Anybody using Vista's built in Media Center?

Anybody using Vista's built in Media Center?
Because I have a question.

I have a new i7 (a quad core with HT - for 8 threads) computer and I have
been running Windows 7 on it. I have not run Vista on it yet. I had Vista
with my previous computer, a Pentium 4 with HT. As I recorded TV with Vista
on my older computer, the time to display the list of TV recordings would
grow longer and longer, eventually taking 2 minutes (my screen saver would
kick in before media center was finished compiling the list) with around 500
to 600 recordings or more.

On my new i7 computer running Windows 7 RC, with about 500 recordings
(double that if I plug in my external drive), the time it takes to display
the list is almost instantaneous. Does Windows 7 Media Center have a better
algorithm for calculating the list than the Vista version of Media Center,
or is my i7 computer that much faster than a 6 year old computer?
What length of time are Vista Media Center users experiencing on newer
hardware with regards to displaying the list of shows?

Gary Mount wrote:
> Anybody using Vista's built in Media Center?
> Because I have a question.
>
> I have a new i7 (a quad core with HT - for 8 threads) computer and I
> have been running Windows 7 on it. I have not run Vista on it yet. I had
> Vista with my previous computer, a Pentium 4 with HT. As I recorded TV
> with Vista on my older computer, the time to display the list of TV
> recordings would grow longer and longer, eventually taking 2 minutes (my
> screen saver would kick in before media center was finished compiling
> the list) with around 500 to 600 recordings or more.
>
> On my new i7 computer running Windows 7 RC, with about 500 recordings
> (double that if I plug in my external drive), the time it takes to
> display the list is almost instantaneous. Does Windows 7 Media Center
> have a better algorithm for calculating the list than the Vista version
> of Media Center, or is my i7 computer that much faster than a 6 year old
> computer?
> What length of time are Vista Media Center users experiencing on newer
> hardware with regards to displaying the list of shows?
>
>


W7 media center seems better here too, I like the bar that allows you to
scroll through a recording, and yes my Vista takes longer to display
recorded TV - It first says no shows have been recorded.

I have less recorded than you but my guess is the time would be the same
pro rata.

Now, I don't think the volume of material has changed much, but I did
change the location settings and have a feeling that it goes off to
"Search" for media before it comes back with anything, which is why mine
now seems slower than when first installed.

"Gary Mount" <> wrote in message
news:0EC9CCE8-5082-45D5-A3A3-...
> Anybody using Vista's built in Media Center?
> Because I have a question.
>
> I have a new i7 (a quad core with HT - for 8 threads) computer and I have
> been running Windows 7 on it. I have not run Vista on it yet. I had Vista
> with my previous computer, a Pentium 4 with HT. As I recorded TV with
> Vista on my older computer, the time to display the list of TV recordings
> would grow longer and longer, eventually taking 2 minutes (my screen saver
> would kick in before media center was finished compiling the list) with
> around 500 to 600 recordings or more.
>
> On my new i7 computer running Windows 7 RC, with about 500 recordings
> (double that if I plug in my external drive), the time it takes to display
> the list is almost instantaneous. Does Windows 7 Media Center have a
> better algorithm for calculating the list than the Vista version of Media
> Center, or is my i7 computer that much faster than a 6 year old computer?
> What length of time are Vista Media Center users experiencing on newer
> hardware with regards to displaying the list of shows?
>
>



Dunno, because I tend to keep just 2 or 3 recordings in 'Recorded TV' at a
time, before shifting them elsewhere; so can't really help much. I regard
'Recorded TV' more as a temporary staging post, rather than as a final
destination, but each to their own usage.

Anyhow (on side note) hopefully if or when they update their algorithms, at
the same time they'll update the algorithm that calculates how much disc
space is required to record a program. It often seems to vastly overestimate
the space required here, especially with 'High Definition' recordings.

--
Jon

Jon wrote:
>
> "Gary Mount" <> wrote in message
> news:0EC9CCE8-5082-45D5-A3A3-...
>> Anybody using Vista's built in Media Center?
>> Because I have a question.
>>
>> I have a new i7 (a quad core with HT - for 8 threads) computer and I
>> have been running Windows 7 on it. I have not run Vista on it yet. I
>> had Vista with my previous computer, a Pentium 4 with HT. As I
>> recorded TV with Vista on my older computer, the time to display the
>> list of TV recordings would grow longer and longer, eventually taking
>> 2 minutes (my screen saver would kick in before media center was
>> finished compiling the list) with around 500 to 600 recordings or more.
>>
>> On my new i7 computer running Windows 7 RC, with about 500 recordings
>> (double that if I plug in my external drive), the time it takes to
>> display the list is almost instantaneous. Does Windows 7 Media Center
>> have a better algorithm for calculating the list than the Vista
>> version of Media Center, or is my i7 computer that much faster than a
>> 6 year old computer?
>> What length of time are Vista Media Center users experiencing on newer
>> hardware with regards to displaying the list of shows?
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Dunno, because I tend to keep just 2 or 3 recordings in 'Recorded TV' at
> a time, before shifting them elsewhere; so can't really help much. I
> regard 'Recorded TV' more as a temporary staging post, rather than as a
> final destination, but each to their own usage.
>
> Anyhow (on side note) hopefully if or when they update their algorithms,
> at the same time they'll update the algorithm that calculates how much
> disc space is required to record a program. It often seems to vastly
> overestimate the space required here, especially with 'High Definition'
> recordings.
>

If you like the Vista version I think you will like the W7 version even
more - though I have not used it enough to comment on storage etc. It
does have some nice added functions.