backtop

Software Windows XP SP3 Specifics Revealed
Brandon Hill (Blog) - October 9, 2007 11:14 AM
Print 140 comment(s) - last by murphyslabrat.. on Oct 15 at 12:56 PM
NeoSmart goes over SP3's new features

News on Microsoft's aging Windows XP operating system has surprisingly been coming in at a steady pace over the past few weeks. Although Windows Vista is Microsoft's current bread-and-butter consumer operating system, there is still much love to go around for Windows XP.

In late September, DailyTech reported that Microsoft is providing XP downgrades for unhappy Vista customers. Microsoft followed up on that news a few days later with the announcement that Windows XP sales would be extended to June 30, 2008.

The company followed up with a new build of Internet Explorer 7.0 for Windows XP that doesn't require product activation and released a Service Pack 3 (SP3) beta for a select group of testers.

The latest SP3 beta is labeled as build 3205 and is a rather small 334.92 MB download. The bloggers over at NeoSmart have gotten a hold of the new SP3 release and have detailed many of the new features and bugfixes with the software update.

According to NeoSmart, SP3 contains 1,073 hotfixes and patches; 114 of which are security related. SP3 also adds four major features to the Windows XP operating systems.

The first is a new activation scheme which will not require a product key during installation. The second feature is a new Network Access Protection Module first featured in Windows Vista. Other new items include a Microsoft Kernel Mode Cryptographics Module and a Black Hole Router detection algorithm.

The release of SP3 coupled with the announcement that XP will be available to businesses and consumers for a longer period of time could breathe new life into the venerable operating system. Many gamers have stuck by the operating system and OEMs like HP and Dell still offer XP on brand new systems.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
now all we need...
By Gul Westfale on 10/9/2007 11:25:58 AM , Rating: 2
... is DX10 under XP and i will never "upgrade" to vista, if upgrade is the right word. i know, i know, it'll never happen, but one can dream...




RE: now all we need...
By MatthewAC on 10/9/2007 11:44:04 AM , Rating: 1
I have Vista, haven't looked back at XP, using 5 year old OSes isn't so much fun...


RE: now all we need...
By phusg on 10/9/2007 12:37:57 PM , Rating: 5
Hmmm. To me an OS is only as old as the time since the latest update. An upcoming SP3 shows that XP is still alive and kicking (and current).


RE: now all we need...
By Arribajuan on 10/9/2007 1:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
Not quite,

Xp's design and architecture is several years old and then has been "upgraded" or patched to adapt to the new market and technological needs.

Even if an "update" is scheduled for tomorrow, the design and core architecture is really old.

If for some reason you don't like vista you will remain with an old OS or jump ship to mac, Linux or whatever and get screwed in different ways (since as much as they are better in some areas, they are not perfect)


RE: now all we need...
By slickr on 10/10/07, Rating: -1
RE: now all we need...
By MGSsancho on 10/10/2007 2:04:27 AM , Rating: 2
im looking for a single statement correct about your post. well this is correct
quote:
But then again in will be 2 years since DX10 is widly addopted.
Im not so sure about the sales of vista vs. xp. tho im sick and im tired. dont feel like writing an essay on the indifferences between XP and vista. they are totally different. not the the UI. but the core everything. oh, is XP able to change audio and video driers with our rebooting? (control panel > system > device manager > properties on a device > driver > roll back driver). also since all the mem in vista is virtualized, vista can just move video mem to main mem, and swap the driver, reboot the video card, then move back the video info back onto the video card it self. granted the screen blanks out for a few secs. oh in vista drivers are in use mode. vista can better emulate older versions of windows. lets see, oh new task manager owns. thanks mike rusnivich (sorry i cant spell it). new disk partitioner is more useful along with the new firewall. starting to rival sygate (still brings tears that symantic bought them out.)

anyways those are just a few differences. I don't feel like insulting you on your ignorance in operating systems and how computers work. nor do i feel like getting any links to back up my statements. i only posted personal experiences. any other features could easily be looked up so i did not bother with them. yeah im lazy i admit it. oh and if you really know what DX10 was, and understood it, you would see why it would almost be very difficult to get it working on XP with out problems. oh well maybe im just cranky and maybe i should not be feeding trolls.


RE: now all we need...
By mathew7 on 10/10/2007 3:51:58 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, it has many core changes, but that's exactly why bussines users won't switch now. By changing all that, they break compatibility with existing applications (I'm talking about application which only they have, for which they paid big bucks to have them).
Also, I personaly don't like the services which start by default. As I recall I had 800MB of RAM used after boot-up (out of which 300MB was due to Aero). XP I think is starts with about 200MB, but by disabling unnecessary services, I got it to around 80MB.
And Vista had a big sales grow only because of OEM sales. But that is going to change as XP is comming back as an option.
My conclusion over the last years is that it's a conspiracy to compensate bad code with fast HW (or should I say fast HW tolerates bad code). I'm sick and tired of the "anybody can be a programmer" idea that MS seems to support. What happened when you could actually choose what to install with an OS?


RE: now all we need...
By Xerstead on 10/14/2007 1:53:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:

Also, I personaly don't like the services which start by default. As I recall I had 800MB of RAM used after boot-up

If you don't like the 'SuperFetch' feature Turn It Off!
Yes, XP can be trimmed down to run without using much RAM. But that just leaves the rest of it sitting there doing nothing. Vista pre-loads your most frequently used programs into your spare RAM so it can load them quicker when you do open them. If the RAM is needed by another program its freed up for immediate use.


RE: now all we need...
By cbo on 10/10/2007 11:55:16 AM , Rating: 2
On the sygate note I was a fan also. At my last gig we use sygate's SEP


RE: now all we need...
By mars777 on 10/10/2007 2:44:26 PM , Rating: 2
Actually he got it pretty close, he only forgot to say that they added a "please enter your password" when you do administrative things.

The rest of added futures are not so useful to bargain so much ram memory for them (without going into the stability /performance area).

Maybe the SP will help. As we all know Xp was crap until SP1 + a few more automatic updates, or better say Sp2.


RE: now all we need...
By GotDiesel on 10/9/07, Rating: 0
RE: now all we need...
By Flunk on 10/9/2007 1:32:58 PM , Rating: 1
bool LinuxExperience(Userlevel L, bool Gamer)
{
switch (L)

case Userlevel.Low:
throw new Exception "User cannot login, does not understand."

case Userlevel.Mid:
throw new Exception "User is confused by interface."

case Userlevel.High:
throw new Exception "User is confused by lack of GUI controls for applications. What is a terminal?"

case Userlevel.Enthusiast:

if (Gamer == false)
return true;

return false;

default:
return false;
}

Anyone who uses Linux should be able to get that. If you don't what I am saying is that Linux is designed for people with a high level of technical knowledge. I find that it annoys and purplexes the average user.


RE: now all we need...
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2007 1:49:43 PM , Rating: 5
I have a high level of technical knowledge but I still don't want to put up with the hassle of getting Linux set up properly. Even other friends of mine who are also programmers don't like dealing with Linux as their OS for their desktop PC.

You install Windows, it works. Simple. You might have to set up a few settings but its all GUIs. You don't have to crawl through text files trying to find certain settings. Linux has come a long way but for me, its still not good enough.


RE: now all we need...
By omnicronx on 10/9/2007 2:03:45 PM , Rating: 2
not all nix distros require that kind of setup. I had ubuntu (or kubuntu if you like kde) running and ready to go just as fast as windows with only changing gui settings like in windows. the Debian style apt-get installation makes getting programs easy, and the included software installer gui which shows you all available packages available for Ubuntu is easy to use. I can do any day to day things on my nix box, it is not until i want to do something fancy such as play games (which you can still do with a little setup).

Of course i had to do some in depth configuration for certain programs, but the normal windows user coming to nix would most likely not need these features anyways. (ftp, shh, etc)

So for day to day activities like most members of your family are a custom to, many nix distros are more than sufficient ;)


RE: now all we need...
By jonmcc33 on 10/9/2007 3:12:21 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, Ubuntu looks great for kids. I have it installed for my 5 year old daughter so she can play her Nick Jr on the intarweb.


RE: now all we need...
By Gholam on 10/10/2007 12:22:04 AM , Rating: 2
Last time I tried Ubuntu, you had to type in several pages' worth of text into terminal to get basic things - like java - working. Of course it wasn't documented in the manual either, and without lots of specified options, the package manager utterly failed to do anything.


RE: now all we need...
By jonmcc33 on 10/10/2007 7:21:31 AM , Rating: 2
I was kidding. My point was that the only thing you can really do on a Linux OS is browse the web. For kids, the perfect thing is a Windows OS because of all the applications - especially learning applications - that work with it. Most of the hardcore Linux users that I know usually have no life. They tend to sit in a dark room all day long and are very pale skinned as the sunlight rarely touches them.


RE: now all we need...
By jtemplin on 10/10/2007 8:58:12 AM , Rating: 2
Lol...I was sitting next to one of those in class yesterday. Sometimes stereotypes come true. What you said reminds me of that episode of King of the Hill where the computer nerd kid turns albino from his reclusiveness.


RE: now all we need...
By goodstuff on 10/10/2007 10:18:04 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, I think he turned green :)


RE: now all we need...
By jmurbank on 10/13/2007 10:43:29 PM , Rating: 2
Linux can do the following.
* video editing
* 3D rendering
* image editing
* handle two or more video cards
* handles 64 GB of RAM with out slowing down
* able to calculate the full hard drive geometry pass the BIOS limits
* provides errors in plain english
* able to work around problems
* see what the program is doing
* very, very efficient memory management
* secured out of the box
* stalls (not freezing) when memory is all used and resumes when more memory is added
* working video capture cards
* reliable and stable open source modules (drivers)
* virtual hardware support
* Can mix 64-bit and 32-bit programs with out crashing
* Does not whine about new hardware that is installed or changed to a different slot.
* Can handle exabytes
* Able to put desire window on top of other windows
* can combine two or more two channel sound card to create a four to infinite channel sound card.
* Unique features in software
* there is always a fix for even a difficult problem
* Simple printer setup through CUPS web interface
* Extensively used by movie studios to aid making the movie better and finalize it on time.
* Data is continually recorded even when the hard drive is all used up. When more space is added, data can be dumped to the new drive.
* multiple users can login at the same time, at the same desk, and only on one computer.
* Free 24 hour/365 days technical support

Tons of more features.

Go to osalt.com for open source alternatives. Also watch Elephants Dream created using blender and other open source projects.


RE: now all we need...
By murphyslabrat on 10/15/2007 12:56:13 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Most of the hardcore Linux users that I know usually have no life. They tend to sit in a dark room all day long and are very pale skinned as the sunlight rarely touches them.

For your information, I am a hardcore Linux user (not exclusively, though). I am currently balancing my time between work and a degree in computer programming; but I still spend plenty of time hanging out with friends, am going to start playing basketball with some friends every other Saturday morning, and during the summer I race in a competitive cycling league.

While I don't have a "sweet tan," I am far from pasty white (or green), and have a thriving social life. And, aside from
setting up Ubuntu on an ATI card, it goes like a dream.


RE: now all we need...
By MrPickins on 10/9/2007 2:34:39 PM , Rating: 3
I feel really nerdy because all I could think while reading your pseudocode is "Where are the breaks between cases?" :P


RE: now all we need...
By murphyslabrat on 10/15/2007 12:45:59 PM , Rating: 2
Same here ;j


RE: now all we need...
By geddarkstorm on 10/9/2007 2:39:41 PM , Rating: 1
That's true, but Ubuntu has become very GUI driven with nearly no need for Terminal use as of 7.10 (the gusty which is coming out soon). Even so, I still remember having to use DOS back in 98 which is not that different from Terminal (just different commands). I think XP just spoiled everyone lol, but GUI is definitely the way to go.


RE: now all we need...
By RMSe17 on 10/9/2007 9:51:34 PM , Rating: 2
Interestingly, while Linux is trying to get everything GUI driven, Microsoft is trying to get everything command-line driven (Monad), since GUI is terrible for system admins.
I oversee a group of ~500 PC's, and sometimes absence of easily accessible control options through the command line really frustrates me.


RE: now all we need...
By auhim on 10/10/2007 12:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's more accurate to say that each is simply trying to provide the right tools for the job under the right circumstances. Microsoft is currently all GUI, but gaining CLI, because it's been moving from only the consumer market, where GUI is better, to the server/sysadmin market, where CLI allows lots of mas control. The opposite is true of Linux. It has been historically used primarily for sysadmin/servers/etc. where the wonders of CLI were heavily used and is now attempting to move to the GUI driven consumer market.

Neither is really trying to make "everything" GUI or CLI. They're each trying to have the right combination of the two so the right tool is there for each job.


RE: now all we need...
By DeepBlue1975 on 10/9/2007 2:52:08 PM , Rating: 2
I get that, good one (Reminds me of an old techie joke called "the evolution of a programmer", which made me LOL for as long as I took reading it and even then some).

But I haven't been using linux for the last 10 years.
Unfortunately I feel too old and that I don't have nearly enough time to set up something like linux.
Plus, I have some hardware which still is not quite at the same level than it is in windows as for what drivers go.
And then, even though I'm not nearly what you'd call "hardcore gamer" (not even plain gamer!) every now and then I like to sit down, use my momo racing wheel (which is now newer than it was 2 years ago when I bought it, LOL) and play some driving game without worrying about not being able to do so.

Then you have formatting incompatibilities between "free office applications" and "MS Office". As almost everyone everywhere uses office, it can be a bit frustrating sometimes.

Besides, windows since its 2000 version, isn't nearly as unstable or bad as I thought win 3.1, 95, 98 and Me used to be.


RE: now all we need...
By amandahugnkiss on 10/9/2007 9:36:02 PM , Rating: 3
A switch statement is your idea of high technical knowledge?

Sad (but it is funny).

You almost sound like one of those elitist jerks who make pompous statements because they feel Linux users are technically superior than any other type of user.

That is sad too (but also funny).


RE: now all we need...
By cbo on 10/10/2007 12:02:32 PM , Rating: 3
I don't think that difficulty of using the os equates to your technical experience. It just means your tolerance level is high. Don't get me wrong Linux is cool and free :) but its a pain looking for apps that you can easily get for windows.


RE: now all we need...
By rippleyaliens on 10/9/2007 1:42:55 PM , Rating: 2
HMM
Tried Vista (Couldnt Afford a machine taht can run Vista properly)
Wen past go to Linux (meaning cant afford the computer upgrade, or lacks the ability to install Vista properly)..

All jokes asside.. Linux has its place in the world, and that is for specialized applications, and people not willing to drop $$$ on a MS product.
From that.. Linux lacks the number of applications that are avaliable for windows. Lacks the programers who are making such apps.
Vista Rocks on a new machine PERIOD..
On my laptop i will never go back to xp.. I am MUCH more productive with vista than xp. Small performance hit, YET able to do much more with the same hardware. (wierd)
Home, i am like the rest of the world. Once Nvidia comes out with a stable driver than yah, will go vista. But now have to trade in the 7950GX2 card for a 8800GTX.. Hence my reason for not jumping on it at home. as far as quirks, yah, there are a number of them, but no where near as many as when xp was first released. Let alone win2000 pro..

Vista is the future folks..
As far as Linux, yah it has a future, and i have to admit it requires more tech savy skills (ability to type versus click)

But there is aplace for it all


RE: now all we need...
By rushfan2006 on 10/9/2007 4:53:07 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I have Vista, haven't looked back at XP, using 5 year old OSes isn't so much fun...


Why? If it works and does what you need - where's the problem? Spending money for no good reason makes little sense to me. Just like upgrading an OS to the latest and greatest *just* because its ...well the latest (but not so) greatest is crazy logic to me.

Of course a lot of this depends on how you use your PC - the bottomline is you want the OS that runs the applications you rely on. At home, my computer is 95% just a gaming box, and XP still OWNS Vista as far as the OS for games.

I know Microsoft is trying to change this but they aren't there yet.

Finally - My XP is solid, never really have OS issues at all, most errors I get aren't XP's fault is the fault of either myself doing something stupid or the application.


RE: now all we need...
By Lakku on 10/10/2007 12:33:37 AM , Rating: 2
I don't think that is true anymore. Since drivers have now matured, especially audio and video drivers, I get comparable performance under Vista as I did in XP. Except now, with games that support it, I get DX10. It's still not perfect, and I waited a long time to make the switch, but to get the most out of games like Crysis, CoJ, World in Conflict etc, Vista is the way to go. I probably won't get rid of XP for awhile, but I have started using Vista for most of my gaming, especially modern (as in the last 6 to 12 months) gaming.


RE: now all we need...
By MaK2000 on 10/9/2007 11:47:16 AM , Rating: 2
I have been rather fond of Vista. I ran the beta, which was horrible, since it first came out and got retail Ultimate x64 on Jan 30th. I dual booted until my last mobo upgrade in July and since then have been running only Vista. It is even faster than XP and super stable. Since January the bugs have been smoothed over pretty well if you ask me.


RE: now all we need...
By Polynikes on 10/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: now all we need...
By deeznuts on 10/9/2007 12:49:38 PM , Rating: 5
Confucius say, "He who reads Tomshardware and believes, IS A FOOL!"

THG notwithstanding, some things in Vista take longer than normal but it's bearable with a fast machine. Why the fack does it need to calculate time though when transferring items on the HDD, just start moving the damn thing already.


RE: now all we need...
By GreenEnvt on 10/9/2007 1:01:34 PM , Rating: 3
Microsoft does claim that it is already doing the copy/move/delete while it says it is calculating time remaining.
I don't fully believe them, as moving files seems to take much longer then XP.


RE: now all we need...
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 1:17:05 PM , Rating: 1
I believe them - all you have to do is click the Show Details button, and it clearly indicates that the copy is in progress. I think they show that message whenever the "completion time" cannot be accurately calculated, like at the start of the operation.

There may be some conditions where this is not true (e.g., copy across VPN as reported by another poster here), however, in my experience, this issue is mostly just a small mistake in their GUI causing a misunderstanding with normal local and network file operations.


RE: now all we need...
By deeznuts on 10/9/2007 1:42:21 PM , Rating: 2
I also suspected it started moving it but even tiny tiny files take a bit longer to get going, in XP it'd be done in a flash.


RE: now all we need...
By omnicronx on 10/9/2007 2:14:15 PM , Rating: 2
There is an issue in vista when copying files, especially with larger files or when you move many GB at a time. From what i have heard it should be fixed in the service pack.


RE: now all we need...
By MGSsancho on 10/11/2007 5:07:59 AM , Rating: 2
largest transfer i had ever done on vista was about 500gb total in a night. 120gb one 1 leg. performance was horrible. 8MBs. then again i was copying from a raid0 withs raptors, to a raid5 using on board raid.... i swear on board raid 5 is the worst thing ever. killed one of my 500gb drives.. tho surprisingly... my raid 0 raptors drive has never had a single fault

but in all honesty, copying from 1 7200 drive to another... transfers at 400-48MBs so its fine. maybe copying takes longer to user mode drivers/indexing/etc with vista. so that would be a performance/stability thing. oh well. an update would always be welcome


RE: now all we need...
By DeepBlue1975 on 10/9/2007 4:44:30 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed.
I find that file transfer speed is better under vista than it was in XP.

XP in my case seemed to always be moving data by little chunks from one drive to another (talking about moving files from one actual physical drive to another, not between partitions from the same drive), one at a time, the disk drive seemed to be busier and clumsier.
In vista that kind of operations seem to flow much beter.

My only gripe is not with windows itself, but with winrar which is dumb enough to make its temporal files in a single drive chosen by configuration, so that when I unrar something from one partition that is not the temporal drive for winrar, it goes back and forth forever :(
But that did happen to me with XP too, as it's a winrar issue rather than a windows one.


RE: now all we need...
By rogard on 10/9/2007 4:56:39 PM , Rating: 2
I am not using winrar, but I seem to remember that there is an option like "don't use temp files" (at all). Should solve your rar problem.

As for WinXP and copying between 2 partitions on one hdd, you are right, it's infuriatingly slow. I am using a free version of a program called teracopy, that uses a variable file buffer. Works great, this is how XP should have been. (Sorry for advertising here, usually I don't do that. But it's so good.)


RE: now all we need...
By The0ne on 10/9/2007 3:29:41 PM , Rating: 2
You've been lied to. It does and takes much more time to copy files over. If you have very many small files, like I do, it seems to take ages. Instead of waiting for anything to happen because the calculation I go and sleep. That's how much it sucks.


RE: now all we need...
By cbo on 10/10/2007 12:11:56 PM , Rating: 2
Yes. And Microsoft is coming out with a patch to increase vista copy/move speed. Which anyone who uses vista for a pvr is dying for.


RE: now all we need...
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2007 1:53:04 PM , Rating: 2
I used to have a lot of respect for THG. Now I think I've been banned from making comments because I got tired of their articles looking like they were written by a Mexican immigrant and sent in complaints.

Makes me sad since I even wrote an article for them back in 2005.


RE: now all we need...
By Mitch101 on 10/9/2007 2:17:27 PM , Rating: 2
Years ago it was a great site now its very biased.

THG is very Pro Intel. Any time Intel has a leg up they cant write enough build articles around Intel. Lets build a $300 PC and use an AMD chip that no one would buy because spending $10.00 more would reverse the article in AMD's favor. They have is easy now that Intel is in the lead but Im betting they find and post any negatives they can when Phenom is released or come up with rediculous benchmarks which show minimal leads when there should be gaps. Its so bad that you might as well get your benchmarks from Intel directly.

Now they have started to do it to ATI since AMD owns them. Again pretty easy since NVIDIA is a bit faster now but when the tides reverse THG's true colors will show again.

I also found it interesting that THG when the Opteron was first launched was the only site that tried to show the P4 as superior.

And I love those BS overclocking articles that magically take intel chips some 10% more than any other review site seems to get their chips up to then tries to promote it like every Intel chip overclocks this high.

THG is not just fanboism its selective marketing. Might as well be like the gaming review mags that take a kickback for a good review.


RE: now all we need...
By rogard on 10/9/2007 3:47:48 PM , Rating: 2
I agree 100%, THG used to be great, but not any more.
I can't even remember when I came across THG for the first time. Must be almost 10 years or so. Back then, they had fascinating nerdy stuff that sometimes really rocked the boat of hardware and software manufacturers. But in recent years it's getting uninspired, commercial, biased and even worse: badly written and researched and generally full of mistakes.
Since THG is originally a German site (they went multilingual quite a while ago) I read both the English and the German content. I wonder where the guys come from in Germany too, because they can't write in their native(?) language either (Slovenians? Polish? No pun intended).
So I do not visit THG very often, but when I do and post my opinion/criticism there, it all ends up in a flame war. Pointless.

(Getting beaten up verbally at DT is much more amusing :-)


RE: now all we need...
By spindoc on 10/9/2007 4:33:30 PM , Rating: 2
Where should I go instead? Besides anandtech, of course.


RE: now all we need...
By rogard on 10/9/2007 4:47:05 PM , Rating: 2
Who needs more than Anandtech and DailyTech?

Just kidding, it all depends on what you are interested in.
There are so many sites out there...

Here are some I use as a starting point:
(Please don't flame if you think they are crap.)

http://www.theinquirer.net
http://www.techpowerup.com/
http://www.xbitlabs.com/
http://www.digital-daily.com/
http://arstechnica.com/

(but I suggest you use the search engine of your choice to find new ones, and this is not exactly the right thread for that anyway)


RE: now all we need...
By Myrandex on 10/9/2007 8:03:01 PM , Rating: 4
www.hardocp.com :)


RE: now all we need...
By euclidean on 10/9/2007 12:49:42 PM , Rating: 2
Fixes have occured since then that have brought Vista up to par or better than XP. It also depends heavily on what hardware you are using, as not all hardware manufacturers have come out with decent driver sets that work wonderfully with Vista. Until that happens, don't expect many people to be vista supporters. Though you also have to look at all the people still using the 32bit version of Vista...If you're still running 32bit, stay with XP and have fun, but if you're running a 64-bit version, drop XP off in your storage and stay with Vistax64.


RE: now all we need...
By Christopher1 on 10/9/2007 1:20:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, that's the problem, definitely. The people who are making the hardware are not making drivers optimized for Vista (at one website recently I found that their 'Vista' and 'XP' drivers were the same driver, just under different names on their downloading screen!).

Personally, that's the only problems I have had on Vista, except for a random folder corruption error where I cannot use Windows Explorer to open the folder and have to use ACDSee 9 to do so.


RE: now all we need...
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 1:25:53 PM , Rating: 1
For many kinds of drivers there is no difference between an XP and a Vista driver - they both follow the Windows Device Driver Model. Vista can also load most drivers written for XP, including video drivers. I was running Vista on my old laptop using a video driver written for Win2K. Of course it didn't support Aero, but it did work.


RE: now all we need...
By omnicronx on 10/9/2007 2:18:25 PM , Rating: 2
Its true, a lot of the time the only difference between 'vista certified' and xp or 2k drivers is that the x64 driver has to also be included to be considered 'certified'. Other than Graphics and soundcard drivers of course.


RE: now all we need...
By The0ne on 10/9/2007 3:35:21 PM , Rating: 2
That's not entirely true. You can force installation of drivers that are not made for Vista but for most users it's not going to happen. Video drivers for example will not let you install XP drivers on Vista. It'll shutdown it's own installation program to prevent you from doing so. There might and might not be a good reason for doing this but who are you going to trust...yourself or the company that released the driver?

And while most of my beef with Vista IS minior, it still doesn't give me anything that I can't get with XP yet. Worse, the only game I play frequently FFXI runs slow. Drivers and proper optimized multiple core software is what I'm waiting for. I mean that in the sense of stability and maturity. Not rush out the door and give users more headache.


RE: now all we need...
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 4:06:13 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Video drivers for example will not let you install XP drivers on Vista.

That's not generally true. As I said above, I can run even a Win2K video driver on Vista on my older Thinkpad. IBM never even released an XP version, if that tells you how old the driver is. But that same driver works fine in Vista.


RE: now all we need...
By omnicronx on 10/9/2007 4:17:13 PM , Rating: 2
I already stated in my previous post video and soundcard drivers are written differently in xp than in vista (many video drivers do work aslong in non 3d accelerated mode). Many XP drivers do work for Vista though but this is not what i was getting at. To get MS 'vista certified' you do not only need 32 bit drivers, but also 64 bit drivers, regardless if your 32 bit drivers are perfect and ready for release, MS won't give you vista certified until you have the 64 bit drivers too.

This meaning many vista certified drivers are very close to their xp counterparts in the first place, its the 64 bit drivers that differ.

I still use my capcard xp drivers, print driver, and modified scanner drivers in vista.

As for video card issues, most problems i have seen in vista appear to be gone for both ATI and NVIDIA, that is unless you run in a crossfire/sli setup, thats the only reason i would stay away from vista for the time being.


RE: now all we need...
By Myrandex on 10/9/2007 8:07:03 PM , Rating: 2
damn time someone tries to get hw companies to make x64 drivers as that is something needed badly on ANY x64 os (linux inclusive).


RE: now all we need...
By Polynikes on 10/9/2007 6:01:15 PM , Rating: 2
Heh, I got mod-slapped for that one.

Have they done anything to improve OpenGL support? The reason I personally need good hardware and performance is for gaming, so naturally when I look at benchmarks those are the most important for me. I want as little holding back my FPS as possible. Lacking OpenGL support was a big stickler for me when Vista debuted.

I will say, however, that if I go 64-bit, which I plan to do eventually, I will definitely go Vista. I'm sure by then there'll be zero support for XP, and with any luck 32-bit will be fading away, and most apps will be originally written for a 64-bit OS.


RE: now all we need...
By encryptkeeper on 10/9/2007 1:54:12 PM , Rating: 2
The biggest problem is the business sector. Although there is the "Vista Business" version, many programs (and hardware) used in business only environments won't run with Vista. Many companies don't see any advantage to switching to a new OS where they will likely have to update PCs AND purchase new, business critical software to work with Vista, if it's even available. But this has caused a seriously negative view of Vista as an undesirable OS, even though MS pushes and pushes the software. That's mainly due to the fact that MS pumped billions into Vista, and that they probably have NO idea what to design next.

Although Windows Vista is Microsoft's current bread-and-butter consumer operating system

Sorry, but I really have to disagree with this. Although Vista sales are high on prebuilt laptops and some desktops, XP still reigns supreme in MS's catalog. Downgrade rights are being used quite often, techs hate working with Vista, and consultants talk their own clients out of it.


RE: now all we need...
By soydios on 10/9/2007 2:03:03 PM , Rating: 1
Some anecdotal evidence to back that up:
The university network printing application that I use only barely works with Vista x86 (my laptop) and doesn't work at all with Vista x64 (my desktop).


RE: now all we need...
By omnicronx on 10/9/2007 2:11:45 PM , Rating: 1
That doesn't back anything up, so what if your network printing app doesn't work, it was probably designed for XP, and an in house project at that. Many apps designed for 98 did not work for XP, that doesn't mean XP was broken, get a clue people. As for x64 not working, it's probably one of the many 32bit code apps that don't work in compatibility mode for x64 or you just plain and simple were not provided with x64 printer drivers.

Vista is not XP people, when your university updates the app for vista and it still doesn't work, come back and complain, until then..


RE: now all we need...
By The0ne on 10/9/2007 3:41:03 PM , Rating: 2
I haven't check lately but SolidWorks does not run on Vista. How many comapanies and users do you think are/aren't using Solidworks and other mission critical applications out there. And if they do work, will they work the same? You're missing the point entirely I believe. There's real financial issues with Vista from the business perspective, which includes IT, that has to be consider to roll out Vista.

Sure there are plenty of users and adopters out there but it's not the solution for a lot of other users and companies. With our company, which relies on Solidworks for design, is Vista free. My family and various family extensions that I build PCs to are Vista free. I don't want to have to support Vista for all the families out there. This isn't because I don't know how but time, resource, their learning curve, etc. Much, as I would think, would be similar considerations other users and companies are faced with.


RE: now all we need...
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 4:09:28 PM , Rating: 1
Actually, they are releasing a new version of SolidWorks that is Vista-optimized:

http://www.solidworks.com/pages/products/vista/vis...

It looks like that version is even optimized for Vista, supporting Aero, instant search, and common RSS services in Vista.


RE: now all we need...
By jtemplin on 10/10/2007 9:08:52 AM , Rating: 2
Omni you totally missed his point. He was supporting the previous post by encrypt, who was arguing that Vista isn't the "bread and butter" OS in the business world. I think hes right and his argument isn't that Vista is broken. He is just saying that in business (especially smaller businesses run by older guys who didn't grow up with computers) there is a resistance to change. If it ain't broke don't fix it, is the sort of thinking I have encountered in the business world.

He was just posting to support that his school (which is probably run similar to a business) isn't supporting Vista very well, since their print software is running like crap on his Vista. So perhaps in the education world TOO Vista isn't the "bread and butter" choice. I think you took his point as you wanted to take it, and not as he meant it. Don't be a jerk to someone if you cant be bothered to understand where they're coming from.


RE: now all we need...
By encryptkeeper on 10/10/2007 9:35:26 AM , Rating: 2
To further my argument, the claim from Microsoft to OEM system builders is "Sell more Vista and your sales will go up" arguing that your hardware sales will be increased by Vista's heavier needs for gear. What doesn't make sense is that argument is followed closely by "To sell more Vista Business, you can tell your customers to use the downgrade rights". Well, if you can use downgrade rights, AND if you can reupgrade with no limits on how long you can wait, why bother buying the extra hardware for the system? If I was a consumer pondering this decision, I'd probably just use that as reason not to spend the extra money on hardware, especially if I needed to buy this from a business. The thing that mystifies me is that MS has always been able to market their products to businesses, and this time around they're having serious problems doing that.


RE: now all we need...
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2007 2:03:57 PM , Rating: 3
Engineers always hate change.

And it always takes a few years for a new OS to make it into large businesses. Some places don't even run XP yet. Does that mean it too sucks?

The arguments you're spouting are the same arguments that have always been there when a new version of Windows has come out. But sheeple love to follow the trend.

And they're designing Vienna next. And you'll be there to spout these arguments then too.


RE: now all we need...
By DeepBlue1975 on 10/9/2007 8:07:39 PM , Rating: 2
So true...
Not only because of fear of change, but also because of licenses cost, testing for internal applications compatibility with the new OS and things like that.

In a very large corporation, where you have something that is working and still gives you the kind of productivity you need, a global change is illogical, time consuming, and hence, very costly.

For example, upgrading OS for some thousands of employees requires:

1- testing internal apps compatibility with the new OS
2- making sure that the old machines are going to work well with the new OS
3- purchasing licenses!
4- extra men hours have to be paid to make the switch, as it will require an overnight attack if you don't want your many employees depending on their PCs to get their work done, standing there and watching for hours while the new OS is installed with all the new applications and all the corporative required configurations
5- after it's installed, every employee will want to customize the OS interface for his taste, and the most die hard ones will be a bit lost at first finding everything they used to work with.
6- extra support overhead because of those little apps that were forgotten in the installation process, and the employees want back
7- extra support overhead because many employees will find an excuse to blame the new OS for any software problem they find in the first place.

And if I keep thinking about it, I guess many more factors would come to my mind as reasons driving a big corporation to not wanting to upgrade their employees' OS because, in the end, the one they already have will be cheaper.

You had a valid reason for not wanting to keep win 95 and 98 around.
NT 4 was good but is now aging and has lost support from MS, and with any relatively modern PCs, driver problems are likely (newer motherboards with everything plus the oven integrated don't usually provide support for anything older than Win2k, which, as TomZ said, uses WDM as do all of the windows versions beyond win2k, NT was a completely different story).

Then, when NT need to be phased out, they got win2k. It still works, most of today's hardware has drivers that can work in Win2k if it's written according to WDM standards, and still has support (I think that is the case, correct me if I'm wrong)... So, those companies having win2k feel no need to upgrade at all.

But a company not needing to upgrade is in no way indication at all that new OSs are not worth it.
For me, Vista Ultimate is well worth it even though I find some minor gripes when using it.


RE: now all we need...
By dgingeri on 10/9/2007 1:30:14 PM , Rating: 2
x10 will never happen under XP because it would require a complete rewrite of the kernel and HAL system. That is what Vista is. XP will never support it because it can't.


...
By totallycool on 10/9/2007 11:27:12 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The first is a new activation scheme which will not require a product key during installation.


Can we have more information on this if possible. Does it by any chance include, not activating windows thru internet or phone. :)




RE: ...
By Proteusza on 10/9/2007 11:38:04 AM , Rating: 1
No, you give them your credit card details and they take whatever they want.

basically nothing has changed.


RE: ...
By Chudilo on 10/9/2007 12:08:38 PM , Rating: 2
That says to me that it will nag you to death to activate it.
Meaning you can install it and use it for a while. Without having any sort of a key. But then they lock everything down.

They leave some basic functionality for someone who just wants to check their email and surf the internet. Not a bad plan to prevent people from switching Linux just because they don't need all the fancy functionality.


RE: ...
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 12:13:01 PM , Rating: 1
More likely it is like Vista's activation which allows you to install without a key, but it requires you to enter a key within some number of days (30 IIRC).


RE: ...
By GaryJohnson on 10/9/2007 1:06:43 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't XP already do that?


RE: ...
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 1:14:15 PM , Rating: 1
Not that I am aware of - the installs of XP I remember doing (it's been a while) required you to enter a key up-front during the installation process. There was no way to continue without a key, IIRC.


RE: ...
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2007 1:57:25 PM , Rating: 2
You are correct. You have to enter a valid key to install XP. It can be a pirated key, but you have to enter one. You'll just have to enter a good one later in order to activate.


RE: ...
By dnd728 on 10/9/2007 4:52:37 PM , Rating: 2
I think you could try MCE for 90 days. Don't know about a key...


RE: ...
By GaryJohnson on 10/10/2007 11:20:54 AM , Rating: 2
I did a reinstall of an OEM copy recently and it didn't need a key or activation, but of course its tied to specific hardware.


RE: ...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/9/2007 1:05:54 PM , Rating: 2
Still needs to be activated within 30 days, but this gives you an easier "grace period".


RE: ...
By Necaradan666 on 10/15/2007 8:52:32 AM , Rating: 2
Where exactly are all these 'specifics' the article mentioned? I don't see any above or a link that shows me any. I have the Service Pack 3 beta, it came with documentation for Service Pack 2. I barely know what has changed. How am I suppose to beta test if I don't know what I'm looking for?


Good News
By paulpod on 10/9/2007 1:14:29 PM , Rating: 1
... that XP is still getting attention.

Since my last comment I have tested one more application on Vista. And, surprise... it DOES NOT WORK!

This app is a Dvico Fusion USB HDTV tuner and their fantastic viewing software. The GFX card is an HD2600xt, CAT 7.9. I tried Vista first and the deinterlacing was aweful, the playback stuttered, and CPU utilization seemed high. There are several decoder mode and deinterlace mode settings to try and none looked real good.

Thinking it might be the 2600 which I had not yet tried in XP, I booted to the XP disk on that system and installed the drivers and app. Of course, the result was absolutely flawless. Perfect deinterlacing, completely smooth playback, and much lower CPU utilization.

It is very clear that Vista is not supporting access to hardware video acceleration (DxVA) the same way XP does. And the result is miserable.

So, my Vista experience: ATI USB Wonder tuners have NO Vista driver. Fusion HDTV does not work. File copies from XP folder shares do not get Gigabit speed. Bioshock does not work. Disk defrag has no controls and progress. Explorer file selection while in single-click mode does not work. Copying large files (HDTV captures) does not provide necessary progress feedback.

People who don't use their systems to do anything cool need to stop claiming the Vista works.




RE: Good News
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 1:23:21 PM , Rating: 1
I can certainly understand the situation you describe. I had an AIW TV tuner card at the time I upgraded from Win98SE to WinXP. At the time, ATI decided to hang me out to dry - even though the card was relatively new, they decided to not support the TV tunder in XP. Because of that I had to give up the card with that functionality.

But that doesn't mean that WinXP didn't "work," nor did it mean that WinXP "sucks." This is the same situation today with Vista - exactly the same. Some hardware and software is simply not going to work, and vendors are going to decide whether to support Vista or whether they will instead encourage customers to upgrade to their newer products.


RE: Good News
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/9/2007 1:32:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Bioshock does not work.

Works fine for me any almost every other Vista user.

quote:
Explorer file selection while in single-click mode does not work.

Works for me just fine, just what is it you do to your machine?

quote:
Copying large files (HDTV captures) does not provide necessary progress feedback.

Since when? I just copied over a terabyte of data from one RAID array to another and it gave me up to the file progress feedback and completed in what I consider a reasonable amount of time given the amount of data being copied.

quote:
Disk defrag has no controls and progress.

Mine has the same controls and progress that XP had, and more options for scheduling and automation.

I have to question just what you are doing to your system. I also have to question why your blaming vista for the following.
quote:
ATI USB Wonder tuners have NO Vista driver.

This is an ATI/AMD Problem.
quote:
Fusion HDTV does not work.

Sounds like Fusion needs to check their software.

My assumption based on the mostly baseless rant you wrote tells me you were in over your head and do not understand much about the factors involved with what your doing... Or you tried to do an "Upgrade" from XP to Vista.

How about some real information about your system specs and software so we can have a look under the hood and see why your having problems yes?


RE: Good News
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2007 1:59:34 PM , Rating: 2
<Cartman> BUT MAAAAA!!!!! </Cartman>

It's much easier to whine and complain than to figure out the real reason for problems.


RE: Good News
By djcameron on 10/9/2007 2:10:40 PM , Rating: 2
My only knock with Vista has been that I can't get Halo 2 or Shadowrun to work in Standard User mode. Every time the kid wants to play, I have to come in and type my admin password. I'd really rather not give him admin rights or disable UAC.


RE: Good News
By Pirks on 10/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: Good News
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 7:20:43 PM , Rating: 1
Nearly all those "lame software 'developers'" wrote their code for XP, where it was a reasonable expectation that a user has Admin rights, especially at home. The environment changed - I don't think it's fair to blame software devs for that.


RE: Good News
By Pirks on 10/9/07, Rating: 0
RE: Good News
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 8:58:48 PM , Rating: 2
Not really, the programming heritage of many Windows apps, especially those for the home, are with Windows 9x which had not access control restrictions.


RE: Good News
By Pirks on 10/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: Good News
By neothe0ne on 10/9/2007 7:04:24 PM , Rating: 3
" quote:
Disk defrag has no controls and progress.

Mine has the same controls and progress that XP had, and more options for scheduling and automation.

I have to question just what you are doing to your system. I also have to question why your blaming vista for the following."

This is the only beef I have with your defense of Vista. How the hell do you call an ugly grey box with no colors or displays the "same controls and progress" that XP had?


RE: Good News
By Necaradan666 on 10/15/2007 8:36:18 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah it's totally automated in Vista. It runs itself every wednesday on my system. While you can adjust the sheduling there are no other controls and the progress indicator as in XP, the coloured blocks getting moved around, is gone.


Dear msft - I would PAY for a WinXP upgrade
By MadDogMorgan on 10/9/2007 4:10:12 PM , Rating: 3
Dear Microsoft. (Stop killing yourself with Vista.)

I would $PAY$ for an XP upgrade that included DX10, improved and unlocked the theme engine support and maybe fixed a few other little things. Leave the DRM out, thank you, I don't want it, it's not even remotely the OS's duty to enforce it. Make the installer more like nLlite so I can choose what crap I want, and don't want, to install.

Make the price $49.95 and I'd pay for it in a heartbeat. That's less than the cost of a stupid new DX10 game.

Yes, I know this post is way too far down the list to matter.
Yes, I know msft will never see it.
Yes, I know it will freak some of you out to have someone suggest that upgrades might not be free forever. What can I say? I'm Mad.

Isn't there some forum thread somewhere where people are signing up to say they would $PAY$ for an XP upgrade?




By TomCorelis on 10/9/2007 4:42:27 PM , Rating: 2
Of course, if MS actually does all that, what reason does anybody have to buy Vista?

And am I one of the few people who, once one gets past Vista's bloat, actually prefers it over XP?


By Xavian on 10/9/2007 5:40:22 PM , Rating: 2
DRM (in the form of palladium, DRM that uses the trusted platform module to lock down files at the hardware level) never made it into the final retail version of Vista.

It was (very luckly) one of the features that was cut, only bitlocking from the original system remains.

I use windows xp because quite frankly, its more streamlined (not having to go through 2-3 dialogues before i get the screen i actually want) and less sluggish.


RE: Dear msft - I would PAY for a WinXP upgrade
By mgambrell on 10/9/2007 7:34:00 PM , Rating: 2
DRM is the OS's duty to enforce, since it is pretty much unenforceable without the OS. Whether you think it ought to be done has nothing to do with whose duty it is if it is going to be done.


RE: Dear msft - I would PAY for a WinXP upgrade
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 9:02:02 PM , Rating: 2
Why is that? Why stops an app from enforcing its own DRM? For example, iTunes?


By mgambrell on 10/10/2007 12:29:26 PM , Rating: 2
The fact that iTunes can (and has) been hacked to bust its DRM without protection from the operating system


Maybe...
By mmntech on 10/9/2007 12:43:01 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe those new features will include DX10 for XP? Sigh, wishful thinking.




RE: Maybe...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/9/2007 1:22:12 PM , Rating: 2
DX 10 not possible on XP without a major rewrite of the driver manager.


RE: Maybe...
By Xavian on 10/9/2007 5:44:11 PM , Rating: 2
DX 10 was and still is possible on windows xp, microsoft didn't have to integrate drivers into DirectX 10 and they didn't need to.

Having DirectX 10 work with windows xp drivers would probably be quite easy for a windows team and about 1-2 months worth of development time.

But ofcourse Microsoft doesn't have the incentive to do it (they need all that money from people upgrading to Vista).


RE: Maybe...
By mgambrell on 10/9/2007 7:29:51 PM , Rating: 2
I am optimistically predicting dx10 for xp eventually. For microsoft, no dx10 in xp is a breathtaking compatibility rejection and totally out of proportion with their style of operation. It made sense for them to want to use it as a carrot to get people to vista, but expect a retrenchment when they decide the carrot is actually an ineffectual and infuriating stick.


RE: Maybe...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 10/10/2007 7:27:27 AM , Rating: 3
XP would need a complete rewrite. New Drivers, New HAL, New Kernel, and New Driver Manager. That IS Vista.

DX10 on XP? Not gonna happen.


RE: Maybe...
By mgambrell on 10/10/2007 12:31:18 PM , Rating: 1
Says who? You just bought into their spin.


RE: Maybe...
By Pirks on 10/11/07, Rating: 0
Bread and butter my...
By DEVGRU on 10/9/2007 3:45:38 PM , Rating: 2
"Although Windows Vista is Microsoft's current bread-and-butter consumer operating system..."

Bread and butter my ass. Microsoft wants it to be, WISHES it was... but it ain't. Not by a LONG shot.




RE: Bread and butter my...
By TomZ on 10/9/07, Rating: 0
RE: Bread and butter my...
By Pirks on 10/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: Bread and butter my...
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 7:24:26 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, you might want to sign up for more of those anger management classes. :o)

Anyway, why not just opt for XP instead? Or else buy one of the machines that doesn't have Windows at all?

I suppose it's easier to just bitch and complain here, however. :o)


RE: Bread and butter my...
By Pirks on 10/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: Bread and butter my...
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 9:00:30 PM , Rating: 2
I never said that the exact same models are available with and without Windows. But my point is that there are lots of models available without Windows, so if it bothers you to be buying Windows, it is certainly possible to avoid it.


RE: Bread and butter my...
By Pirks on 10/9/07, Rating: 0
RE: Bread and butter my...
By rockyct on 10/10/2007 3:27:51 AM , Rating: 1
Then don't buy a Dell.

No one is forcing you to buy a Dell, so Dell and Microsoft can do anything they want as long as it's legal. There was almost the exact same backlash when XP came out and now history is repeating itself once again. Vista sucked in beta, it sucked on the day it came out (due to drivers), but now it's actually pretty good. I even bought a copy of Vista for my laptop because of the new features for laptops (presentation settings, increased battery life, etc) and I couldn't be happier with it.


RE: Bread and butter my...
By Pirks on 10/11/2007 1:46:33 AM , Rating: 1
Why should I not choose the Dell if Dell has the best price/hardware ratio? I want Dell, and I want it freed from Vista. I wanna have choice. What's bad about that?


RE: Bread and butter my...
By TomZ on 10/11/2007 2:00:32 PM , Rating: 2
Uh...because they bundle an OS that you don't want to buy?!?

Duh. As you said, it's about choice - your choice to not buy Windows.


RE: Bread and butter my...
By Pirks on 10/11/2007 10:04:06 PM , Rating: 1
This is why I want hardware that's decoupled from software. I wanna buy a computer from Dell that's bundled with the OS _I_ want, not _THEM_. What Dell is doing now is very similar to Crapple shit - they too force you to buy OS X when you buy their hardware, and to buy their hardware if you wanna buy an OS X and run it. I freakin' hate that shit, in any form, be it Dell, Crapple or whoever. This shit stinks soo bad :-(


Meh..
By iFX on 10/9/2007 11:31:37 AM , Rating: 4
This article and many daily tech articles beat around the bush for several paragraphs before they get to anything remotely related to the title of the article.

The extra information is nice - put it after the meat.




RE: Meh..
By ebakke on 10/9/2007 12:40:49 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you for saying exactly what I was thinking.


Welcome XP SP3
By rogard on 10/9/2007 4:03:47 PM , Rating: 2
I am happy that MS is doing an SP3. That is what countless users want to have for a long time. Great.

The whole discussion about Vista pro&contra is more or less pointless and the same that happened when XP was new.
It will take some time, but eventually the majority of PCs will run under Vista, although there will always be some die hard fans or people with elderly hardware that stick to their old OS, which is fine as well.
I hope there will be security relevant updates for XP for a long time to come, and functional upgrades would be awesome.
Personally, I'll do the same thing as with XP: wait for SP1 and driver improvement, then build a new rig with a new OS.

Well, you never know. Maybe one day there will be a DX10 patch for DOS? ;-)




By scrapsma54 on 10/9/2007 4:46:28 PM , Rating: 2
Vista isn't so Encumbering on resources. Sure It may be scary that a lot of memory is being used by vista. What you should know that unused memory is less efficient than used memory. Vista uses all available resources and pre-loads any execution data into memory and ready boost. Vista will shut off any applications that are not needed and lower priorities on background processes that are needed to operate. The sad statement however is that Dx9 is crippled since it runs in the headless snake proof user mode instead of the kernel that operates like the head of the snake. Would you rather crash and find out later that the crash just corrupted your new Windows xp rig, or start up and find everything back where you left it? All work saved in a backup folder just before clearing memory? Vista is more of a leap from xp than xp was a leap from 2000. Memory management is flawless and increasing cpu usage priority when the user needs it instead of when the Program needs it is a major plus. Want an Idea? I have an old dual Xeon 1.7GHz processor pc thats running it and it has a 4.2 cpu index rating. Windows used to be more hardware reliant, For vista, its not so much the case anymore as it requires a balance.




pointless?
By goku on 10/9/2007 5:52:39 PM , Rating: 2
Aside from patches which can be obtained separately, is there really a point to this Service Pack? Or do people blindly install these things just to say they have the latest/most secure regardless of knowing anything about it?




SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By crystal clear on 10/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By mechBgon on 10/9/2007 12:20:10 PM , Rating: 4
"Even better than Vista"?

Comedy gold. :) Just on the security front alone, Vista >> WinXP. At any service pack level. Ford Escorts don't become Dodge Vipers no matter how you rice 'em up.

MVP, Windows Shell/User


RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By TomZ on 10/9/2007 12:30:10 PM , Rating: 2
People don't "get" the security changes in Vista. I don't think that Microsoft has done the best job getting that word out.


RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By Verran on 10/9/2007 1:11:01 PM , Rating: 2
I think most people just don't care. I have no security concerns with XP behind a standard router/firewall with out-of-the-box configs. I never use Windows Firewall. All I use are AVG, SpyBot, and Ad-Aware (all free and easy to configure and maintain), and I haven't had any security issues in years.

So to me, when people try to sell Vista with claims of increased security, I have to wonder if it's something they actually needed, or just a catch-phrase they're reading from the back of the box.


RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By FITCamaro on 10/9/2007 1:55:43 PM , Rating: 2
For people like my father, the extra security is needed.

I'm building them a new PC here shortly. It's getting Vista.


RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By goku on 10/9/2007 8:27:55 PM , Rating: 3
Creating another popup window for the user to, without a second thought, close is NOT what I call security.


By Pirks on 10/9/2007 8:32:46 PM , Rating: 2
Obviously you never heard of a thing called "limited user account". Read some books on Windows, that should help.


By GoodBytes on 10/9/2007 4:09:36 PM , Rating: 2
I think some (many average computers users) people think "Oh I have this Internet Security program and Anti-virus, therefore it's all I need for maximum protection."

Which is understandable not true. But that's just my opinion based on my personal observations.


RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By crystal clear on 10/9/2007 1:22:26 PM , Rating: 2
Hi there-

My first comment reflects the opinions of the buyers in general-they are the bread & butter for M.S.

What you say is right-people are not convinced.

The pros & cons of Vista have been discussed & debated for a long time in this forum-I do not wish to reopen that debate.

The very fact the WinXP SP3 is on the way shows that M.S. has the buyers in mind.

If vista was a big success then there would be no need for this SP3 & WinXP would not be sold anymore.

The buyers choice is supreme irrespective of some MVPs opinions.


RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By mechBgon on 10/9/2007 9:57:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The buyers choice is supreme irrespective of some MVPs opinions.


The only "opinion" this MVP has stated so far is that Vista's security capabilities are far better than WinXP's will ever be. And if you want to contest that, you can start here:

http://www.symantec.com/enterprise/security_respon...

The most notable difference, in my opinion, is when you compare a default, out-of-the-box Vista installation to a default, out-of-the-box WinXP installation, both with all their security updates installed. As the Symantec article above shows, Vista's proactive security enhancements are quote effective against stuff that works on WinXP.

quote:
If vista was a big success then there would be no need for this SP3 & WinXP would not be sold anymore.


I don't know where you get that idea. SP3 for WinXP has been in development for longer than Vista has even been on the market.

MVP, Windows Shell/User


RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By crystal clear on 10/10/2007 4:57:31 AM , Rating: 2
If any of my responses have in anyway offended you-I certainly regret it-not that I intended it in anyway.

I have full respect for you & your professional qualifications/achievements,sorry could not respond earlier as our time zones vary-Israel.

With this I respond to your comment-

quote:
The only "opinion" this MVP has stated so far is that Vista's security capabilities are far better than WinXP's will ever be. And if you want to contest that, you can start here:


We seem to be targeting different objectives-you on security & me on consumer preferences/choices.

You think in terms of security-but the buyers think of price/performance/convienience/reliabilty/user friendly/ & a host of other requirements/needs/preferences etc.

They are not that security consious as you are or anybody on this site would be.

Operating Systems are like human being-they have their strengths & weaknesses.None of them is perfect or fullproof.

M.S. should send out(hire) students in their free time to go & reach out those buyers out there(in shops/malls) & ask simple questions-

# Why would you buy Vista or Why would you not buy Vista.
# why do you prefer WinXP over Vista & vice a versa.

You will get some very upsetting responses (not the HATE M.S. responses)

quote:
I don't know where you get that idea. SP3 for WinXP has been in development for longer than Vista has even been on the market.


I was implying the sales/revenues etc & not the development time etc.

To summarize it with due respect for your opinions-we were on different wave lengths-Still I find your comment very usefull.


By amandahugnkiss on 10/10/2007 5:56:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Operating Systems are like human being-they have their strengths & weaknesses.None of them is perfect or fullproof.


F off, I am fuckin perfect, I squeeze cheeze into diomands,
I fart sky scrapers, and I own the worlds tallest bridge (which is kinda stupid cause bridges are supposed to span stuff, still, this one is 863 stories tall, I think, then there's the fact that it's made of diamonds, that helps too).

quote:
If any of my responses have in anyway offended you-I certainly regret it-not that I intended it in anyway.

Such a clever whore you are, it's like one of them before and after puzzles on wheel of fortune.

quote:
You think in terms of security-but the buyers think of price/performance/convienience/reliabilty/user friendly/ & a host of other requirements/needs/preferences etc.
That's phenominal work there CC, they think about certain aspects that they associate with buying a PC and then make decisions based on the factors they think are important. Fantastic.<qoute>


RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By crystal clear on 10/9/2007 12:38:57 PM , Rating: 2
Contrary to popular belief, Windows XP SP3 does ship with all-new features - not just patches and hotfixes, most of them backported from Windows Vista:

Windows XP SP3 now contains 1,073 patches/hotfixes, not including those in previous service packs. Of the 1,073 included updates, 114 are for security-related issues. The remainder are updates to performance & reliability, bugfixes, improvements to kernel-mode driver modules, and many BSOD fixes.


http://neosmart.net/blog/2007/windows-xp-sp3-beta-...

"Even better than Vista"?

Yes from the buyers point of view.
(Not to be misunderstood that Vista is not a good OS)
The ultimate decider is the buyer !


By crystal clear on 10/9/2007 2:30:04 PM , Rating: 1
The buyers for me are the MVP-Most Valuable Person


RE: SP3 could be a serious blow to Vista.
By mechBgon on 10/9/2007 10:32:39 PM , Rating: 2
Well, unless something changes, I believe you will have the ongoing option to buy an OEM Vista Business license and exercise downgrade rights to Windows XP for as long as OEM Vista is available, just like buying an OEM WinXP Pro license today grants you downgrade rights to Win2000 Pro.

More info: http://oem.microsoft.com/downloads/Disti_Product_G...

Maybe this helps ease your concerns?

MVP, Windows Shell/User


By crystal clear on 10/10/2007 7:20:56 AM , Rating: 2
I would like to see" market demand drive decisions on when to stop selling Windows XP".

This is what I would say to M.S.-

# Let the market take its course of transistion from XP to Vista.

# Switch from the hard sell approach to the soft sell approach.

To summarize it-"Let the market decide"
I can safely assume that by Oct/Nov 08 you will start seeing WinXP fading gradually in the background & not a "instant death". .

I am not against Vista but see very crystal clear the market indicators & reactions/responses.

It says "Wait dont push us-Dont rush-give it time"

Till then you have the time to work & develop the Vista even further.


By crystal clear on 10/9/2007 1:33:37 PM , Rating: 2
The title of my comment itself summarizes the below-

Contrary to popular belief, Windows XP SP3 does ship with all-new features - not just patches and hotfixes, most of them backported from Windows Vista:

catch words-

SP3 does ship with all-new features - most of them backported from Windows Vista:


This is the serious blow !

If MVPs were in the selling business,they would certainly know the buyers opinions & views.


The Problem with Win XP.
By michal1980 on 10/9/07, Rating: -1
RE: The Problem with Win XP.
By michal1980 on 10/10/07, Rating: -1
"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il











botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki