrator which I don't get because I AM an administrator! But if I log out and log back in as THE Administrator then I can use regedit.
Re: [H] Vista Permissions
That did the trick! Thanks! At 06:38 PM 3/21/2009, you wrote: Sounds like a security policy of windows got set that's unrelated to UAC: Check: http://www.winhelponline.com/articles/156/1/Error-Registry-editing-has-been- disabled-by-your-administrator-when-you-open-the-Registry-Editor-in-Windows- Vista.html Eli -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Saturday, March 21, 2009 7:10 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista Permissions You can right-click on the shortcut and select Run as Administrator (or set the setting in the properties for the shortcut and run as admin). I think that either way, it will make you enter the credentials of an administrator if the current user is not one. That does not work on some things, like for example, opening regedit. When I go to run, and enter regedit I see This task will be created with administrative privileges but when I execute I see a pop up that reads Registry editing has been disable by your administrator which I don't get because I AM an administrator! But if I log out and log back in as THE Administrator then I can use regedit.
Re: [H] vista to xp
Hello yoga, Wednesday, March 18, 2009, 10:30:37 PM, you wrote: good morning sir, i have installed network printer in xp machine, My laptop windows vista home edition installed. i tryed to connect the printer but one error msg appear. The printer spooler was not running, restart the spooler or machine. i had restart the print spooler and restrat the machine but the same error msg accoured every time. any solution for this proplem, plz send me sir Thanks Regards yogaraj Is the printer shared? Is the user account setup? Network settings correct? Can you see drive shares? -- Regards, joeuser - Still looking for the 'any' key... ...now these points of data make a beautiful line...
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
Agreed that's what the apps do is superior but why couldn't they give us couple of GUIs like they do for Windows. They must have known people would resist anything that increased the learning curve? Most of my clients who upgraded to XP had me set it up like Win 95 aka now known as Windows Classic Theme. Some wouldn't upgrade to XP unless I made like what their old computers look like Win95 like they had. Classic mode has been completely removed in Win7...
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
Ribbon takes a lot to get used to. I personally don't like it. I feel slower with it. The big problem is that you can't customize with it, you can't make your own ribbon or icon your macros. After years of creating Macros and menus to make my job go easier they are gone. It is not something I am going to be able to live with. But I strongly disagree that it is change for the sake of change. The ribbon was put there to make it easy for all to use in a windows live experience, where people won't personalize their apps, and MS can define all the parameters, all of which makes for easy support. MS is obsessed with cloud computing, but my guess is that they will loose out on that to Goggle. Personally, I don't see companies paying of cloud computing. I've actually noticed something quite interesting...for users that previously had zero or limited experience with Office, it appears to be a massive win. I can see that, but why cater exclusively to the lowest common denominator. What is smart, or innovative about that? It is a marketing strategy, not a innovative or even a clever strategy which is why they will end up losing out to Goggle, or open source.
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
Don't play games so I can't help you much there, but the funny thing is that most game incompatibilities with Vista64 aren't due to the game itself, but the crummy anti-copying/DRM infections publishers feel they must include. That being said, your best resource for getting game-specific information can be found here: http://www.vistax64.com/gaming/ -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 12:43 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] vista 64 and games I finally got around to attempting to install a game in Vista 64 SP1. I bought Gears of War for Windows and when I put the DVD in it doesn't even appear in explorer let alone install. Then I tried my Quake 4 DVD and while that appears in explorer I am immediately informed that it isn't supported. So what does work? Or maybe it has something to do with my dual Asus 4870s set to Crossfire??
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
At 10:59 AM 3/8/2009, you wrote: Don't play games so I can't help you much there, but the funny thing is that most game incompatibilities with Vista64 aren't due to the game itself, but the crummy anti-copying/DRM infections publishers feel they must include. Thanks, Greg. I know you are enamored with Vista 64 but I have been struggling with Vista 64 for months now and I keep thinking things are better and I am going to see all the value in it... but I haven't. One thing is for sure, I would not let Vista or Office 2007 anywhere near my company... the hassles and learning curve with Vista and Office 2007 would cut productivity by 80 percent. Most people in a office environment have very limited and specific computer skills and now you want them to forget all that and start over? I am only managing because I use XP PRO with Office 2003 in a VM to get my work done. From a user point of view the only thing that I really like is the 8GB of RAM and I could make a long list of the things I don't like. I think MS was so use to the my way or the highway upgrade, and the we will drag everyone along as we continue to add new to PC users on a massive scale,... that it was/ is in a state of shock that so many disklike the programs. But the real surprise must of been the lack of new user base to pull the old user base into their idea of the future. The pie isn't getting bigger in the way it use to be and MS finds itself trying to appease it's existing user base. m
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
Thanks, Greg. I know you are enamored with Vista 64 but I have been struggling with Vista 64 for months now and I keep thinking things are better and I am going to see all the value in it... but I haven't. One thing is for sure, I would not let Vista or Office 2007 anywhere near my company... the hassles and learning curve with Vista and Office 2007 would cut productivity by 80 percent. Most people in a office environment have very limited and specific computer skills and now you want them to forget all that and start over? I am only managing because I use XP PRO with Office 2003 in a VM to get my work done. I know that my user base is fairly atypical since it is a software company, but I actually have a fair number of users upset with us because we WON'T do a mass deployment of Vista and Office 2007. We're doing deployment by attrition...new users and machine rebuilds only for Vista, Office 2007 on new machines/rebuilds and by request/need. For technical staff, Vista and O2k7 have been a complete non-issue. Even the non-technical staff (mostly operations employees) have picked up both very quickly, with little to no involvement from us. By the way, my brother was able to install Quake 4 on his Vista64 (technically, Server 2008 x64, same thing) workstation. He did say that autoplay crashed, but setup.exe works fine. Greg
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
I have just built my Vista 64 box. In stalled Call of Duty - World at War and it runs great! Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 1:43 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] vista 64 and games I finally got around to attempting to install a game in Vista 64 SP1. I bought Gears of War for Windows and when I put the DVD in it doesn't even appear in explorer let alone install. Then I tried my Quake 4 DVD and while that appears in explorer I am immediately informed that it isn't supported. So what does work? Or maybe it has something to do with my dual Asus 4870s set to Crossfire??
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
Picking them up being productive with an app are 2 entirely different things. I've O2k7 wish I never installed it. I wish I had installed O2k3 instead. I haven't tried it yet but will windows let you install both? I thought I read somewhere that it wouldn't but I'm not sure.
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
I like Office 2007. I am able to find most stuff in Word and Excel faster now than I could before. There are a few things I still have to go to help on though. I am by no means an Office Power user (I am a software developer), but I can get around as well as I need to. I find the added features (print to PDF among others) a welcome addition. I agree that the upper left button thingy kind of sucks. I'd like to have a menu bar. Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Johnson Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 7:29 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] vista 64 and games At 02:53 PM 3/8/2009, Greg Sevart typed: For technical staff, Vista and O2k7 have been a complete non-issue. Even the non-technical staff (mostly operations employees) have picked up both very quickly, with little to no involvement from us. Picking them up being productive with an app are 2 entirely different things. I've O2k7 wish I never installed it. I wish I had installed O2k3 instead. Sure I can run the 2k7 version but I'm still not as productive with it as I was with 2k3 that's after more than a year of using it. IMHO that ribbon thing is a POS. MSFT has changed the GUI in many cases just to make the end luser feel like they've gotten a lot extra for their which is utter crap. There is no other reason that they had to change the GUI just because your user are better than average doesn't mean much in this discussion as they'll just hunt longer to find what they wanted. OBTW using that logo for the 1st pull down menu wasn't exactly necessary either. Change just for the sake of change is not in the end lusers best interest just MSFT back pocket. FWIW it's JMHO YMMV but probably not. ;-)
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
I had trouble doing some stuff in Access 2003 (installed after 2007) and Access 2007, but it might have been the order that they were installed or the fact that it was on Vista Business. I just installed 2003 into a VM and away I went. Bobby -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2009 8:11 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] vista 64 and games Picking them up being productive with an app are 2 entirely different things. I've O2k7 wish I never installed it. I wish I had installed O2k3 instead. I haven't tried it yet but will windows let you install both? I thought I read somewhere that it wouldn't but I'm not sure.
Re: [H] vista 64 and games
Picking them up being productive with an app are 2 entirely different things. I've O2k7 wish I never installed it. I wish I had installed O2k3 instead. Sure I can run the 2k7 version but I'm still not as productive with it as I was with 2k3 that's after more than a year of using it. IMHO that ribbon thing is a POS. MSFT has changed the GUI in many cases just to make the end luser feel like they've gotten a lot extra for their which is utter crap. There is no other reason that they had to change the GUI just because your user are better than average doesn't mean much in this discussion as they'll just hunt longer to find what they wanted. OBTW using that logo for the 1st pull down menu wasn't exactly necessary either. Change just for the sake of change is not in the end lusers best interest just MSFT back pocket. Ribbon takes a lot to get used to. I personally don't like it. I feel slower with it. But I strongly disagree that it is change for the sake of change. I've actually noticed something quite interesting...for users that previously had zero or limited experience with Office, it appears to be a massive win. They're able to pick up and use advanced functionality much faster and with little to no assistance compared to previous versions. Traditional hierarchical menus are NOT user friendly. It's just a classical situation in which grasping a new interface concept is difficult when you have previous experience. Further, Outlook 2007 is vastly superior to Outlook 2003--and that alone makes the whole suite worthwhile to me. Excel 2007 handles vastly larger data sets, and is considerably faster--another big win. Word 2007 has been less temperamental than previous version as well. But yes, I dislike the ribbon interface personally. Greg
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Things are getting better. It is becoming a mature OS. Rick Glazier From: FORC5 curious how that is working for ya ? I have that but am afraid to mess with it due to the stories I read about drivers and such. At 08:21 PM 12/17/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure!
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
I agree. Although Vista is bloated compared to XP, it has become much more mature and rock stable. On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Rick Glazier rickglaz...@gmail.com wrote: Things are getting better. It is becoming a mature OS. Rick Glazier From: FORC5 curious how that is working for ya ? I have that but am afraid to mess with it due to the stories I read about drivers and such. At 08:21 PM 12/17/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure! -- Best Regards, Zulfiqar Naushad
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
One would hope by the second service pack they actually get it working right :) I haven't found any real problems with Vista (aside from a handful of annoyances) but there still isn't anything to really make me recommend it over XP. Brian On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Rick Glazier rickglaz...@gmail.com wrote: Things are getting better. It is becoming a mature OS. Rick Glazier From: FORC5 curious how that is working for ya ? I have that but am afraid to mess with it due to the stories I read about drivers and such. At 08:21 PM 12/17/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure!
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Yeah agreed Brian. XP64 is ROCK solid ( based on Win2003 kernel ) and I found good drivers for everything I own. Current setup: Areca 2 port PCI-E Raid card for RAID1 OS disk(s) 6G of Triple Channel OCZ PC1333 Ramz 620W 3 12V rails Corsair PSU Asus P6T Deluxe X58 motherboard * Onboard sound is ok Intel Core i7 920 ( Have not overclocked yet, but I will muahahaha ) EVGA GTX280 1G blah blah 2x WD 150 Velociraptors for raid1 OS I tried Vista twice and not only did it feel slow/bloated it had several annoying things which made me run back to XP. I'm not saying I won't ever use Vista but until they pry XP64 from my cold dead hands or Vista starts looking like a supermodel, I'm stickin where I am :) On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:04:22AM -0500, Brian Weeden wrote: One would hope by the second service pack they actually get it working right :) I haven't found any real problems with Vista (aside from a handful of annoyances) but there still isn't anything to really make me recommend it over XP. Brian On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Rick Glazier rickglaz...@gmail.com wrote: Things are getting better. It is becoming a mature OS. Rick Glazier From: FORC5 curious how that is working for ya ? I have that but am afraid to mess with it due to the stories I read about drivers and such. At 08:21 PM 12/17/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure! -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
how about backward compatibility ? I have a couple of really old proggie I use all the time, one for envelopes. Pretty sure these are 16bit, was a effort to get them to run in xp. fp At 09:22 AM 12/18/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: I tried Vista twice and not only did it feel slow/bloated it had several annoying things which made me run back to XP. I'm not saying I won't ever use Vista but until they pry XP64 from my cold dead hands or Vista starts looking like a supermodel, I'm stickin where I am :) -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Unknown if really old (esp 16 bit) apps work properly. I use plenty of 32 bit apps though and they work flawlessly. On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 09:57:00AM -0700, FORC5 wrote: how about backward compatibility ? I have a couple of really old proggie I use all the time, one for envelopes. Pretty sure these are 16bit, was a effort to get them to run in xp. fp At 09:22 AM 12/18/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: I tried Vista twice and not only did it feel slow/bloated it had several annoying things which made me run back to XP. I'm not saying I won't ever use Vista but until they pry XP64 from my cold dead hands or Vista starts looking like a supermodel, I'm stickin where I am :) -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Ditto, but I also don't like the changes they made to Explorer. That's one of my main complaints of Vista. I haven't found any real problems with Vista (aside from a handful of annoyances) but there still isn't anything to really make me recommend it over XP. Brian
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Ditto, but I also don't like the changes they made to Explorer. That's one of my main complaints of Vista. I haven't found any real problems with Vista (aside from a handful of annoyances) but there still isn't anything to really make me recommend it over XP. Brian Well the only reason I can think of to recommend Vista is if your a gamer and want DirectX 10. All the games I currently play are DirectX 9.0c so I have no reason to switch from XP.
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
I will switch to Vista once there are no activation issues, and when utilities can strip out all the unnecessary crap to streamline the OS. I use XP64 and a custom Lite version of XP for non 64-bit boxes. XPLite only takes about 300 megs for the OS and is way faster without the bloatware. lopaka --- On Thu, 12/18/08, Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net wrote: From: Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net Subject: Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ? To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 8:22 AM Yeah agreed Brian. XP64 is ROCK solid ( based on Win2003 kernel ) and I found good drivers for everything I own. Current setup: Areca 2 port PCI-E Raid card for RAID1 OS disk(s) 6G of Triple Channel OCZ PC1333 Ramz 620W 3 12V rails Corsair PSU Asus P6T Deluxe X58 motherboard * Onboard sound is ok Intel Core i7 920 ( Have not overclocked yet, but I will muahahaha ) EVGA GTX280 1G blah blah 2x WD 150 Velociraptors for raid1 OS I tried Vista twice and not only did it feel slow/bloated it had several annoying things which made me run back to XP. I'm not saying I won't ever use Vista but until they pry XP64 from my cold dead hands or Vista starts looking like a supermodel, I'm stickin where I am :) On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:04:22AM -0500, Brian Weeden wrote: One would hope by the second service pack they actually get it working right :) I haven't found any real problems with Vista (aside from a handful of annoyances) but there still isn't anything to really make me recommend it over XP. Brian On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Rick Glazier rickglaz...@gmail.com wrote: Things are getting better. It is becoming a mature OS. Rick Glazier From: FORC5 curious how that is working for ya ? I have that but am afraid to mess with it due to the stories I read about drivers and such. At 08:21 PM 12/17/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure! -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Yep. I use the Freeware nLite to strip stuff out of my Windows installs too when I do the SP slipstreams. :) Works like a charm. -- JRS steinie**...@pacbell.net Please remove **X** to reply... I will switch to Vista once there are no activation issues, and when utilities can strip out all the unnecessary crap to streamline the OS. I use XP64 and a custom Lite version of XP for non 64-bit boxes. XPLite only takes about 300 megs for the OS and is way faster without the bloatware. lopaka
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
At 08:57 AM 12/18/2008, you wrote: how about backward compatibility ? I have a couple of really old proggie I use all the time, one for envelopes. Pretty sure these are 16bit, was a effort to get them to run in xp. fp nothing in 16bit runs in vista64, I don't know about XP64... I read that was very problematic. In fact, I never read anything good about it until I saw Brian's post. What you can do with modern hardware and 8GB of RAM in Vista 64 is run a XP VM and run anything you need in there. With this much RAM and modern dual and quad core processors there is essentially no lag in a VM as long as you are not doing something like gaming, or HD video editing, or something equally video intensive. And yes, I agree, Vista can be very annoying and frustrating. But my experience has been that if you are running mulit threaded apps Vista 64 SP1 can be very quick. For example, I had an encoding race between my dual XP32 Xeon 3.4hz 4GB of RAM and my new quad 3.0ghz Vista64 8GB of RAM. I expected somewhere between 40 to 60 percent faster based on the CPU speeds. However, what I got encoding a hour worth of HD using TMPGenc DVD inc Authoring works 4 was XP32 around 3 hours and forty minutes Vista 64 55 minutes of course a lot of this was the CPU but I think all the RAM helped. At 09:22 AM 12/18/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: I tried Vista twice and not only did it feel slow/bloated it had several annoying things which made me run back to XP. I'm not saying I won't ever use Vista but until they pry XP64 from my cold dead hands or Vista starts looking like a supermodel, I'm stickin where I am :) -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Yeah nLite/vLite are AWESOME. On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:01:36AM -0800, JRS wrote: Yep.? I use the?Freeware?nLite to strip?stuff out of my Windows installs too when I do the SP slipstreams.? :)? Works like a charm.? ? -- JRS steinie**...@pacbell.net Please remove **X** to reply... I will switch to Vista once there are no activation issues, and when utilities can strip out all the unnecessary crap to streamline the OS. I use XP64 and a custom Lite version of XP for non 64-bit boxes. XPLite only takes about 300 megs for the OS and is way faster without the bloatware. lopaka -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Using vlite is how I discovered the several hundred MB of unnecessary tablet PC stuff that is part of every Vista install, including desktops. Had a weird problem with the one time I did a vlite install. Somehow, it corrupted the real administrator account. I was logged in as administrator and tried to change the boot options to enable minidumps and it kept telling me I didn't have the right privledges. Weird. Brian On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net wrote: Yeah nLite/vLite are AWESOME. On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:01:36AM -0800, JRS wrote: Yep.? I use the?Freeware?nLite to strip?stuff out of my Windows installs too when I do the SP slipstreams.? :)? Works like a charm.? ? -- JRS steinie**...@pacbell.net Please remove **X** to reply... I will switch to Vista once there are no activation issues, and when utilities can strip out all the unnecessary crap to streamline the OS. I use XP64 and a custom Lite version of XP for non 64-bit boxes. XPLite only takes about 300 megs for the OS and is way faster without the bloatware. lopaka -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
I use FF in my server with Vista, do not use it for much though except when the family is on the main box. there are a few annoyances for sure. fp At 10:23 AM 12/18/2008, JRS Poked the stick with: Ditto, but I also don't like the changes they made to Explorer. That's one of my main complaints of Vista. I haven't found any real problems with Vista (aside from a handful of annoyances) but there still isn't anything to really make me recommend it over XP. Brian -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
