backtop

Software Windows XP SP3 Goes RTM
Brandon Hill (Blog) - April 21, 2008 1:19 PM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 119 comment(s) - last by jlips6.. on Apr 28 at 8:19 PM
Windows XP SP3 is finally finished

DailyTech reported last week that Service Pack 3 (SP3) for Windows XP would be released to manufacturing (RTM) on April 21. The initial reports from Neowin came true and Microsoft today officially announced SP3.

Microsoft's Chris Keroack posted the news in the TechNet Forums:

Today we are happy to announce that Windows XP Service Pack 3 (SP3) has released to manufacturing (RTM). Windows XP SP3 bits are now working their way through our manufacturing channels to be available to OEM and Enterprise customers.

We are also in the final stages of preparing for release to the web (i.e. you!) on April 29th, via Windows Update and the Microsoft Download Center. Online documentation for Windows XP SP3, such as Microsoft Knowledge Base articles and the Microsoft TechNet Windows XP TechCenter, will be updated then. For customers who use Windows XP at home, Windows XP SP3 Automatic Update distribution for users at home will begin in early summer.

Thanks to everyone here who installed the public betas -- you not only gave us detailed feedback but also helped each other out with timely troubleshooting. Through the beta program we found several important issues and were able to confirm some essential fixes. We couldn’t have done this without you.

We will still be monitoring this forum during the next few weeks in case you have more feedback about the release of Windows XP SP3.

Windows Connect and MSDN/TechNet Subscribers should be able to download soon. The public will have to wait until April 29, however, to download the update from the Microsoft Download Center and Windows Update.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
As someone posted in another thread....
By gaakf on 4/21/2008 2:11:37 PM , Rating: 3
It's amazing how every thread about Windows XP always starts out with a bash against Vista. For those who feel compelled to bash in future posts, please grow up. This is not a thread about Vista. Vista is not your only option after XP. And nobody is forcing you to upgrade.




RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By just4U on 4/21/2008 2:21:19 PM , Rating: 5
Most articles that have anything to do with XP will draw some feedback about it's eventual replacement. That's a given.

The way I see it, no one's pressured into buying the software but .. hey if your getting a new computer I'd recommend not shelling out money for xp .. just take the leap to the new OS. It might take a few days to get used to but in the long run, most should be glad they did.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By SilthDraeth on 4/22/2008 10:56:11 AM , Rating: 2
IF you buy a new computer with VISTA there is no reason to buy XP as the License explicitly allows you to install XP using the Vista license key.

So go ahead and use either OS.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By just4U on 4/22/2008 12:44:25 PM , Rating: 2
I was not aware of that. You mean you can switch back and forth at will? Or is there some restrictions to it?


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Mr Perfect on 4/22/2008 1:51:48 PM , Rating: 3
There are some restrictions. Microsoft has a document on it
here.

http://download.microsoft.com/download/d/2/3/d23b9...

This is probably the part you're interested in though.

quote:
Rights to OEM versions of systems software are granted in the OEM License Terms. The OEM License Terms for most OEM versions of systems software do not grant downgrade rights. The exception is the OEM License Terms for the Windows® XP Professional operating system and the Windows Vista™ Business and Windows Vista Ultimate operating systems, which grant downgrade rights. See the full text of the OEM License Terms for the specific downgrade rights.


By just4U on 4/22/2008 2:02:05 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks for the quick reply. :)


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By mmntech on 4/21/2008 3:22:07 PM , Rating: 3
Allow me to summarize your typical XP vs Vista thread...
Poster 1: Vista sux balz, XP FTW!
Poster 2: No, Vista is awesome! Best OS ever!
Poster 1: Now, Vista broken!
Poster 2: DX10 kicks @$$! XP is for losers.
Poster 3: Mac OS X sux
Poster 4: Yeah, Mac OS X is gay
Poster 5: Linux pwns all.


By ChronoReverse on 4/21/2008 3:34:12 PM , Rating: 2
I'd say most of the Vista users would say that Vista is pretty good and mostly better than XP rather than going off on the extremes you wrote there.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By jajig on 4/21/2008 3:55:58 PM , Rating: 4
pffft!! Xp is filled with bloatware 2000 FTW!


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By T4RTER S4UCE on 4/21/2008 5:09:22 PM , Rating: 4
2000 is way overpriced, Windows 3 forever!


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By GaryJohnson on 4/21/2008 9:48:28 PM , Rating: 4
OS/2 Warp > Windows 3


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By HVAC on 4/21/2008 10:00:32 PM , Rating: 3
I'll short circuit the downhill slide:

No OS ... write directly to the bare metal in assy ... FTW!!


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Jedi2155 on 4/21/2008 11:59:45 PM , Rating: 5
Wacha talkin' bout willis?

I'll be still crankin on my wooden abbacus long after gas is gone!


By anotherdude on 4/24/2008 9:07:58 AM , Rating: 4
I find new primes on my fingers everyday before breakfast


By Captain Orgazmo on 4/24/2008 5:42:18 PM , Rating: 1
Crankin' your abacus? Is that what they call it these days?