XP Lite never heard of it fp At 10:50 AM 12/18/2008, Robert Martin Jr. Poked the stick with: I will switch to Vista once there are no activation issues, and when utilities can strip out all the unnecessary crap to streamline the OS. I use XP64 and a custom Lite version of XP for non 64-bit boxes. XPLite only takes about 300 megs for the OS and is way faster without the bloatware. lopaka --- On Thu, 12/18/08, Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net wrote: From: Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net Subject: Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ? To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 8:22 AM Yeah agreed Brian. XP64 is ROCK solid ( based on Win2003 kernel ) and I found good drivers for everything I own. Current setup: Areca 2 port PCI-E Raid card for RAID1 OS disk(s) 6G of Triple Channel OCZ PC1333 Ramz 620W 3 12V rails Corsair PSU Asus P6T Deluxe X58 motherboard * Onboard sound is ok Intel Core i7 920 ( Have not overclocked yet, but I will muahahaha ) EVGA GTX280 1G blah blah 2x WD 150 Velociraptors for raid1 OS I tried Vista twice and not only did it feel slow/bloated it had several annoying things which made me run back to XP. I'm not saying I won't ever use Vista but until they pry XP64 from my cold dead hands or Vista starts looking like a supermodel, I'm stickin where I am :) On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:04:22AM -0500, Brian Weeden wrote: One would hope by the second service pack they actually get it working right :) I haven't found any real problems with Vista (aside from a handful of annoyances) but there still isn't anything to really make me recommend it over XP. Brian On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Rick Glazier rickglaz...@gmail.com wrote: Things are getting better. It is becoming a mature OS. Rick Glazier From: FORC5 curious how that is working for ya ? I have that but am afraid to mess with it due to the stories I read about drivers and such. At 08:21 PM 12/17/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure! -- Bryan G. Seitz -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
He means using the nLite tool to customize a version of XP that you then turn into an install CD/DVD: http://www.nliteos.com/ Pretty cool. Allows you to include/exclude a lot of windows components, change which drivers are included as well as change a lot of default settings. You can really slim down an XP install that way. vLite is the same tool for Vista. Brian On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 3:48 PM, FORC5 fuf...@cox.net wrote: XP Lite never heard of it fp At 10:50 AM 12/18/2008, Robert Martin Jr. Poked the stick with: I will switch to Vista once there are no activation issues, and when utilities can strip out all the unnecessary crap to streamline the OS. I use XP64 and a custom Lite version of XP for non 64-bit boxes. XPLite only takes about 300 megs for the OS and is way faster without the bloatware. lopaka --- On Thu, 12/18/08, Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net wrote: From: Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net Subject: Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ? To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 8:22 AM Yeah agreed Brian. XP64 is ROCK solid ( based on Win2003 kernel ) and I found good drivers for everything I own. Current setup: Areca 2 port PCI-E Raid card for RAID1 OS disk(s) 6G of Triple Channel OCZ PC1333 Ramz 620W 3 12V rails Corsair PSU Asus P6T Deluxe X58 motherboard * Onboard sound is ok Intel Core i7 920 ( Have not overclocked yet, but I will muahahaha ) EVGA GTX280 1G blah blah 2x WD 150 Velociraptors for raid1 OS I tried Vista twice and not only did it feel slow/bloated it had several annoying things which made me run back to XP. I'm not saying I won't ever use Vista but until they pry XP64 from my cold dead hands or Vista starts looking like a supermodel, I'm stickin where I am :) On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:04:22AM -0500, Brian Weeden wrote: One would hope by the second service pack they actually get it working right :) I haven't found any real problems with Vista (aside from a handful of annoyances) but there still isn't anything to really make me recommend it over XP. Brian On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Rick Glazier rickglaz...@gmail.com wrote: Things are getting better. It is becoming a mature OS. Rick Glazier From: FORC5 curious how that is working for ya ? I have that but am afraid to mess with it due to the stories I read about drivers and such. At 08:21 PM 12/17/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure! -- Bryan G. Seitz -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
thanks, been using that for awhile just never heard the OS called xplite fp At 01:56 PM 12/18/2008, Brian Weeden Poked the stick with: He means using the nLite tool to customize a version of XP that you then turn into an install CD/DVD: http://www.nliteos.com/ Pretty cool. Allows you to include/exclude a lot of windows components, change which drivers are included as well as change a lot of default settings. You can really slim down an XP install that way. vLite is the same tool for Vista. Brian On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 3:48 PM, FORC5 fuf...@cox.net wrote: XP Lite never heard of it fp At 10:50 AM 12/18/2008, Robert Martin Jr. Poked the stick with: I will switch to Vista once there are no activation issues, and when utilities can strip out all the unnecessary crap to streamline the OS. I use XP64 and a custom Lite version of XP for non 64-bit boxes. XPLite only takes about 300 megs for the OS and is way faster without the bloatware. lopaka --- On Thu, 12/18/08, Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net wrote: From: Bryan Seitz se...@bsd-unix.net Subject: Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ? To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 8:22 AM Yeah agreed Brian. XP64 is ROCK solid ( based on Win2003 kernel ) and I found good drivers for everything I own. Current setup: Areca 2 port PCI-E Raid card for RAID1 OS disk(s) 6G of Triple Channel OCZ PC1333 Ramz 620W 3 12V rails Corsair PSU Asus P6T Deluxe X58 motherboard * Onboard sound is ok Intel Core i7 920 ( Have not overclocked yet, but I will muahahaha ) EVGA GTX280 1G blah blah 2x WD 150 Velociraptors for raid1 OS I tried Vista twice and not only did it feel slow/bloated it had several annoying things which made me run back to XP. I'm not saying I won't ever use Vista but until they pry XP64 from my cold dead hands or Vista starts looking like a supermodel, I'm stickin where I am :) On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 11:04:22AM -0500, Brian Weeden wrote: One would hope by the second service pack they actually get it working right :) I haven't found any real problems with Vista (aside from a handful of annoyances) but there still isn't anything to really make me recommend it over XP. Brian On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 10:58 AM, Rick Glazier rickglaz...@gmail.com wrote: Things are getting better. It is becoming a mature OS. Rick Glazier From: FORC5 curious how that is working for ya ? I have that but am afraid to mess with it due to the stories I read about drivers and such. At 08:21 PM 12/17/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure! -- Bryan G. Seitz -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
At 09:50 AM 12/18/2008, you wrote: I will switch to Vista once there are no activation issues, and when utilities can strip out all the unnecessary crap to streamline the OS. I use XP64 and a custom Lite version of XP for non 64-bit boxes. XPLite only takes about 300 megs for the OS and is way faster without the bloatware. lopaka Nlite has a Vista Version
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Hello Jason, Thursday, December 18, 2008, 11:47:56 AM, you wrote: Well the only reason I can think of to recommend Vista is if your a gamer and want DirectX 10. All the games I currently play are DirectX 9.0c so I have no reason to switch from XP. Are games faster on Vista with DX10? -- Regards, joeuser - Still looking for the 'any' key... ...now these points of data make a beautiful line...
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Farcry 2 is the only one so far that runs better in DX10 than DX9. http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTU5Myw2LCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA== Joe User wrote: Hello Jason, Thursday, December 18, 2008, 11:47:56 AM, you wrote: Well the only reason I can think of to recommend Vista is if your a gamer and want DirectX 10. All the games I currently play are DirectX 9.0c so I have no reason to switch from XP. Are games faster on Vista with DX10?
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
vista has separate install media for 32 and 64 bits the license key determines which version of Vista it is (Home Basic/ Premium/Business/Ultimate) but the media determines the bitness (bittedness?) On 18 Dec 2008, at 00:28, FORC5 wrote: Does Vista in all it's wisdom detect 32/64 bit cpu and install accordingly ? or are there two versions like with XP ? May need to update my server HW for some beta testing with Vista or even xp64. Have xp64 and Vista Ultimate just not sure if it swings both ways or not. :-| Any ideas ? Fp -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
Single key, different installation media. With Home Basic/Home Premium/Business retail versions, you can request the alternate media from MS for a nominal S/H fee. With Ultimate Retail, you should have both editions in the box. With OEM/System Builder versions, you only get the one you purchased. You can sometimes get alternate media by contacting your vendor or MS directly. With MSDN/Technet, all should be available for you to download and/or shipped to you. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of FORC5 Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 6:28 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista Ultimate ? Does Vista in all it's wisdom detect 32/64 bit cpu and install accordingly ? or are there two versions like with XP ? May need to update my server HW for some beta testing with Vista or even xp64. Have xp64 and Vista Ultimate just not sure if it swings both ways or not. :-| Any ideas ? Fp -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure! On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 06:39:20PM -0600, Greg Sevart wrote: Single key, different installation media. With Home Basic/Home Premium/Business retail versions, you can request the alternate media from MS for a nominal S/H fee. With Ultimate Retail, you should have both editions in the box. With OEM/System Builder versions, you only get the one you purchased. You can sometimes get alternate media by contacting your vendor or MS directly. With MSDN/Technet, all should be available for you to download and/or shipped to you. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of FORC5 Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 6:28 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista Ultimate ? Does Vista in all it's wisdom detect 32/64 bit cpu and install accordingly ? or are there two versions like with XP ? May need to update my server HW for some beta testing with Vista or even xp64. Have xp64 and Vista Ultimate just not sure if it swings both ways or not. :-| Any ideas ? Fp -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Vista Ultimate ?
curious how that is working for ya ? I have that but am afraid to mess with it due to the stories I read about drivers and such. thanks fp At 08:21 PM 12/17/2008, Bryan Seitz Poked the stick with: And I recommend installing neither ;) I'm rolling with XP64 these days as Vista is a complete failure! On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 06:39:20PM -0600, Greg Sevart wrote: Single key, different installation media. With Home Basic/Home Premium/Business retail versions, you can request the alternate media from MS for a nominal S/H fee. With Ultimate Retail, you should have both editions in the box. With OEM/System Builder versions, you only get the one you purchased. You can sometimes get alternate media by contacting your vendor or MS directly. With MSDN/Technet, all should be available for you to download and/or shipped to you. Greg -Original Message- From: hardware-boun...@hardwaregroup.com [mailto:hardware- boun...@hardwaregroup.com] On Behalf Of FORC5 Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 6:28 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista Ultimate ? Does Vista in all it's wisdom detect 32/64 bit cpu and install accordingly ? or are there two versions like with XP ? May need to update my server HW for some beta testing with Vista or even xp64. Have xp64 and Vista Ultimate just not sure if it swings both ways or not. :-| Any ideas ? Fp -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759 -- Bryan G. Seitz -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. -Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Re: [H] Vista 64 question
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008, Scott Sipe wrote: I have a dell with a Q6600 processor and 2gb ram. It has 32-bit Vista Home Premium. Two questions: 1) Do I gain anything by installing Vista 64-bit on it? Is there an actual performance difference? Not sure, I went 64 just so I could upgrade memory whenever I felt like it instead of upgrading to 64 then upgrading. 2) Can I use my current Vista Home Premium license number to install the 64-bit version? Mine worked on both 32 and 64, retail key. Christopher Fisk -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Re: [H] Vista 64 question
I have a dell with a Q6600 processor and 2gb ram. It has 32-bit Vista Home Premium. Two questions: 1) Do I gain anything by installing Vista 64-bit on it? Is there an actual performance difference? No. There are some applications that benefit from the extra general purpose registers available with the x86-64 instruction set, but in general, you should expect performance to be fairly identical. While I am a big 64-bit advocate, I generally won't install it on systems with 4GB RAM. However, given that you could upgrade to 4 or 6GB for under $50... 2) Can I use my current Vista Home Premium license number to install the 64-bit version? It depends. With retail versions, you can request easily alternate media from Microsoft for the other edition. Since you ordered from Dell (which is still an operating business), as per Microsoft, you would have to contact them. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/326246 Supposedly, some have been able to get replacement media regardless of the actual OEM by using the region-specific links under the section Media replacement for end-users of system builders' computers. Greg
Re: [H] Vista 64 issues and questions
On Thu, 4 Dec 2008, Winterlight wrote: In the past I always have set up my drive C = Primary 2GB FAT32 Boot.. where I have the boot files and MBR then I have a logical drive with separate partitions that typically dual boot XP1 on D XP2 on C I tried this as a trial run on my new setup with C as boot drive, D as Vista 64 and E as a new install clean XPSP3. I installed XP first and then Vista 64. Vista boot loader sees XP but when it starts to load XP but then it just does a spontaneous reboot. Anybody know why? What are Vista 64 using for anti virus, anti malware, and firewall? Is Vista's firewall and Defender good enough to do the job here? What about anti virus? Brian, I began to have the shutdown issue right after I installed VMWare Workstation. I've been happy with Avast! for Vista64. I never bother with the built in firewall since I just run Vista for gaming (WoW, TF2, other steam games) and I have a Firewall on my network connection. Christopher Fisk -- Leela: Hey, you know what might be a hoot? Professor: No. Why would I know that? -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
Re: [H] Vista 64 issues and questions
For Anti Virus and all the other gubbins, pretty much everything for Vista is x64 compatible. Especially now that Vista has been out for so long. XP64 was a bit of a waste of time, but Vista x64 can cope with pretty much everything. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: 04 December 2008 19:24 To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista 64 issues and questions In the past I always have set up my drive C = Primary 2GB FAT32 Boot.. where I have the boot files and MBR then I have a logical drive with separate partitions that typically dual boot XP1 on D XP2 on C I tried this as a trial run on my new setup with C as boot drive, D as Vista 64 and E as a new install clean XPSP3. I installed XP first and then Vista 64. Vista boot loader sees XP but when it starts to load XP but then it just does a spontaneous reboot. Anybody know why? What are Vista 64 using for anti virus, anti malware, and firewall? Is Vista's firewall and Defender good enough to do the job here? What about anti virus? Brian, I began to have the shutdown issue right after I installed VMWare Workstation. m
Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner
Depending on the version of PM you should not be using it period. Assuming your's is not one of the versions that screws up, I'd imagine it does not matter what the OS is as long as it supports the filesystem type version. Doesn't ADD allow you to make a boot cd? Could have sworn I have a TI ADD on the same boot cd. There are also OSS live cd's to do the same: http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php Winterlight wrote: I have a new laptop that came with Vista 64. My version of Acronis Disk Director doesn't support Vista 64. is there any reason why I can't just boot to DOS and re partition using Partition Magic for DOS?
Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner
GParted or almost any of the LiveCD linux distros out there. Jason Tozer -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden Sent: 12 November 2008 13:36 To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner I had a really bad episode with Partition Magic a couple years ago where it FUBARd a partition and I stopped using it. I've been using Acronis since and really like it. If you can't use Acronis, I second Ben's recommendation for Gparted. --- Brian Weeden Technical Consultant Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundtion.org +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Ben Ruset [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am a big fan of the gparted CD. I've used it successfully on many Red Hat boxes. maccrawj wrote: Depending on the version of PM you should not be using it period. Assuming your's is not one of the versions that screws up, I'd imagine it does not matter what the OS is as long as it supports the filesystem type version. Doesn't ADD allow you to make a boot cd? Could have sworn I have a TI ADD on the same boot cd. There are also OSS live cd's to do the same: http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php This message and any attachment are confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone or email the sender and delete this message and any attachment from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy this message or attachment or disclose the contents to any other person. Clifford Chance LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England Wales under number OC323571. The firm's registered office and principal place of business is at 10 Upper Bank Street, London, E14 5JJ. For further details, including a list of members and their professional qualifications, see our website at www.cliffordchance.com. The firm uses the word 'partner' to refer to a member of Clifford Chance LLP or an employee or consultant with equivalent standing and qualifications. The firm is regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority. The Authority's rules can be accessed by clicking on the following link: http://www.sra.org.uk/code-of-conduct.page Clifford Chance as a global firm regularly shares client and/or matter-related data among its different offices and support entities in strict compliance with internal control policies and statutory requirements. Incoming and outgoing email communications may be monitored by Clifford Chance, as permitted by applicable law and regulations. For further information about Clifford Chance please see our website at http://www.cliffordchance.com or refer to any Clifford Chance office.
Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner
I am a big fan of the gparted CD. I've used it successfully on many Red Hat boxes. maccrawj wrote: Depending on the version of PM you should not be using it period. Assuming your's is not one of the versions that screws up, I'd imagine it does not matter what the OS is as long as it supports the filesystem type version. Doesn't ADD allow you to make a boot cd? Could have sworn I have a TI ADD on the same boot cd. There are also OSS live cd's to do the same: http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php
Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner
Depending on what you're trying to accomplish, you may be able to do what you're looking for without any third party tools. Basic partition shrinking and extension capabilities are built in to Disk Management in Vista. It does have some limitations (it won't shuffle around data to allow you to shrink more, so you may need to do a defrag to consolidate data). And no, don't use any software to re-partition unless it explicitly supports Vista. Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardware- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2008 11:30 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista 64 partitioner I have a new laptop that came with Vista 64. My version of Acronis Disk Director doesn't support Vista 64. is there any reason why I can't just boot to DOS and re partition using Partition Magic for DOS?
Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner
Have you tried shrinking the existing partition within Disk Management? You could then create a new one. XP's install is going to jack your BCD though, so you'll have to fix it after the installation. Not sure how, but it should be possible. Note that every time you boot XP, it will also wipe out all system restore points, etc. within Vista, since it doesn't understand the new VSS mechanism. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardware- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 10:28 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner Well, Partition Magic 9 in DOS does support VISTA, I have used it with Vista 32.Of course I am not suggesting running it in Vista. After all, a NTFS drive is a NTFS drive. I just don't have much experience with Vista 64 although I don't see why it wouldn't work as well. And I want to resize and create a new partition to install XP32 on. So what does work with Vista 64 At 06:03 AM 11/12/2008, you wrote: Depending on what you're trying to accomplish, you may be able to do what you're looking for without any third party tools. Basic partition shrinking and extension capabilities are built in to Disk Management in Vista. It does have some limitations (it won't shuffle around data to allow you to shrink more, so you may need to do a defrag to consolidate data). And no, don't use any software to re-partition unless it explicitly supports Vista. Greg
Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner
I had a really bad episode with Partition Magic a couple years ago where it FUBARd a partition and I stopped using it. I've been using Acronis since and really like it. If you can't use Acronis, I second Ben's recommendation for Gparted. --- Brian Weeden Technical Consultant Secure World Foundation http://www.secureworldfoundtion.org +1 (514) 466-2756 Canada +1 (202) 683-8534 US On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Ben Ruset [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am a big fan of the gparted CD. I've used it successfully on many Red Hat boxes. maccrawj wrote: Depending on the version of PM you should not be using it period. Assuming your's is not one of the versions that screws up, I'd imagine it does not matter what the OS is as long as it supports the filesystem type version. Doesn't ADD allow you to make a boot cd? Could have sworn I have a TI ADD on the same boot cd. There are also OSS live cd's to do the same: http://gparted.sourceforge.net/livecd.php
Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner
At 11:37 AM 11/12/2008, you wrote: Have you tried shrinking the existing partition within Disk Management? You could then create a new one. XP's install is going to jack your BCD though, so you'll have to fix it after the installation. Not sure how, but it should be possible. Note that every time you boot XP, it will also wipe out all system restore points, etc. within Vista, since it doesn't understand the new VSS mechanism. I don't use restore points, if I am worried about something I image with Acronis. I wouldn't even be thinking twice about using PM except it is a brand new laptop. Your right about the boot screenI don't know why MS changed it in the first place. the old way is easy to deal with. But I may have to use a boot manager to do this. m -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardware- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2008 10:28 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista 64 partitioner Well, Partition Magic 9 in DOS does support VISTA, I have used it with Vista 32.Of course I am not suggesting running it in Vista. After all, a NTFS drive is a NTFS drive. I just don't have much experience with Vista 64 although I don't see why it wouldn't work as well. And I want to resize and create a new partition to install XP32 on. So what does work with Vista 64 At 06:03 AM 11/12/2008, you wrote: Depending on what you're trying to accomplish, you may be able to do what you're looking for without any third party tools. Basic partition shrinking and extension capabilities are built in to Disk Management in Vista. It does have some limitations (it won't shuffle around data to allow you to shrink more, so you may need to do a defrag to consolidate data). And no, don't use any software to re-partition unless it explicitly supports Vista. Greg
Re: [H] Vista FireWire support
FW depot is a reseller, Oxford is a chipset manufacturer, the bridge board is likely made by a 3rd party. Since FWD does not manufacture they have nothing to do with the driver and likely lack even an educated TS department, hence the simpleton response. Bottom line is that like the USB mass storage driver, 1394 *device support* is a generic Windows driver and should support any standards compliant device chipset. Having a driver for the 1394 host controller in the PC is another matter entirely, since your 1394 is working now obviously you have that. That said bridge boards are not cheap @ ~$50 just to run 2 PATA devices inside your PC. Looked into it briefly since my Asus Rampage has only a single PATA controller and instead opted to downstream the drive replace it with a new SATA. For FW, Oxford is one of the better chipsets with 911+ being 400Mb 912 being 800Mb. There is also Initio which are former Adaptec people which I hear is good but have never used. James Maki wrote: I am looking at a firewire-to-ide bridge board at FireWire Depot; http://fwdepot.com/thestore/product_info.php/products_id/1643 In the description, it states that it Support Win98SE, ME, 2K, XP, Linux, FreeBSDS and MAC OS 8.6 or higher. No mention of Vista. I wrote customer support asking about Vista x64 support and received the following cryptic (at least to me) message in return: only microsoft writes driver for vista so you would need to check to see if microsoft is publishing a vista firewire driver for oxford 911+ chip set I find it strange that the manufacturer would not already know this information. I am running two external cases with the oxforde 911 and 911+ chipset and it works. I just want to bring the drives (two IDE dvd drives) into a case. Anyone see a problem I am missing? I am just a bit put off by the lack of a definitive answer from the manufacturer on this subject. Thanks for you input. Jim Maki [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [H] Vista FireWire support
Thank you so much for the reply and info. Still not sure I want to spend the money (actually $69.95). My motherboard also has only a single PATA controller and onboard firewire, so looking at this as an option. And since I just noticed that FireWire Depot is going out of business at the end of the month, I will not be buying from them! Jim -Original Message- From: maccrawj Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 1:37 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista FireWire support FW depot is a reseller, Oxford is a chipset manufacturer, the bridge board is likely made by a 3rd party. Since FWD does not manufacture they have nothing to do with the driver and likely lack even an educated TS department, hence the simpleton response.
Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
At least now it boots without having the DVD correct? Maybe now go thru the BIOS and check for everything being good and right. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 7:06 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files I found a BIOS update for my mobo and applied i t, then reset the CMOS on the PC. Now the problem is even worse - it hangs for several minutes on a blank screen after the DMI update and then loads Vista. Once it gets past that it works fine. I've hit the boot drive with every HD utility I can think of and it all check out just fine. But I might just replace it anyways and see if that helps. --- Brian On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 8:00 AM, mark.dodge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have tried boot ini and MBR fixes then it would seem to me that there is something in the BIOS knackered to not boot from the HD. /1535 - Release Date: 7/4/2008 5:03 PM
Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
Nope. The several minute blank screen before booting Vista is with the install DVD in the drive. Without it the machine just hangs on a black screen after the DMI update. Cleared the CMOS, reset the BIOS to default and tweaked, and ran fix boot files from Vista install DVD. But it's the same machine that is now giving me a video beep error and won't post so maybe it was a bad mobo all along. Brian On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 6:00 AM, mark.dodge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At least now it boots without having the DVD correct? Maybe now go thru the BIOS and check for everything being good and right. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden Sent: Saturday, July 05, 2008 7:06 AM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files I found a BIOS update for my mobo and applied i t, then reset the CMOS on the PC. Now the problem is even worse - it hangs for several minutes on a blank screen after the DMI update and then loads Vista. Once it gets past that it works fine. I've hit the boot drive with every HD utility I can think of and it all check out just fine. But I might just replace it anyways and see if that helps. --- Brian On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 8:00 AM, mark.dodge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have tried boot ini and MBR fixes then it would seem to me that there is something in the BIOS knackered to not boot from the HD. /1535 - Release Date: 7/4/2008 5:03 PM
Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
If you have tried boot ini and MBR fixes then it would seem to me that there
is something in the BIOS knackered to not boot from the HD.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:25 AM
To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
Subject: Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
Okay this problem has returned. Vista crapped out on me after only a month
and I needed to do a fresh reinstall (kept rebooting everytime a DVD was
inserted or locking up every 15 min). So this time I pulled my RAID card
and only had my boot drive attachced when I installed. But on reboot it
stopped at the loading DMI part of the boot process again unless I put the
Vista install DVD in the drive. Then it would load Vista no prob.
I installed the EasyBCD proggie linked to this thread and tried just about
every option, including write MBR and recreate missing/deleted boot
files.
This is the readout from EasyBCD:
Windows Boot Manager
identifier {9dea862c-5cdd-4e70-acc1-f32b344d4795}
device partition=C:
description Windows Boot Manager
locale en-US
inherit {7ea2e1ac-2e61-4728-aaa3-896d9d0a9f0e}
default {7cb80d1e-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
displayorder{7cb80d1e-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
toolsdisplayorder {b2721d73-1db4-4c62-bf78-c548a880142d}
timeout 30
Windows Boot Loader
---
identifier {7cb80d1e-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
device partition=C:
path\Windows\system32\winload.exe
description Microsoft Windows Vista
locale en-US
inherit {6efb52bf-1766-41db-a6b3-0ee5eff72bd7}
bootdebug Yes
osdevicepartition=C:
systemroot \Windows
resumeobject{7cb80d1f-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
nx OptIn
pae ForceDisable
sos No
debug No
Partition C is the correct drive to boot from. I think the problem is that
the bootloader itself is not being called after POST, which is why it's
hanging at the DMI screen. Again, I did a complete re-install so the
problem isn't a second hard drive.
Any suggestions? Honestly, I can't believe that Vista has this sort of
problem and I can't believe I haven't heard more people bitching about it.
While I have run into the XP no boot device found error due to having the
wrong driver or messed up boot.ini path, it was at least fixable with the
tools provided by Windows and was easy to avoid.
Brian
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Alex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes it's a common problem. quite irritating.
http://neosmart.net/dl.php?id=1
Grab EasyBCD and re-write the MBR to your hard drive.
On Tue, 27 May 2008 14:11:01 -0400, Brian Weeden wrote
Just installed my first Vista system (Ultimate, using it for my HTPC)
and have a weird problem. The install process never copied over
the boot files - the system will not boot unless the install DVD is
in the drive. Otherwise it just hangs at the DMI screen after the
BIOS post. I nuked it and did a second install and the same problem
happened.
I don't know anything about Vista - is this a common problem? What's
the fix? With an XP system I would normally just copy over ntldr
and make sure the boot.ini file is correct but I don't see those
anywhere on the Vista system.
Brian
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1524 - Release Date: 6/28/2008
7:42 PM
Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
I found a BIOS update for my mobo and applied i t, then reset the CMOS
on the PC. Now the problem is even worse - it hangs for several
minutes on a blank screen after the DMI update and then loads Vista.
Once it gets past that it works fine.
I've hit the boot drive with every HD utility I can think of and it
all check out just fine. But I might just replace it anyways and see
if that helps.
---
Brian
On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 8:00 AM, mark.dodge [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have tried boot ini and MBR fixes then it would seem to me that there
is something in the BIOS knackered to not boot from the HD.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 5:25 AM
To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com
Subject: Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
Okay this problem has returned. Vista crapped out on me after only a month
and I needed to do a fresh reinstall (kept rebooting everytime a DVD was
inserted or locking up every 15 min). So this time I pulled my RAID card
and only had my boot drive attachced when I installed. But on reboot it
stopped at the loading DMI part of the boot process again unless I put the
Vista install DVD in the drive. Then it would load Vista no prob.
I installed the EasyBCD proggie linked to this thread and tried just about
every option, including write MBR and recreate missing/deleted boot
files.
This is the readout from EasyBCD:
Windows Boot Manager
identifier {9dea862c-5cdd-4e70-acc1-f32b344d4795}
device partition=C:
description Windows Boot Manager
locale en-US
inherit {7ea2e1ac-2e61-4728-aaa3-896d9d0a9f0e}
default {7cb80d1e-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
displayorder{7cb80d1e-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
toolsdisplayorder {b2721d73-1db4-4c62-bf78-c548a880142d}
timeout 30
Windows Boot Loader
---
identifier {7cb80d1e-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
device partition=C:
path\Windows\system32\winload.exe
description Microsoft Windows Vista
locale en-US
inherit {6efb52bf-1766-41db-a6b3-0ee5eff72bd7}
bootdebug Yes
osdevicepartition=C:
systemroot \Windows
resumeobject{7cb80d1f-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
nx OptIn
pae ForceDisable
sos No
debug No
Partition C is the correct drive to boot from. I think the problem is that
the bootloader itself is not being called after POST, which is why it's
hanging at the DMI screen. Again, I did a complete re-install so the
problem isn't a second hard drive.
Any suggestions? Honestly, I can't believe that Vista has this sort of
problem and I can't believe I haven't heard more people bitching about it.
While I have run into the XP no boot device found error due to having the
wrong driver or messed up boot.ini path, it was at least fixable with the
tools provided by Windows and was easy to avoid.
Brian
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Alex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes it's a common problem. quite irritating.
http://neosmart.net/dl.php?id=1
Grab EasyBCD and re-write the MBR to your hard drive.
On Tue, 27 May 2008 14:11:01 -0400, Brian Weeden wrote
Just installed my first Vista system (Ultimate, using it for my HTPC)
and have a weird problem. The install process never copied over
the boot files - the system will not boot unless the install DVD is
in the drive. Otherwise it just hangs at the DMI screen after the
BIOS post. I nuked it and did a second install and the same problem
happened.
I don't know anything about Vista - is this a common problem? What's
the fix? With an XP system I would normally just copy over ntldr
and make sure the boot.ini file is correct but I don't see those
anywhere on the Vista system.
Brian
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 8.0.101 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1524 - Release Date: 6/28/2008
7:42 PM
Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
Okay this problem has returned. Vista crapped out on me after only a month
and I needed to do a fresh reinstall (kept rebooting everytime a DVD was
inserted or locking up every 15 min). So this time I pulled my RAID card
and only had my boot drive attachced when I installed. But on reboot it
stopped at the loading DMI part of the boot process again unless I put the
Vista install DVD in the drive. Then it would load Vista no prob.
I installed the EasyBCD proggie linked to this thread and tried just about
every option, including write MBR and recreate missing/deleted boot
files.
This is the readout from EasyBCD:
Windows Boot Manager
identifier {9dea862c-5cdd-4e70-acc1-f32b344d4795}
device partition=C:
description Windows Boot Manager
locale en-US
inherit {7ea2e1ac-2e61-4728-aaa3-896d9d0a9f0e}
default {7cb80d1e-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
displayorder{7cb80d1e-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
toolsdisplayorder {b2721d73-1db4-4c62-bf78-c548a880142d}
timeout 30
Windows Boot Loader
---
identifier {7cb80d1e-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
device partition=C:
path\Windows\system32\winload.exe
description Microsoft Windows Vista
locale en-US
inherit {6efb52bf-1766-41db-a6b3-0ee5eff72bd7}
bootdebug Yes
osdevicepartition=C:
systemroot \Windows
resumeobject{7cb80d1f-458b-11dd-af8d-aa046b8ac7f2}
nx OptIn
pae ForceDisable
sos No
debug No
Partition C is the correct drive to boot from. I think the problem is that
the bootloader itself is not being called after POST, which is why it's
hanging at the DMI screen. Again, I did a complete re-install so the
problem isn't a second hard drive.
Any suggestions? Honestly, I can't believe that Vista has this sort of
problem and I can't believe I haven't heard more people bitching about it.
While I have run into the XP no boot device found error due to having the
wrong driver or messed up boot.ini path, it was at least fixable with the
tools provided by Windows and was easy to avoid.
Brian
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 2:25 PM, Alex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
yes it's a common problem. quite irritating.
http://neosmart.net/dl.php?id=1
Grab EasyBCD and re-write the MBR to your hard drive.
On Tue, 27 May 2008 14:11:01 -0400, Brian Weeden wrote
Just installed my first Vista system (Ultimate, using it for my HTPC)
and have a weird problem. The install process never copied over
the boot files - the system will not boot unless the install DVD is
in the drive. Otherwise it just hangs at the DMI screen after the
BIOS post. I nuked it and did a second install and the same problem
happened.
I don't know anything about Vista - is this a common problem? What's
the fix? With an XP system I would normally just copy over ntldr
and make sure the boot.ini file is correct but I don't see those
anywhere on the Vista system.
Brian
Re: [H] Vista 64
I have Vista 64 with my Retail copy of Vista. It came with both versions. Regards, Tim The Beave Lider E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: dowbeave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 7:17 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista 64 Is Vista 64 on all Retail DVDs, or is a separate purchase? If it is on the same DVD does it give you a choice when you start to install?
Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
Have you tried installing using a different HDD? I'd be starting lower than a Vista reinstall by running the drive manufacturers diagnostic CD doing a long DST. Brian Weeden wrote: Okay this problem has returned. Vista crapped out on me after only a month and I needed to do a fresh reinstall (kept rebooting everytime a DVD was inserted or locking up every 15 min). So this time I pulled my RAID card and only had my boot drive attachced when I installed. But on reboot it stopped at the loading DMI part of the boot process again unless I put the Vista install DVD in the drive. Then it would load Vista no prob. I installed the EasyBCD proggie linked to this thread and tried just about every option, including write MBR and recreate missing/deleted boot files. snip
Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
Different HD might be a good idea, or see if the manufacturer has a firmware update for your HD.. We have also seen similar issues with new PC's we just started getting at work. Our Image does not work right on the brand new ones unless get into the BIOS and change the HD from AHCPI to ATA/SATA before we install the image. Not sure what Dell or the HD manufacturer may have changed, just know we need to do it.. On Jun 29, 2008, at 7:46 PM, maccrawj wrote: Have you tried installing using a different HDD? I'd be starting lower than a Vista reinstall by running the drive manufacturers diagnostic CD doing a long DST. Brian Weeden wrote: Okay this problem has returned. Vista crapped out on me after only a month and I needed to do a fresh reinstall (kept rebooting everytime a DVD was inserted or locking up every 15 min). So this time I pulled my RAID card and only had my boot drive attachced when I installed. But on reboot it stopped at the loading DMI part of the boot process again unless I put the Vista install DVD in the drive. Then it would load Vista no prob. I installed the EasyBCD proggie linked to this thread and tried just about every option, including write MBR and recreate missing/deleted boot files. snip -- JRS [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please remove **X** to reply... Facts do not cease to exist just because they are ignored.
Re: [H] Vista 64
X86 and x64 editions are on separate discs. With Retail non-Ultimate versions, for a small SH fee, you can request the other media from what you bought (ie: if you bought Business x86, you can get Business x64--they use the same keys). Ultimate edition retail box has both x86 and x64 DVDs. Order Vista alternate media: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/1033/ordermedia/default.mspx OEM versions, in contrast, cannot be interchanged. What you bought is all you're entitled to. Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardware- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 9:17 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista 64 Is Vista 64 on all Retail DVDs, or is a separate purchase? If it is on the same DVD does it give you a choice when you start to install?
Re: [H] Vista 64
Thanks Greg. At 07:31 PM 6/28/2008, you wrote: X86 and x64 editions are on separate discs. With Retail non-Ultimate versions, for a small SH fee, you can request the other media from what you bought (ie: if you bought Business x86, you can get Business x64--they use the same keys). Ultimate edition retail box has both x86 and x64 DVDs. Order Vista alternate media: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/1033/ordermedia/default.mspx OEM versions, in contrast, cannot be interchanged. What you bought is all you're entitled to. Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardware- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Winterlight Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 9:17 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista 64 Is Vista 64 on all Retail DVDs, or is a separate purchase? If it is on the same DVD does it give you a choice when you start to install?
Re: [H] Vista Annoyances
Brian Weeden wrote: See, this is the thing. I could understand it if it was a whole entire module that had to be added on. But the code to freaking do this is already in EVERY copy of Vista All you need to do is make a modification to one DLL and a registry edit and presto - as many simultaneous logins as you want. Same thing with everything else in Vista ultimate - every single copy of Vista sold (no matter which version you buy) has all the features. The license you buy (Basic, Home Premium, Ultimate) just determines which features get unlocked. It's just artificial market segmentation for the sake of being able to sell different feature sets at different price points. Which I can sort of understand from a business POV but it sure does make me mad as a consumer. Of course all it takes is one enterprising hacker who figures out how to enable all the disabled features and it's all over. So, is it possible to unlock enough stuff to turn Home into Ultimate?
Re: [H] Vista Annoyances
Should be able to just give Home an Ultimate CD key and presto chango. I think there is even a little thing withing Vista that allows you to upgrade on the fly (so to speak). Brian On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Anthony Q. Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brian Weeden wrote: See, this is the thing. I could understand it if it was a whole entire module that had to be added on. But the code to freaking do this is already in EVERY copy of Vista All you need to do is make a modification to one DLL and a registry edit and presto - as many simultaneous logins as you want. Same thing with everything else in Vista ultimate - every single copy of Vista sold (no matter which version you buy) has all the features. The license you buy (Basic, Home Premium, Ultimate) just determines which features get unlocked. It's just artificial market segmentation for the sake of being able to sell different feature sets at different price points. Which I can sort of understand from a business POV but it sure does make me mad as a consumer. Of course all it takes is one enterprising hacker who figures out how to enable all the disabled features and it's all over. So, is it possible to unlock enough stuff to turn Home into Ultimate?
Re: [H] Vista Annoyances
I think he meant a free hack... grin Rick Glazier From: Brian Weeden Should be able to just give Home an Ultimate CD key and presto chango. I think there is even a little thing withing Vista that allows you to upgrade on the fly (so to speak).
Re: [H] Vista Annoyances
Yeah I know - not that I know of. I mean, bits and pieces here and there like the multiple session thing but that's about it so far. Brian On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Rick Glazier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think he meant a free hack... grin Rick Glazier From: Brian Weeden Should be able to just give Home an Ultimate CD key and presto chango. I think there is even a little thing withing Vista that allows you to upgrade on the fly (so to speak).
Re: [H] Vista Annoyances
Vista more aggressively precaches things than XP ever did, which will give the illusion of things using more memory than they actually are ? ( the other issues I have no comments regarding however.) On 16 Jun 2008, at 18:09, Brian Weeden wrote: 3) Memory usage. The HTPC boots up and loads maybe 3 programs (one of which is the VMC shell) and the thing is using 2.1 GB of RAM. WTF My main WinXP machine loads about 20 programs at start, including Firefox, and never goes about 1.5 GB of RAM unless I'm gaming or working with big files.
Re: [H] Vista Annoyances
Okay I've only been using Vista for about 2 weeks on my HTPC and it's got several things that annoy the crap out of me: 1) Only 1 session allowed at once. This is a real killer for a HTPC as I need to be able to have it autologin to one session to show the HTPC shell (I'm using Vista Media Center) while simultaneously allowing me to remote desktop into another session to manage downloads, do maintenance, and encoding/ripping. Of course there is a hack to enable it, it seems that Microsoft decided this was a server feature and made it part of Server 2003 and not the $400 Vista Ultimate. That's been true for non-server Windows OS'es since the inception of RDP/TS... 2) Boot files. My Vista machine won't boot without the install DVD in the machine. I tried downloading and running that Vista boot fix program someone on the list linked and ran all the different fixes it offered but nothing worked. I figure the issue won't get solved until I have to reformat and reinstall, which I hear with Vista needs to happen within 6 months. Haven't seen that yet with Vista, but have several times with XP. With XP, my trick was to unplug ALL storage devices except the boot HD and the optical drive I'm installing from when doing the initial installation. I've also been running on the same Vista64 install since I switched to my P35-based Gigabyte board...so that's been over a year now. No issues to report, so I'm not planning a reinstall anytime soon. 3) Memory usage. The HTPC boots up and loads maybe 3 programs (one of which is the VMC shell) and the thing is using 2.1 GB of RAM. WTF My main WinXP machine loads about 20 programs at start, including Firefox, and never goes about 1.5 GB of RAM unless I'm gaming or working with big files. That's SuperFetch at work. It takes otherwise unused memory to pre-fetch files for when you might need them. This is very much a good thing--you're actually getting a benefit from the memory you paid for. If any application needs the memory, it surrenders it immediately. Now, that being said, Vista does have an overall higher memory footprint...but that's really to be expected IMO. 4) Autosizing the details pane on explorer. This is a huge annoyance for me. On XP, I can setup a folder view just the way I like it (detailed list, no icons) and even have all the columns sized just right and then tell Windows to make all the other folders look the same. In Vista, every damn time I open a folder I have to right click and tell it to auto size all columns because you can't read half the damn information. The inability for Windows to remember my folder customization settings has been an annoyance for me long before Vista, though Vista does seem to be worse for whatever reason.
Re: [H] Vista Annoyances
Issue 2: Download EasyBCD and fix your MBR. Issue 4: I think this is one of those tweakable features you can disable via Folder Options or Performance Vistual Effects. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 10:09 AM To: hwg Subject: [H] Vista Annoyances Okay I've only been using Vista for about 2 weeks on my HTPC and it's got several things that annoy the crap out of me: 1) Only 1 session allowed at once. This is a real killer for a HTPC as I need to be able to have it autologin to one session to show the HTPC shell (I'm using Vista Media Center) while simultaneously allowing me to remote desktop into another session to manage downloads, do maintenance, and encoding/ripping. Of course there is a hack to enable it, it seems that Microsoft decided this was a server feature and made it part of Server 2003 and not the $400 Vista Ultimate. 2) Boot files. My Vista machine won't boot without the install DVD in the machine. I tried downloading and running that Vista boot fix program someone on the list linked and ran all the different fixes it offered but nothing worked. I figure the issue won't get solved until I have to reformat and reinstall, which I hear with Vista needs to happen within 6 months. 3) Memory usage. The HTPC boots up and loads maybe 3 programs (one of which is the VMC shell) and the thing is using 2.1 GB of RAM. WTF My main WinXP machine loads about 20 programs at start, including Firefox, and never goes about 1.5 GB of RAM unless I'm gaming or working with big files. 4) Autosizing the details pane on explorer. This is a huge annoyance for me. On XP, I can setup a folder view just the way I like it (detailed list, no icons) and even have all the columns sized just right and then tell Windows to make all the other folders look the same. In Vista, every damn time I open a folder I have to right click and tell it to auto size all columns because you can't read half the damn information. I think I'm going to stick with XP for a while longer, maybe as long as I can. It's not the best thing in the world but I find nothing in Vista worth the frustration. Brian
Re: [H] Vista Annoyances
I did download EasyBCD and did the MBR fix. Didn't work. Brian On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Alex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Issue 2: Download EasyBCD and fix your MBR. Issue 4: I think this is one of those tweakable features you can disable via Folder Options or Performance Vistual Effects. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 10:09 AM To: hwg Subject: [H] Vista Annoyances Okay I've only been using Vista for about 2 weeks on my HTPC and it's got several things that annoy the crap out of me: 1) Only 1 session allowed at once. This is a real killer for a HTPC as I need to be able to have it autologin to one session to show the HTPC shell (I'm using Vista Media Center) while simultaneously allowing me to remote desktop into another session to manage downloads, do maintenance, and encoding/ripping. Of course there is a hack to enable it, it seems that Microsoft decided this was a server feature and made it part of Server 2003 and not the $400 Vista Ultimate. 2) Boot files. My Vista machine won't boot without the install DVD in the machine. I tried downloading and running that Vista boot fix program someone on the list linked and ran all the different fixes it offered but nothing worked. I figure the issue won't get solved until I have to reformat and reinstall, which I hear with Vista needs to happen within 6 months. 3) Memory usage. The HTPC boots up and loads maybe 3 programs (one of which is the VMC shell) and the thing is using 2.1 GB of RAM. WTF My main WinXP machine loads about 20 programs at start, including Firefox, and never goes about 1.5 GB of RAM unless I'm gaming or working with big files. 4) Autosizing the details pane on explorer. This is a huge annoyance for me. On XP, I can setup a folder view just the way I like it (detailed list, no icons) and even have all the columns sized just right and then tell Windows to make all the other folders look the same. In Vista, every damn time I open a folder I have to right click and tell it to auto size all columns because you can't read half the damn information. I think I'm going to stick with XP for a while longer, maybe as long as I can. It's not the best thing in the world but I find nothing in Vista worth the frustration. Brian
Re: [H] Vista Annoyances
On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Greg Sevart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay I've only been using Vista for about 2 weeks on my HTPC and it's got several things that annoy the crap out of me: 1) Only 1 session allowed at once. This is a real killer for a HTPC as I need to be able to have it autologin to one session to show the HTPC shell (I'm using Vista Media Center) while simultaneously allowing me to remote desktop into another session to manage downloads, do maintenance, and encoding/ripping. Of course there is a hack to enable it, it seems that Microsoft decided this was a server feature and made it part of Server 2003 and not the $400 Vista Ultimate. That's been true for non-server Windows OS'es since the inception of RDP/TS... See, this is the thing. I could understand it if it was a whole entire module that had to be added on. But the code to freaking do this is already in EVERY copy of Vista All you need to do is make a modification to one DLL and a registry edit and presto - as many simultaneous logins as you want. Same thing with everything else in Vista ultimate - every single copy of Vista sold (no matter which version you buy) has all the features. The license you buy (Basic, Home Premium, Ultimate) just determines which features get unlocked. It's just artificial market segmentation for the sake of being able to sell different feature sets at different price points. Which I can sort of understand from a business POV but it sure does make me mad as a consumer. Of course all it takes is one enterprising hacker who figures out how to enable all the disabled features and it's all over. Brian
Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
Hello Brian, Tuesday, May 27, 2008, 12:11:01 PM, you wrote: Just installed my first Vista system (Ultimate, using it for my HTPC) and have a weird problem. The install process never copied over the boot files - the system will not boot unless the install DVD is in the drive. Otherwise it just hangs at the DMI screen after the BIOS post. I nuked it and did a second install and the same problem happened. I don't know anything about Vista - is this a common problem? What's the fix? With an XP system I would normally just copy over ntldr and make sure the boot.ini file is correct but I don't see those anywhere on the Vista system. Brian Vista doesn't use the XP boot.ini You should be able to repair the install by placing the disc in and selecting repair option. -- Regards, joeuser - Still looking for the 'any' key...
Re: [H] Vista install lacking boot files
yes it's a common problem. quite irritating. http://neosmart.net/dl.php?id=1 Grab EasyBCD and re-write the MBR to your hard drive. On Tue, 27 May 2008 14:11:01 -0400, Brian Weeden wrote Just installed my first Vista system (Ultimate, using it for my HTPC) and have a weird problem. The install process never copied over the boot files - the system will not boot unless the install DVD is in the drive. Otherwise it just hangs at the DMI screen after the BIOS post. I nuked it and did a second install and the same problem happened. I don't know anything about Vista - is this a common problem? What's the fix? With an XP system I would normally just copy over ntldr and make sure the boot.ini file is correct but I don't see those anywhere on the Vista system. Brian
Re: [H] vista web mail question
As Outlook? No, more like Outlook Express. Gary VanderMolen, MS-MVP (WLMail) -- From: Harvey Best [EMAIL PROTECTED] I did see that Windows Mail question pop up. If I go ahead and install it, does it work basically the same way as Outlook?
Re: [H] vista web mail question
Outlook doesn't come with Vista. The only email program that comes with Vista is called Windows Mail. If you prefer webmail, you can just ignore Windows Mail. For example, if you want your Hotmail to handle a MailTo link on Craigslist, use this fix: http://www.winhelponline.com/articles/224/1/Register-Windows-Live-Hotmail-with-the-Default-Programs-tool-in-Windows-Vista.html Gary VanderMolen, MS-MVP (WLMail) -- From: Harvey Best [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just got my first system with Vista, yes, I know, ugh. But anyway. I use web mail, Hotmail and Comcast. Is there a way I can set up Vista's Outlook to access those, so when I click a reply to, (like in Craigslist as I post a lot of jobs I need done there) it will come up? Its a pain writing down the email in the ad and transferring it over to the web mail sites.
Re: [H] vista web mail question
I did see that Windows Mail question pop up. If I go ahead and install it, does it work basically the same way as Outlook? To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 14:46:52 -0700 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [H] vista web mail question Outlook doesn't come with Vista. The only email program that comes with Vista is called Windows Mail. If you prefer webmail, you can just ignore Windows Mail. For example, if you want your Hotmail to handle a MailTo link on Craigslist, use this fix: http://www.winhelponline.com/articles/224/1/Register-Windows-Live-Hotmail-with-the-Default-Programs-tool-in-Windows-Vista.html Gary VanderMolen, MS-MVP (WLMail) -- From: Harvey Best [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just got my first system with Vista, yes, I know, ugh. But anyway. I use web mail, Hotmail and Comcast. Is there a way I can set up Vista's Outlook to access those, so when I click a reply to, (like in Craigslist as I post a lot of jobs I need done there) it will come up? Its a pain writing down the email in the ad and transferring it over to the web mail sites. _ In a rush? Get real-time answers with Windows Live Messenger. http://www.windowslive.com/messenger/overview.html?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_Refresh_realtime_042008
Re: [H] vista web mail question
Vista, hehe. Looked nice on the customer's HP laptop I worked on last month but it was tricked out hardware 64bit Vista ultimate. Only thing I really did not like was all the security popups x2+ and nothing was where I expected it to be from XP. There's always Thunderbird HotPopper which can also do SMTP/POP3 to comcast. I do Hotmail, Yahoo (YPOPS), GMail Comcast with TB myself, works great. Harvey Best wrote: Just got my first system with Vista, yes, I know, ugh. But anyway. I use web mail, Hotmail and Comcast. Is there a way I can set up Vista's Outlook to access those, so when I click a reply to, (like in Craigslist as I post a lot of jobs I need done there) it will come up? Its a pain writing down the email in the ad and transferring it over to the web mail sites. Thanks, harvey _ Spell a grand slam in this game where word skill meets World Series. Get in the game. http://club.live.com/word_slugger.aspx?icid=word_slugger_wlhm_admod_april08 Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [H] VISTA Screwed me again
Check the firewall. There's at least one Vista update that seems to re-enable it if it were previously disabled. Otherwise check that all is okay (network discovery, file sharing, etc enabled) in the network center. -Original Message- From: FORC5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 7:28 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] VISTA Screwed me again server is running vista ( left over from MS testing ) has been OK for what it does. Originally gave me a lot of grief LAN wise. Vista had access to the LAN, the LAN had no access to VISTA. Made the mistake of running updates, my problem is back. all permissions seem to be set properly. any ideas appreciated game is a foot. fp -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.
Re: [H] VISTA Screwed me again
FORC5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: game is a foot. afoot a foot is twelve inches or five toes and a heel. ;) Hope you get your Vista thing worked out. Regards, Al
Re: [H] VISTA Screwed me again
all seem well, still looking for the firewall which is suspect. thanks At 05:48 PM 4/13/2008, Greg Sevart Poked the stick with: Check the firewall. There's at least one Vista update that seems to re-enable it if it were previously disabled. Otherwise check that all is okay (network discovery, file sharing, etc enabled) in the network center. -Original Message- From: FORC5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 7:28 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] VISTA Screwed me again server is running vista ( left over from MS testing ) has been OK for what it does. Originally gave me a lot of grief LAN wise. Vista had access to the LAN, the LAN had no access to VISTA. Made the mistake of running updates, my problem is back. all permissions seem to be set properly. any ideas appreciated game is a foot. fp -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- Gun control is not about guns; it's about control. -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- What part of Right to Arm Bears do you not understand ?
Re: [H] VISTA Screwed me again
Quite so Watson :-} fp At 05:57 PM 4/13/2008, Al Poked the stick with: FORC5 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: game is a foot. afoot a foot is twelve inches or five toes and a heel. ;) Hope you get your Vista thing worked out. Regards, Al -- Tallyho ! ]:8) Taglines below ! -- What part of Right to Arm Bears do you not understand ?
Re: [H] Vista SP1 released to Windows update...
Dog Shit SP1, Good 'ol #2 served up steaming hot! Bryan Seitz wrote: Get yer hot fresh DOG SHIT here!!! On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 07:45:25PM -0400, Bobby Heid wrote: http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/03/18/windows-vi sta-sp1-released-to-windows-update.aspx Bobby Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [H] Vista SP1 released to Windows update...
Get yer hot fresh DOG SHIT here!!! On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 07:45:25PM -0400, Bobby Heid wrote: http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2008/03/18/windows-vi sta-sp1-released-to-windows-update.aspx Bobby -- Bryan G. Seitz
Re: [H] Vista SP1 comments
When I was running Vista, I put SP1 on (grabbed from MSDN) and noticed no performance benefit as well. Thane Sherrington wrote: So from what I'm seeing here, SP1 is not going to save Vista.
Re: [H] Vista SP1 comments
Hmm, that's contrary to the SP1 reviews I'd read...were these established Pre-SP1 Vista machines, or clean installs of both? The reason I ask is that SP1 clears Vista's SuperFetch learned behavior cache, so it's re-learning from scratch. That could play a big role in that test... I personally don't think Vista needed saving in the first place--it's really no more or less quirky than any other version of Windows I've used. Performance on good hardware has been quite reasonable, stability has frankly been excellent, and drivers (namely video) have improved dramatically... Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardware- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thane Sherrington Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 12:08 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: [H] Vista SP1 comments I've been trying to speed up Vista machines for customers (I've been doing this for sometime with XP) and as a benchmark, I measure the following: Boot time (from power on until I can see the icons in My Computer. Time to 5% CPU utilization (from power up until the CPU utilization drops below 5% for 10 seconds straight.) Shutdown time (from clicking Turn Off until the computer powers off.) Now Vista is slower than XP on all three tests on every machine I've tried (I've even done fresh installs of XP vs fresh installs of Vista.) Now I'm not saying Vista sucks because it boots more slowly, but it certainly isn't a plus for the OS. Here is the funny part. From what I've read, SP1 is supposed to speed up Vista. But in every test I've done (five systems so far, and one clean install) SP1 slows the first two benchmarks by from 30% to 50%. Now I find that ridiculous. I haven't read up on SP1, so maybe it's giving all sorts of other exciting new features and the better stability and performance that MS talks about wasn't the main purpose, but one would think that given that performance is one of the huge complaints about Vista, MS would have tried to do something to make it faster. (And since boot time and shutdown time are two of the major areas that end users recognize as issues, these would be something to look at.) So from what I'm seeing here, SP1 is not going to save Vista. T
Re: [H] Vista SP1 comments
Meanwhile SP3 actually *does* speed up XP a bit and the idle memory footprint is a little less. Go figure. Vista = Windows ME part II Pure garbage. Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 14:08:01 -0400 To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [H] Vista SP1 comments I've been trying to speed up Vista machines for customers (I've been doing this for sometime with XP) and as a benchmark, I measure the following: Boot time (from power on until I can see the icons in My Computer. Time to drops below 5% for 10 seconds straight.) Shutdown time (from clicking Turn Off until the computer powers off.) Now Vista is slower than XP on all three tests on every machine I've tried (I've even done fresh installs of XP vs fresh installs of Vista.) Now I'm not saying Vista sucks because it boots more slowly, but it certainly isn't a plus for the OS. Here is the funny part. From what I've read, SP1 is supposed to speed up Vista. But in every test I've done (five systems so far, and one clean install) SP1 slows the first two benchmarks by from 30% to 50%. Now I find that ridiculous. I haven't read up on SP1, so maybe it's giving all sorts of other exciting new features and the better stability and performance that MS talks about wasn't the main purpose, but one would think that given that performance is one of the huge complaints about Vista, MS would have tried to do something to make it faster. (And since boot time and shutdown time are two of the major areas that end users recognize as issues, these would be something to look at.) So from what I'm seeing here, SP1 is not going to save Vista. T _ Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008
Re: [H] Vista SP1 comments
Reason #`144 to stick with Windows XP if you can. On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Hayes Elkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Meanwhile SP3 actually *does* speed up XP a bit and the idle memory footprint is a little less. Go figure. Vista = Windows ME part II Pure garbage. Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 14:08:01 -0400 To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [H] Vista SP1 comments I've been trying to speed up Vista machines for customers (I've been doing this for sometime with XP) and as a benchmark, I measure the following: Boot time (from power on until I can see the icons in My Computer. Time to drops below 5% for 10 seconds straight.) Shutdown time (from clicking Turn Off until the computer powers off.) Now Vista is slower than XP on all three tests on every machine I've tried (I've even done fresh installs of XP vs fresh installs of Vista.) Now I'm not saying Vista sucks because it boots more slowly, but it certainly isn't a plus for the OS. Here is the funny part. From what I've read, SP1 is supposed to speed up Vista. But in every test I've done (five systems so far, and one clean install) SP1 slows the first two benchmarks by from 30% to 50%. Now I find that ridiculous. I haven't read up on SP1, so maybe it's giving all sorts of other exciting new features and the better stability and performance that MS talks about wasn't the main purpose, but one would think that given that performance is one of the huge complaints about Vista, MS would have tried to do something to make it faster. (And since boot time and shutdown time are two of the major areas that end users recognize as issues, these would be something to look at.) So from what I'm seeing here, SP1 is not going to save Vista. T _ Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008
Re: [H] Vista SP1 comments
Gah. This again? No, SP3 does not speed up XP. The test everybody references was comparing MS Office 2007 pre- and post-SP3, and the improvement was only 10%. I am not sure that I could actually determine if office is running 30% faster, let alone 10%. Other tests have not found any appreciable difference in any other aspect. Vista SP1 does better in lower-memory systems too, from what I've heard. Greg -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:hardware- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hayes Elkins Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 12:21 PM To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Subject: Re: [H] Vista SP1 comments Meanwhile SP3 actually *does* speed up XP a bit and the idle memory footprint is a little less. Go figure. Vista = Windows ME part II Pure garbage.
Re: [H] Vista SP1 comments
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hardware@hardwaregroup.com Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 13:40:19 -0600 Subject: Re: [H] Vista SP1 comments No, SP3 does not speed up XP. http://exo-blog.blogspot.com/2007/11/windows-xp-sp3-yields-performance-gains.html The test everybody references was comparing MS Office 2007 pre- and post-SP3, and the improvement was only 10%. Last I checked, that's a speed improvement. _ Climb to the top of the charts! Play the word scramble challenge with star power. http://club.live.com/star_shuffle.aspx?icid=starshuffle_wlmailtextlink_jan