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By rupaniii on 4/21/2008 6:39:04 PM , Rating: 2
XP SP2 is very very much the second coming of 2KSP4.
No, Vista can run well, but, as a transitional operating system, it tries too much.
Microsoft should have installed XP and Vista in a dual boot.
The money is recovered, use XP as a good will tool.
New Programs: Vista all the way.
64Bit and loads of memory, Vista.
XP and Compatability - same hardware that makes vista run good XP runs like milk on.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Hexus on 4/22/2008 12:23:26 PM , Rating: 2
Although your going in the right direction. A dual boot wouldn't work. I had the same idea. Get the best of both. But Vista and XP didn't communicate well and corrupt the hell out of each other.


By jajig on 4/22/2008 4:16:33 PM , Rating: 2
Did you use different partitions?


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Pirks on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By darkpaw on 4/21/2008 5:19:41 PM , Rating: 2
Guess you missed the other thread where it was shown -

1) Percentage of increase is a bad measure, a small increase in a small number is a higher percentage then a small increase in a very large number.

2) The 3% growth in PCs was still many more total systems then the 30% growth in Apples.


By ChronoReverse on 4/21/2008 5:42:18 PM , Rating: 3
Indeed. This Dilbert comic illustrates: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2008-04-19/


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Pirks on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By omnicronx on 4/21/2008 7:36:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
He also confirm the belief that Macs are more expensive than equivalent PCs. However, he said that while consumers often believe they are around 20 to 30 per cent more expensive, they are actually more often 16 per cent more expensive for desktops and just nine per cent for laptops.
But your site also says this, I am sorry but this is obviously a bias article. What hardware are they comparing it too? I can find a laptop with the same specs for half the price, and PC hardware is even cheaper if you know where to find it.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Pirks on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By omnicronx on 4/22/2008 9:23:40 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You won't find 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo 2GB RAM 160GB HDD 13" laptop for $700 anywhere
Sure you can, it's called a sale, something Mac users would know little about. I picked up laptop for my sister last year for 800$ with the same specs as the macbook at that time. If you are willing to wait it out, and you know where to look, PC's are MUCH cheaper than Mac's, there is really no debating this.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Geektek3 on 4/22/2008 9:40:02 AM , Rating: 1
Having just gone to HP.com, I just built a DV6700Z with a 2.4GHz Turion 64 x2, 2 gigs, 160GB HDD and a 15.4" screen for $774. So I guess you are right, I couldn't build one with a 13" screen...


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Pirks on 4/22/08, Rating: 0
By jlips6 on 4/28/2008 8:19:56 PM , Rating: 1
really? I thought you left that forum after you decided to quit while you were behind but not too far behind.
A bigger screen is better. A 13" screen is puny, and it's keyboard space will be likely be uncomfortable unless you are under the age of 12. And I have no idea why you are pointing out the processors are the same and trying to say they are different. Yes they are made by different companies, no there is no spec difference despite your factless, linkless rant as to performance.


By winterspan on 4/21/2008 7:55:23 PM , Rating: 2
Is that supposed to take something away from Apple's phenomenal growth? And did you really need someone else to point out such obvious facts as "a small [unit] increase in a small [unit] number is a higher percentage increase than the same [unit] increase in a larger [unit] number" ?!?

other thoughts:

- Contrary to your ignorant blather, "percentage increase" is probably the most fundamental measure of growth used in economics.

- Your second "point" is irrelevant. I consistently see this fallacy in certain analysts' reports of Apple's success. I believe it is because it is difficult to obtain the sort of data that would actually make sense when reviewing there performance. What I'm talking about is how Apple's sales are looked at in the much greater context of generic OVERALL computer sales where you don't see proper product, market, and price-point segmentation.

Regarding the first major division in PC sales, "business" vs "consumer", Apple's desktop and laptop computers are not aimed towards general business use. Businesses of all sizes generally purchase cheap, no-frills, "utilitarian" beige-box PCs in bulk from suppliers like Dell and HP. Their focus is on low costs, expandability, and cheap maintenance and repair. Apple in fact, doesn't even offer a headless, expandable desktop. the iMac is definitely a consumer machine with it's built-in gloss display, web camera, and non-expandability. The Mac Pro on the other hand, is a professional DCC workstation, complete overkill for general business PC use.
A second major concern for businesses is how a major new computer purchase is going to affect the IT department, personnel training, etc. A new platform requires the IT staff to be able to cope with managing and maintaining new hardware equipment and a new software and operating system environment. This is in addition to all of the re-training and support required to move staff over to the new system.
Considering most businesses are conservative with new costs and especially risk, it's no surprise that adoption of Macs in the workplace is still fairly low, albeit growing.

In the consumer PC arena, retail prices are extremely important in buying decisions. The vast majority of PC purchases are made at levels far below the average selling price of a new iMac or Macbook Pro. Apple's products definitely command a premium, but the main reason their average selling price is much higher than generic PC manufacturers is because they target the mid to high-end of the market, and do not attempt to compete in the bargain basement segment that many PC manufacturers get most of their sales from.

For a *relevant* comparison and market-share study on Apple, I would love to see an analyst put together data taking into account these basic dynamics of the PC market, and not just lump all the data together. I assume this is not done because the data is not available publicly. If this were done, I would expect to see Apple's position even more favorable than it is reported now.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Major HooHaa on 4/21/2008 4:15:01 PM , Rating: 2
I welcome XP Service Pack 3, as the last time I re-installed Windows XP on my machine it then went and downloaded 81 updates, the first time I connected to the internet.

It will be nice to have a final Windows XP update.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By akugami on 4/21/2008 5:06:13 PM , Rating: 2
Do what I do, I have legit copies of Windows XP, including a legit VLK but I find it annoying to re-install XP all the time as well. Go on the torrent sites and look up a slipstreamed copy of XP. They usually are released monthly but I only download them about every three months or so.

I am not recommending you pirate XP, merely use the CD images floating around with XP updates already slipstreamed so that it saves you time. Use them with a legit XP key.

I'm awaiting the release of SP3 on Technet and will download it ASAP. It's good to have a legit CD image rather than the ones from the pirates.


By darkpaw on 4/22/2008 5:26:20 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds like a great way to get some malware too.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By HeelyJoe on 4/23/2008 3:55:11 PM , Rating: 4
Why don't you just make your own with nLite? It isn't very hard, and there are plenty of guides floating around.

If you do it yourself, you won't have to worry about spyware, and you can slipstream your drivers into the disk too, so you don't have to install those when you first boot Windows.


By kzrssk on 4/24/2008 3:42:51 PM , Rating: 2
The only problem I have with nLite is that installations prepared with it don't let me connect my Zen Vision:M for some reason. No matter what I do I can't get it to be recognized by an nLited XP. I plug it into my girl's computer (running straight XP Home) and it works fine.


By sprockkets on 4/21/2008 8:51:44 PM , Rating: 2
On my current test of Vista, I found turning off the Superfetch service stops the stupid OS from churning the HDD all the time. YES, we know after awhile that it does stop, but:

Time superfetch spends making computer faster > Time it saves by not running.

Now, except for it taking more time to load its extra features, it behaves more like XP. And I found the hidden audio device (why do you have to hide it in the first place is lame).

Still, not being able to use different languages unless you have business or enterprise or ultimate sucks.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By Shark Tek on 4/22/2008 3:38:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And nobody is forcing you to upgrade.


Are you sure about that ?

What about Halo 2, Gears of War, Direct X 10, etc.

Did you read what the package says "Vista only"?

Note: I know that some Vista only titles can be run on XP with hacks but the truth is that they are forcing you to upgrade.


RE: As someone posted in another thread....
By rdeegvainl on 4/23/2008 3:19:34 PM , Rating: 1
Wait what?
Are you seriously insinuating that people MUST have Halo 2, that they MUST have Gears of War? They are in no way examples of being forced to upgrade anymore than Microsoft not putting them out for windows 3.1 and 95. Even if they weren't available on the XBOX, and 360, you still aren't stopped from using software you already have.


By clovell on 4/23/2008 5:20:44 PM , Rating: 2
If porting a game that ran on a modified version of DirectX 8 and requiring it to be run on an OS with DX 10 isn't a force, I'd be surprised to hear what actually is.


By kzrsoze on 4/23/2008 3:36:58 PM , Rating: 1
Both Vista and XP are lame. Windows ME is where it's at. ;)


Thank god
By PICBoy on 4/21/2008 2:15:15 PM , Rating: 2
Finally! I was begining to think it was going to take forever. I hope the waiting was worth it. I spect Anandtech to do some reviews about it and see any performance improvements (even 5% is good!).
I still don't like the idea of switching to Vista, the bad news is that eventually I have to if I want to enjoy DX10. Now THAT sucks.




RE: Thank god
By just4U on 4/21/2008 2:23:36 PM , Rating: 2
I am rather curious as to what it's bringing to the table to.. Will it just be wrapped up updates? Performance increases? Better security? What?!

I don't have XP on my machines anymore but I have to do lots of troubleshooting on others so yeah.. I want to see it.


RE: Thank god
By daftrok on 4/21/08, Rating: 0
RE: Thank god
By ChronoReverse on 4/21/2008 5:04:36 PM , Rating: 3
Since all versions of Vista can have Aero Glass turned off, video card compatibility doesn't play into this.


RE: Thank god
By PICBoy on 4/21/2008 5:27:51 PM , Rating: 2
But money does and paying more for something not useful enough is bad in my book. Hell, I rather buy 100 donuts than paying for a 3D cascade or other crapy animations!


RE: Thank god
By ChronoReverse on 4/21/2008 5:43:32 PM , Rating: 3
That's not what Aero Glass is only about though. It's also about offloading work from the CPU and allowing windowed 3D applications to be more seamless.

Besides, you can get a copy of Home Premium for $120.


RE: Thank god
By majorpain on 4/22/2008 11:47:42 AM , Rating: 2
ever heard of Compiz-fusion with Linux? Looks and works alot better than aero crap. And btw, you can get a copy of it for free!
:D


RE: Thank god
By ChronoReverse on 4/23/2008 11:06:50 AM , Rating: 2
Does it run on Windows XP? No? Well go away then.


RE: Thank god
By rupaniii on 4/21/2008 6:42:18 PM , Rating: 3
I'm holding out until Windows 7. Why? My web design stuff is all open source as is my test server and my big number crunching 8GB Quad Core server running folding at home.
Yeah, I can game fine on my XP gaming machine, and my PS3.
When Windows 7 comes out, is hardly compatable with anything, and just moves forward, I can feel more comfortable with it.


RE: Thank god
By omnicronx on 4/21/2008 7:40:02 PM , Rating: 3
linux?


RE: Thank god
By ChronoReverse on 4/23/2008 11:07:11 AM , Rating: 2
Sounds like your really should be using Linux then.


New Features of SP3
By callmeroy on 4/21/2008 2:37:12 PM , Rating: 5
**New Functionality included in SP3**
(source URL: http://download.microsoft.com/download/c/d/8/cd8cc...

Networking
Black hole router detection
Improves black hole router detection (detecting routers that are silently discarding packets). This detection is turned on by default.

Networking
Network Access Protection
Allows you to better protect network assets by enforcing compliance with system health requirements. For more information about Network Access Protection, see http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=110597.

Security
Credentials security service provider
Allows forward compatibility with Windows Vista® and Windows Server® 2008, And enables applications to delegate user credentials from the client to the target server. This security service provider is available through the security service provider interface, and it is used by Remote Desktop Protocol 6.0.

Security
Descriptive security options control panel
Offers more descriptive text to explain the settings and prevent incorrect configuration of settings.

Security
Enhanced security for Administrator and Service policy entries
Presents Administrators and Service entries (in System Center Essentials) by default on new policy instances. Additionally, a user will not be able to remove the setting in the UI for the "Impersonate Client After Authentication" user right.

Security
Microsoft Kernel Mode Cryptographic Module
Implements and supports the SHA2 hashing algorithms (SHA256, SHA384, and SHA512) in X.509 certificate validation.

The Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 140-1 standard has been replaced by FIPS 140-2, and these modules have been validated and certified according to this standard.

Setup
Windows Product Activation
Allows users to complete their software setup without having to provide a product key.




RE: New Features of SP3
By kzrssk on 4/21/2008 4:39:14 PM , Rating: 2
I keep wondering what benefit not having to enter your key during setup will have. When you install Windows, you are either there or not, as in, you either installed it unattended, or you're sitting there through most of the process, inputting data when needed. Moving the product key step to the end doesn't really change much that I can see for either case.


RE: New Features of SP3
By ThePooBurner on 4/21/2008 7:50:54 PM , Rating: 2
If you wait till the end it might effect the ability to counter activation hacks and prevent some of them. One thought that comes to my mind anyway.


RE: New Features of SP3
By sprockkets on 4/21/2008 8:33:48 PM , Rating: 2
It mirrors how vista does it, that is all.


INCORRECT
By hajj on 4/21/2008 1:57:48 PM , Rating: 2
im sorry but it doesnt say it will be released today for msdn/technet people.

"Q: Has Sp3 been released for msdn subscribers?"

"A: MSDN/Technet - Not yet. This will be available within the next month."




MSDN and XP SP3
By bertomatic on 4/23/2008 12:45:18 PM , Rating: 2
So, I went to MSDN with IE7 to get SP3. They changed the whole site, again. Navigating is now twice as painful as before and completely fails some of the time. It forces you to install and use the lousy download manager software from Akamai Technologies. The download fails to start, resulting in "error".

The SP download works just fine in Opera but fails in IE7, go figure? Another MSDN foulup.




Good news for Microsoft
By cyyc009 on 4/21/08, Rating: 0
In other developments
By isorfir on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: In other developments
By Joz on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
Yeah SP3...
By StillPimpin on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: Yeah SP3...
By JonnyBlaze on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: Yeah SP3...
By StillPimpin on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: Yeah SP3...
By MrBungle123 on 4/21/2008 5:33:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
what does Vista do that XP can't.


Take up 10 gigs of HD space?


RE: Yeah SP3...
By omnicronx on 4/22/2008 12:20:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Exactly, because no business in their right mind would trust their mission critical data
no business in their right mind would trust them mission critical data to XP ;) Vista is a workstation os not a server os, I don't understand what all the fuss is about. The OS accessing your mission critical data should not matter, and if it does, your business is in trouble.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By omnicronx on 4/22/2008 12:21:21 AM , Rating: 4
And regardless of speed, and all that other jargin about Vista going around, Vista is more secure than XP, thats for sure.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By 325hhee on 4/21/2008 1:53:15 PM , Rating: 1
Too bad XP, and SP3 or 4 if they ever make one will never support DX10. I still love my Vista build over XP, the memory is allocated and use more efficiently, the bugs have been fixed, and just turn off Aero and that damn security thing, you'll be fine.

Now lets see what SP3 really offers. I never did the beta or dl the preview release, but from what I gather, it's nothing really wow about it, just about time.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Spivonious on 4/21/2008 1:57:25 PM , Rating: 5
Full-screen applications (i.e. games) turn off Aero automatically, so turning it off makes absolutely no difference in game performance.

If Aero causes your desktop experience to be sluggish, then I suggest upgrading your PC.

UAC is annoying while configuring the machine, but next to silent under normal use.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By ChronoReverse on 4/21/2008 2:17:44 PM , Rating: 2
Aero doesn't lag the machine with my GMA950 (minimum level for Aero). I can't imagine any other card that supports it lagging normal usage.

Unless you like to use Flip3D...


RE: Yeah SP3...
By 325hhee on 4/21/2008 3:20:47 PM , Rating: 1
I just personally hate the Aero interface, it annoys me. It's not functional for the way I use my computer. Rolodex is not something I like to play around with.

I also don't like tabs on, I turn those things off in Firefox, IE, etc.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By ChronoReverse on 4/21/2008 3:35:26 PM , Rating: 4
What on earth do you mean? Flip3D isn't Aero.

Most of the time, Aero is just another skin over the standard
Windows appearance. Except it's accelerated by the GPU and doesn't waste CPU cycles.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Captain Orgazmo on 4/24/2008 5:59:28 PM , Rating: 1
Flip3D requires Aero to be on, as it is part of the 3D Desktop Window Manager layer. When Aero is activated, all on-screen and off-screen surfaces are rendered by the GPU, which allows the live thumbnails in the task switcher, when you hover over taskbar tabs, and in Flip3D. Besides the eye-candy, it allows a more responsive GUI as desktop rendering isn't slowed when the CPU and main memory are busy.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By vdig on 4/21/2008 2:33:17 PM , Rating: 2
At first, I did not like the fact that Vista requires more memory than XP does, and that gaming fps performance is generally weaker on Vista.

That negative opinion went right out the window when my graphics driver crashed - instead of a BSOD as per XP, I got a one second blank screen, followed by the game returning to the screen and working flawlessly for the rest of the night. The OS told me the graphic driver crashed and restarted, then faded away so that I could continue doing whatever. That was very pleasant. Less BSOD crashes means I'm a happy gamer.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By jay401 on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: Yeah SP3...
By ChronoReverse on 4/21/2008 3:36:14 PM , Rating: 2
And it's the same with Vista. Except you have the added bonus of not losing all your work with a BSOD. It simply tells you that there was a problem (and maybe you should fix it).


RE: Yeah SP3...
By FITCamaro on 4/21/2008 4:14:26 PM , Rating: 2
Yes but driver hiccups happen. Or they're just plain bugged. Nothing Microsoft can do to control it since they don't write the driver. But would you rather have the machine crash or it reset the driver and you can continue working until you fix it?


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Locutus465 on 4/21/2008 4:18:47 PM , Rating: 5
Actually... It is encouraging that Vista can survive driver screw ups (yay user mode drivers)... I'm sorry, but I'd 1000x rather temporarly lose a HW device, be able to save my work etc and reboot cleanly (or whatever must be done to fix the problem) than have windows blue screen on me.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By ATWindsor on 4/21/2008 3:20:46 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't seem to work that way in my dual-monitor-setup. Persformance is pretty bad, and Aero is on during gaming. Frankly, even when just using the desktop it seems to lag sometimes. Maybe 128 MB isnt enough video-memory for to high-res-screens on Vista? (I have a 6600GT)


RE: Yeah SP3...
By ChronoReverse on 4/21/2008 3:38:02 PM , Rating: 2
Which driver set are you using? There was no perceivable lag (outside of Flip3D) with my old 9600SE before I upgraded to my 3850.

Aero the _theme_ is still on during gaming, but the 3D portion (Aero Glass) is turned off. It looks mostly identical.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By ATWindsor on 4/21/2008 3:53:24 PM , Rating: 2
Might be the case, i have turned of transparency of windows as I dont like it, so the diffrence between Aero glass and Aero Theme might be small. I have tried a good deal fo diffrent drives, for the moment I use the newest one at the date I downloaded the last time, a month or so ago. It even mentions some problems with this (the lagging) in the performance-monitor.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Locutus465 on 4/21/2008 3:42:50 PM , Rating: 2
I find it odd that your vista install isn't disabling Aero when games are launched (speaking of course of your typical directx FPS/RTS type game). On my system I would notice vista re-enabling Aero after exiting a game on my old 7800GT and the same thing happening with my current Radeon 3870. I only run one monitor though.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Noliving on 4/21/2008 4:55:51 PM , Rating: 2
Aero turns off when you launch a game. What evidence do you have that aero doesn't turn off?

The reason why your desktop lags is because like you said you only have a 128mb video card. The higher the resolution the more video memory you need to run aero. Get a 256mb video card or a 512 and that will take care of your desktop performance issue.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By ATWindsor on 4/22/2008 1:39:34 AM , Rating: 2
Might be, I think id rather go back to XP during the next reinstall. I find it abit over the top that a pretty decent card like the 6600GT isn't enough to drive two monitors. Vista has been a bit disappointing anyway. Not because its particualry bad, but its just not particualry good either, the improvments over XP are small, and the biggest annoyances (for me) about XP remains unfixed.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Araemo on 4/21/2008 4:44:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Full-screen applications (i.e. games) turn off Aero automatically, so turning it off makes absolutely no difference in game performance.

Are you positive about that?

If true, that is exceedingly disappointing to me.

I had hoped that aero would allow Vista machines to alt-tab out of games very quickly, as well as being able to render older 3d games at, say, 640x480, but then apply 'software'(hardware-accelerated via aero) scaling to fill my monitor's native resolution, so that my second monitor doesn't get partially covered with my first monitor's desktop every time I run starcraft.

Just a couple ideas, though.. hopefully someone from MS is listening.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Noliving on 4/21/2008 4:59:59 PM , Rating: 2
Actually google that. you might be able to do that if you run it in window mode.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By ChronoReverse on 4/21/2008 5:03:18 PM , Rating: 2
Well, Vista can't ignore the requests that the old games made on the system so that's not really an option (the second part).

As for the alt-tab part, I play TF2 in a window instead of full screen and the performance drop is minimal-to-nonexistent even though Aero Glass stays on. It's interesting how the ATI driver is smart enough to catch when I alt-tab out though; the framerate drops immediately when TF2 loses focus.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Locutus465 on 4/21/2008 2:00:34 PM , Rating: 2
Honestly all the hate for vista really does confuse me... To be perfectly honest it's a stable OS that has survived a lot of (stupid) punishment I've thrown at it... Hell, on that laptop I'm typing on right now I did a full upgrade install from 32b home premium to 32b unltimate and it was one happy camper. Any other version of windows I've ever tried *ANY FORM* of upgrade install on barfed all over the place. Note, I'm not talking anytime upgrade, I'm talking *FULL UPGRADE INSTALL* (short version, I have an MSDN sub and used my key from that which is not anytime compatible).

Vista has the looks, it's got a lot of nice touches that make it much easier to work with in a home and business environment (hello windows search) that XP can't fully replicate and admittingly after several compatibility updates and driver releases it perfectly supports every game I care to play.

Tomorrow (or tonight if i'm very lucky) I'm going to pushish my desktop in ways that I haven't dared for years. After already switching out my sound and video card I'm going to be switching out my motherboard from an s939 nvidia based asus bord to a S AM2+ AMD board with a Phenom CPU... Not sure what the results will be but given my experience with vista so far I'm actually fairly hopeful that the worst of it will be having to reactivate. I'll report back the results assuming this thread is still up here in a day or two.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By fxyefx on 4/21/2008 2:14:19 PM , Rating: 2
It seems like for every story I hear or read of a relatively flawless windows vista experience, there's at least one story of a terrible experience. I guess the real question is whether or not upgrading to vista is worth the effort and money (assuming you're running xp right now). What does vista do to significantly change your computer usage? Do those superficial changes actually result in more productivity or new functionality?


RE: Yeah SP3...
By MattCoz on 4/21/2008 2:36:02 PM , Rating: 3
And 90% of those terrible experiences are driver problems. This is nothing different than what happened with XP. But I agree that there really isn't a huge reason to upgrade. In my opinion it is a much more pleasant experience than XP, but a lot of people aren't willing to go through any kind of transition period.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Ratinator on 4/21/2008 2:39:28 PM , Rating: 3
Also remember that most people post to bitch, so by default you will typically get more people complaining about something on a forum like this compared to the many thousands who don't have a problem and don't say anything.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Locutus465 on 4/21/2008 2:40:23 PM , Rating: 2
Well, one thing to keep in mind is that more so that previous versions of Windows Vista does like (and to some extent require) a little bit better build than you typically got out of a XP era budget. So what kind of computer you're running will determain whether or not it's worth installing vista.

That said, it doesn't take a beast to run vista, my laptop is very basic and has no problems. My current desktop eats up vista's advanced graphics which is

AMD Athlon64 X2 3800+
AMD Radeon 3870 (recently upgraded from Geforce 7800GT)
2GB Memory.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Moishe on 4/21/2008 3:49:05 PM , Rating: 2
how is that Radeon 3870 compared to the 7800? and what kind of games do you play?


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Locutus465 on 4/21/2008 3:56:23 PM , Rating: 2
Well, in quake 4 and doom 3 I still play at my LCD's native resolution (1280x1024)... However I now run both on ultra quality, quake 4 has 16x FSAA enabled and doom 3 now has 8x FSAA enabled (for some reason enabling 16x on latest patch forces 640x480). In both cases the games run at between 10 and 15FPS faster than they did with lower quality settings on the 7800GT.

Crysis (beta demo) I now play at my LCD's native resolution with generally smooth game play (occationally it will get stuck, I think this might be a beta code issue though). Previously crysis would only just barely run 1024x768 and it was not an enjoyable experience.

I've got WoW and AOE III both completely maxed out, while I don't know how to check the FPS in either game I can tell you both run much more smoothly than they would with all the bells and whistles turned out (though the 7800GT could play WoW smoothly with most turned on anyway).

I plan on testing out Oblivion and FEAR later on...


RE: Yeah SP3...
By ThePooBurner on 4/21/2008 7:58:04 PM , Rating: 2
ctrl+shift+z is the binding to turn on FPS view in WoW as far as i know. That is what it is on mine, but i don't remember if i set that binding or not. Either way, just go to the key bindings. It's in there.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Locutus465 on 4/22/2008 9:47:18 AM , Rating: 2
Thanks, I might give that a try... Though it wouldn't be a very good basis for comparison since I never got the FPS off of WoW before upgrading video cards. Doom and quake are really the only ones I have hard numbers from.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Locutus465 on 4/21/2008 3:02:40 PM , Rating: 3
Oh forgot the functionality aspect...

I'm loving windows search and it's integration into the shell for starters. It may sound insigificant (it would have to me actually) but once you use it it's hard to imagin using windows with out it there. One such example is integration of windows search into the control pannel. Rather than having to dig through the control pannel looking for the right place to access, say indexing options I can actually just type indexing into the search box in the control pannel and it will pull up the item I'm looking for.

I'm a webdeveloper so for me the ability to run multiple websites is a god send.

I do appriciate good visuals and design there for I love aero.

A generally more logical layout regarding resource monitering utilities is appriciated, for instance you can access the system resource monitor from the task bar.

I like that vista has finally implemented a better system for running a user account in limited privileges mode and allowing higher privileges only when prompted. The system does need some work (every installer shouldn't be tripping UAC) but it's great to see that in windows and frankly once the security mentality at MS shifts back to center more a service pack can take care of UAC's short comings.

In my experience vista is much smarter about handling environments where the number of monitors are variable... i.e. when I use my laptop at home I just use it with the laptop screen alone, at work I plug in a secondary LCD. Vista is smart enough to not orphan windows off screen when you unplug monitor number to (only exception I've found are trillian chat windows can sometimes be orphaned, that's it).

It took some getting used to, but I now much prefer Vista's handling of the start menu programs list. Keeping it contained entirly with in the confines of the start menu really helps reduce the number of issues I've had in the past with finding the right app to run.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By kkwst2 on 4/21/2008 3:19:46 PM , Rating: 2
I like Vista, but my recommendation would be to wait until you do a system upgrade before getting Vista. For me, everytime I upgrade it takes me weeks to months to get everything back/tweaked the way I like it. For me, there's nothing compelling enough about Vista to warrant upgrading. Maybe if you've got a 360 and want to use it as a media extender. It's much more slick and powerful under Vista.

If you're building or buying a new system, I would generally recommend Vista without hesitation.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By just4U on 4/21/2008 2:16:14 PM , Rating: 2
I am in agreement that Vista is better overall atleast with new machines that have been configured correctly to run with it. But I do understand how others can still be leary...

Early Adopter's usually fill in others about it, and since many initially didn't have the greatest of experiences it tended to get a bit of a bad rep and a higher reluctance to move over. Also we've never been in a situation like this before (that I know of) with such a mature OS (in XP) and alot won't want to leave that fold after becoming used to it.

Now I think most can make the jump on new desktop machines. Laptops are another story and that really depends on Dell/HP/Toshiba ect to make sure that users have a enjoyable experience. They can't cut certain corners or people will continue to complain how it's not as good as XP.


RE: Yeah SP3...
By Locutus465 on 4/22/2008 9:34:07 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I said I'd report back after the motherboard install and I'm pleased to inform everyone here that I'm typing on the upgraded desktop... So yeah, I just went from a s939 nvidia based system to an AM2+ quad phenom with out reinstalling vista and everything is AOK... I wouldn't have even tried previously.


SP3 supports DX10.1
By StillPimpin on 4/21/08, Rating: -1
RE: SP3 supports DX10.1
By FITCamaro on 4/21/2008 4:10:14 PM , Rating: 2
And what exactly makes you believe this?


RE: SP3 supports DX10.1
By PICBoy on 4/21/2008 5:30:55 PM , Rating: 2
LOL! I wish that was true.
I wouldn't be the end of Vista but sure as hell wouldn't make me worry about having to switch.


RE: SP3 supports DX10.1
By ThePooBurner on 4/21/2008 7:59:36 PM , Rating: 5
You, sir, are full of crap.


RE: SP3 supports DX10.1
By Locutus465 on 4/22/2008 9:53:08 AM , Rating: 2
did a quick search on live and there is no official support for dx10.1 which is exactly what I was thinking... I guess there's a 19 year old kid who wrote something that offers some support but I guess it's buggy. At any rate, dx10 isn't that important to gaming yet so it's not the life or death of vista. Vista is a nice OS if you take the time to actually use it rather than read some negative press and decide you hate it.


For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By TheJian on 4/22/08, Rating: -1
RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By Pezman37 on 4/22/2008 4:23:16 AM , Rating: 2
I'm hardly compelled by this "proof." Bablefish needs a l33t speak translator, or maybe something that puts it so there's no caps every 5th word.


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By Belard on 4/22/2008 8:54:13 AM , Rating: 2
It is generally known across the board that most games RUNS SLOWER in VISTA. Coping FILES on a computer is SLOWER in VISTA. Unzipping files is WAY WAY SLOWER in VISTA. Booting up or shutting down is SLOWER in VISTA.

The ability to download porn is SLOWER in VISTA.

XP offered a lot of new and important things over Windows98... It cant be said about Vista, after 7 years of WindowsXP. It brings nothing to the table that XP can't do - other than the locked out DX10. Which will be LESS important anyways because of how newer ATI/Nvidia cards are being developed that bypass DX all together.


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By TheJian on 4/23/2008 4:41:38 PM , Rating: 2
Your comment makes no sense, as is usually the case when someone mounts an evidence attack on Vista. The best you get is junk like your post. No arguments with the data, just crap about my txt...ROFL.


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By clovell on 4/23/2008 5:51:54 PM , Rating: 2
If you can't be bothered to type a technical arguement out in coherent English, don't expect people to be bothered to take it seriously. It makes perfect sense.


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By Noliving on 4/24/2008 3:21:02 AM , Rating: 2
There are some problems though, first off the test is on a 9800gx2, which is a sli card. SLi on vista along with crossfire still has yet to be done effectively in terms of drivers for vista. Another problem is that the article is dated in mid march, new drivers have already been released since then. If you want a more fair benchmark look at recent benchmarks that just came out and use 9800gtx or any other non sli/crossfire cards and you would be surprised that the performance is litterally the same in all games.

Case in point would be even on xp for the longest time running an sli setup of gx2 cards actually resulted in worse performance for a game vs. one gx2.


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By darkpaw on 4/22/2008 8:42:10 AM , Rating: 3
WTF does it matter if you lose a few frames when you're already getting 100+ FPS??

If it's playable, it's good. All of those are very playable. The WIC mins just scrape the edge of unplayablity, but the averages are just fine.


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By callmeroy on 4/22/2008 10:32:12 AM , Rating: 3
As a gamer of (wow this sad - I'm getting old) -- 26 years starting back in the Adam/Vic-20 days through to today (and a custom PC builder the whole time who loves putting together gaming boxes - but only for myself these days) I can agree with you are saying here.

I find it almost laughable -- once you hit a certain sweet spot, you'll be hard pressed to find anyone who can convince me they can notice a significant difference in game performance - you'd have to have a very well trained eye to notice subtle differences over a specific point.

Also -- don't confuse latency with FPS -- people do that all too often...latency and FPS each work hand in hand of course - but they are still not the same thing.

I will say it does vary on the type of game , some games do require higher FPS for a smooth and enjoyable experience more than others do.

For instance an MMO - EverQuest, WoW - you can get away with nearly anything that is at least 50 fps, beyond that is just gravy.

An FPS is very fast moving, very high paced and there is a lot going on on the screen -- so 60 fps I'd say is the sweet spot there.

Flight Sims are probably the most brutal of all -- you need no LESS than 60 fps to really enjoy a good "dog fight".

Once you get into 70, 80 and beyond FPS -- I think its more perception of performance than realized performance.

People are thinking the 80 fps is making everything really smooth looking and awesome -- when I'd argue you'd get that at even 60 fps -- but rather what's doing it is the raw power of your graphic card ( a huge bit being the memory of it).


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By Locutus465 on 4/22/2008 10:39:37 AM , Rating: 1
hey now, I'm 30 in a few short days!! :(

Anyway, agreed which is why I'm cranking up all the graphics options with my new system... Why bother with gaming at 100FPS with limited detail if you can crank up the details, get a much better image and still be hovering between 50 and 60 FPS minimum?


By BoxCutterLou on 4/25/2008 4:16:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Anyway, agreed which is why I'm cranking up all the graphics options with my new system... Why bother with gaming at 100FPS with limited detail
Anyway, agreed which is why I'm cranking up all the graphics options with my new system... Why bother with gaming at 100FPS with limited detail

Man, I had all settings on High in HL2 on a integrated ati 200 chip. I played that entire game like that. I got like 7-15fps. I'm not kidding. I was then force to buy the top of the line at the time (x1900xtx) because I never wanted to go through that again. Becareful


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By just4U on 4/27/2008 3:12:52 PM , Rating: 2
Gamer's come in all ages. I know some in their 50s... and hmmm come to think of it atleast 1 that's pushing 60. I just "dinged" (heh) 39 myself.

I tell you tho, when I was a boy I used to visit old folks homes to visit relatives. You seen several elderly people just sitting there in a chair looking sad and bored... Years later I think, Damn... "GAMING"(?) When im in my 70s im soo going to be into that! Gives me something fun and interesting to do when I am probably not going to be able to do much else.

So hell yeah! Gaming for all ages!!


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By Belard on 4/22/2008 1:49:04 PM , Rating: 2
When comparing in WIC - 45fps (visa) and 56fps (XP) - that is a severe difference.

Nice to be selective... ;)

DX10 is supposed to be faster... a lot faster. Its not. Earth shatter graphics, not much better than DX9. Not worth the head ache.


By Locutus465 on 4/22/2008 3:22:27 PM , Rating: 2
There's a big difference using the different engines in crysis which was actually programed for x10 (regardless of how good the game as a whole is). While the game isn't my fav I do have to admit graphically it beats just about everything else on the market.

Just out of curiosity were those frame rates measured with relivent (i.e. fairly recent) drivers? The situation with vista has improved dramatically in recent months, though I would still say that XP is generally a bit faster.


RE: For all the VISTA LOVERS...LOL
By TheJian on 4/23/2008 5:14:21 PM , Rating: 2
So you have the system they tested on? Don't forget it was a 9800GX2 ($550 thats a dual card you know) thats currently top of the line, with a Quadcore cpu and they heavily overclocked both to get those frame rates. So if you're running a 8800GT you can consider those fps numbers cut by a LOT. Down at those levels 30% can be the difference between having fun and watching slide shows. They also didn't have every detail setting turned on, which I'd obviously do until I got to a fps that was unplayable. Also you're missing the point. This years crop of games will require more power (and so will the next crop etc), would you rather be the guy with 30% less performance when that happens? Just knowing games will NOT get any easier on my system in the future makes me love XP even more. I just got 30% for free buy avoiding Vista (even though I have it (both), I'm just pointing out Vista vs XP is a no brainer performance wise). It matters that I'll last for 30% longer than you if I run XP and you run Vista. Are you still buying AMD chips (I used to)? I'll take faster even if I can't see it today. Eventually I'll be glad it's there. Most people don't have Quads running at 3.7ghz and 9800GX2's running overclocked. So the point here is the HIT you take running vista, not the super killer frame rates they got. Go to tomshardware.com's site and look at the video card charts. Then knock 30%off and tell me you still like what you see on most cards. DirectX 10 makes the games even slower. NONE run faster. Period. So I think you should rethink what you said. Also in multiplayer your fps can drop like a rock if a lot of people are in the game.


By majorpain on 4/22/2008 12:13:26 PM , Rating: 1
that was really usefull. read some of the links in the original post and finally i got surprised with Vista, and i dont mean it in a good way! Seems Ubuntu is getting its space in UE and all over. Im using kubuntu here at work for the last 8-9 months and i dont plan to change it unless its a new rlz of kubuntu. Still use XP at home to play games and nothing more.
Cheers!


"This is from the DailyTech.com. It's a science website." -- Rush Limbaugh

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments









botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki