SLOW

Discussion in 'Windows Vista General Discussion' started by Larry, Jul 1, 2006.

  1. Larry

    Larry Guest

    Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    Larry, Jul 1, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Larry

    Travis King Guest

    Yeah and also the code hasn't been fully optimized yet either. Now if it's
    still slow after that, there are no excuses...
    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    Travis King, Jul 1, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Larry

    Jason Guest

    It is a little slower then I was expecting, but RC1 should be better when it
    is released.

    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    Jason, Jul 1, 2006
    #3
  4. Larry

    Chad Harris Guest

    Re: SLOW--kill services/processes/defrag

    The clear, confident, connected MSFT is paying developers 4 grand a day to
    go after the debug code but if it's "dogcrap slow" than you need to end the
    dogcrap processes and services that you con't need to run and get a
    competent defragger that isn't the dogcrap defragger that ships with Vista
    like Perfect Disk or Diskeeper. I defrag it every couple days with Perfect
    Disk and you can tell the difference. It's never been slow for me on the
    same box as XP; in fact many things are faster.

    LOL. after RTM the refrain will be SP1 will be better.

    CH

    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    Chad Harris, Jul 2, 2006
    #4
  5. Larry

    jonah Guest

    On Sat, 1 Jul 2006 18:11:13 -0400, "Larry" <>
    wrote:

    >Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?


    Yeah and its like watching paint dry if you put office 12 beta in as
    well, speeds up noticably with 1Gb + ram though.

    Jonah
    jonah, Jul 2, 2006
    #5
  6. Larry

    Chad Harris Guest

    Office 12 beta in for months and not slow if you kill services/processes and
    defrag often with Perfect Disk or diskeeper. Kick spyware off too.
    Remember Defender only gets 60-70% right now at best so use a few spyware
    booters at the rope line.

    CH

    "jonah" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 1 Jul 2006 18:11:13 -0400, "Larry" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?

    >
    > Yeah and its like watching paint dry if you put office 12 beta in as
    > well, speeds up noticably with 1Gb + ram though.
    >
    > Jonah
    Chad Harris, Jul 2, 2006
    #6
  7. Colin Barnhorst, Jul 2, 2006
    #7
  8. More likely it is that your hardware is inadequate. While Vista still has a
    lot of debug code *and* is not optimized for performance, it still runs
    fairly well on decent hardware. Put it on an older machine and you can
    expect to be walking, not running.

    --
    Best of Luck,

    Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
    http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
    Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    Rick \Nutcase\ Rogers, Jul 2, 2006
    #8
  9. Larry

    Art Guest

    I noticed that the hdd where Vista is installed gets severely fragmented
    right after Vista first starts. But the problem is Vista doesn't see its
    drive as fragmented. The Disk Defragmenter on Vista diesn't see Vista's files
    as fragmented. But when you boot up another hdd with XP and check Vista's
    drive for fragmentation, you'll be surpised the whole drive is red and green.
    I highly recommend checking Vista's drive for fragmentation using another XP
    on another drive. I've seen this 4 times now, as I've re-installed Vista 4
    times. After the defrag, Vista will run faster, boot quicker even on Aero
    Glass mode, less hard drive activity. I currently use Vista x64 on an 80GB
    Maxtor IDE.

    "Larry" wrote:

    > Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    Art, Jul 2, 2006
    #9
  10. Larry

    Chad Harris Guest

    Re: SLOW--getta decent defragger!

    Art---

    Defrag with a real defragger (you won't have one ever shipped with a
    Windows OS), and do it 3X per week and more if you're using graphics
    intensive apps often. Also make sure that you have enough free space to do
    a competent defrag. Perfect Disk says 5%, MSKBs say 15%, Execsoft says more
    is better 20-30% in their white papers.

    Because of cost, legal considerations some 3rd apps are never going to be
    good quality that are shipped with Windows. Defragging is one. Use
    www.raxco.com Perfect Disk or use www.diskeeper.com Diskeeper. In XP, the
    defragger was a watered down version of Diskeeper made by ExecutiveSoft.
    They have a free public beta that will work on Vista anybuild done made yet.

    http://www.diskeeper.com/profile/submit-select.aspx?a=l&PId=104

    I saw; it says 5384 and now you have Vista Beta 2 or Vista 5456.5 "Interim"
    aka ("are we there /the TBTs wanna new build no matter the bugs not fixed
    in the prior one--kids in adult bodies whining for new builds" just to say
    they have the latest whether anything has been done significant since the
    last one) it'll work. BTW that phenomenon is called "superficial reverse
    Schadenfreude" or the illusion of elitism without the substance to back it
    up. It's in the water at Redmond even though 99% of 'em can't spell it.

    1) You can use Executive Soft's www.diskeeper.com Diskeeper 10 now as a 30
    day full functionality trial available for Vista X86. I have Diskeeper 8.0
    with its latest update working fine on Vista and it is much better than the
    defragger that Vista or Windows One Care will ship with. Since defragging
    is highly important, and not a sexy enough feature for MSFT to ever
    emphasize anywhere on their websites or in their promotional material, I
    think it's mandatory to get a 3rd party defragger. Let me put it
    simply--defragging helps speed your PC significantly if done regularly. I
    noticed that in the http://oca.microsoft.com hang errors explanations that
    no mention is made of degragmentation and its vaule, but a number of off the
    wall causes for hang are mentioned.

    2) You can use Perfect Disk www.raxco.com but in order to do it you have to
    patch the MSI or the installer with ORCA from the platform SDK.

    3) Also if you dual boot XP and Vista, and use Perfect Disk 8.0 and up, you
    can
    use it to defrag your Vista drive from the XP drive much better than with
    the watered down defragger MSFT ships with Vista, and you can do boot
    defrags as well. Raxco's perfect disc also requires only 5% of free space
    to do an effective defrag. See: www.raxco.com

    Either of these two is light years better than anything XP or Vista ships
    with and it is important--it's not in the frill category.

    Good luck,

    CH


    "Art" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I noticed that the hdd where Vista is installed gets severely fragmented
    > right after Vista first starts. But the problem is Vista doesn't see its
    > drive as fragmented. The Disk Defragmenter on Vista diesn't see Vista's
    > files
    > as fragmented. But when you boot up another hdd with XP and check Vista's
    > drive for fragmentation, you'll be surpised the whole drive is red and
    > green.
    > I highly recommend checking Vista's drive for fragmentation using another
    > XP
    > on another drive. I've seen this 4 times now, as I've re-installed Vista
    > 4
    > times. After the defrag, Vista will run faster, boot quicker even on Aero
    > Glass mode, less hard drive activity. I currently use Vista x64 on an 80GB
    > Maxtor IDE.
    >
    > "Larry" wrote:
    >
    >> Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    Chad Harris, Jul 2, 2006
    #10
  11. Larry

    Bill Guest

    Re: SLOW--getta decent defragger!

    Chad,

    I took your suggestion, d/l+installed Diskeeper Home Edition 10.0 15 day
    trial program. I did this on C drive - Windows XP SP2. I defragged both C
    and D (Vista) drive. On C, it found 693 fragments and got all but 1 cleaned
    up. This is the original C drive that came with the machine last year. (Dell
    XPS Gen 5, 3.8GHz 800FSB, 1GB DDR2 SDRAM @ 667MHz - 2 WD Raptor 74 GB 10K
    HDS.)

    I also defragged D, found over 100 fragments, cleaned up all of them. This
    is the drive I installed Vista Beta 2, build 5384, a few weeks ago. I
    defragged D while booted up to C - seemed to work OK.

    I am impressed with Diskeeper after this brief use - now I'll go read the
    instructions and see how/when/etc. to properly care for my machine. I
    believe the price for this program is $29.95 - not too bad at all.

    Thanks for ''heads up"

    Bill




    "Chad Harris" <Bushisamoron.net> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Art---
    >
    > Defrag with a real defragger (you won't have one ever shipped with a
    > Windows OS), and do it 3X per week and more if you're using graphics
    > intensive apps often. Also make sure that you have enough free space to
    > do a competent defrag. Perfect Disk says 5%, MSKBs say 15%, Execsoft says
    > more is better 20-30% in their white papers.
    >
    > Because of cost, legal considerations some 3rd apps are never going to be
    > good quality that are shipped with Windows. Defragging is one. Use
    > www.raxco.com Perfect Disk or use www.diskeeper.com Diskeeper. In XP, the
    > defragger was a watered down version of Diskeeper made by ExecutiveSoft.
    > They have a free public beta that will work on Vista anybuild done made
    > yet.
    >
    > http://www.diskeeper.com/profile/submit-select.aspx?a=l&PId=104
    >
    > I saw; it says 5384 and now you have Vista Beta 2 or Vista 5456.5
    > "Interim" aka ("are we there /the TBTs wanna new build no matter the bugs
    > not fixed in the prior one--kids in adult bodies whining for new builds"
    > just to say they have the latest whether anything has been done
    > significant since the last one) it'll work. BTW that phenomenon is
    > called "superficial reverse Schadenfreude" or the illusion of elitism
    > without the substance to back it up. It's in the water at Redmond even
    > though 99% of 'em can't spell it.
    >
    > 1) You can use Executive Soft's www.diskeeper.com Diskeeper 10 now as a 30
    > day full functionality trial available for Vista X86. I have Diskeeper
    > 8.0
    > with its latest update working fine on Vista and it is much better than
    > the
    > defragger that Vista or Windows One Care will ship with. Since defragging
    > is highly important, and not a sexy enough feature for MSFT to ever
    > emphasize anywhere on their websites or in their promotional material, I
    > think it's mandatory to get a 3rd party defragger. Let me put it
    > simply--defragging helps speed your PC significantly if done regularly. I
    > noticed that in the http://oca.microsoft.com hang errors explanations that
    > no mention is made of degragmentation and its vaule, but a number of off
    > the
    > wall causes for hang are mentioned.
    >
    > 2) You can use Perfect Disk www.raxco.com but in order to do it you have
    > to
    > patch the MSI or the installer with ORCA from the platform SDK.
    >
    > 3) Also if you dual boot XP and Vista, and use Perfect Disk 8.0 and up,
    > you can
    > use it to defrag your Vista drive from the XP drive much better than with
    > the watered down defragger MSFT ships with Vista, and you can do boot
    > defrags as well. Raxco's perfect disc also requires only 5% of free space
    > to do an effective defrag. See: www.raxco.com
    >
    > Either of these two is light years better than anything XP or Vista ships
    > with and it is important--it's not in the frill category.
    >
    > Good luck,
    >
    > CH
    >
    >
    > "Art" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I noticed that the hdd where Vista is installed gets severely fragmented
    >> right after Vista first starts. But the problem is Vista doesn't see its
    >> drive as fragmented. The Disk Defragmenter on Vista diesn't see Vista's
    >> files
    >> as fragmented. But when you boot up another hdd with XP and check Vista's
    >> drive for fragmentation, you'll be surpised the whole drive is red and
    >> green.
    >> I highly recommend checking Vista's drive for fragmentation using another
    >> XP
    >> on another drive. I've seen this 4 times now, as I've re-installed Vista
    >> 4
    >> times. After the defrag, Vista will run faster, boot quicker even on Aero
    >> Glass mode, less hard drive activity. I currently use Vista x64 on an
    >> 80GB
    >> Maxtor IDE.
    >>
    >> "Larry" wrote:
    >>
    >>> Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?

    >
    >
    Bill, Jul 2, 2006
    #11
  12. Larry

    gs Guest

    pardon me for jumping in, how would a amd athlon x64 3700+ on Asus A7N-Vm
    with !gb behave?
    It does NVIDIA Nforce 4 chip set GPU 64MB

    "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Not knowing anything about your computer, who can say?
    >
    > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375/en-us
    >
    > "Larry" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?

    >
    >
    gs, Jul 3, 2006
    #12
  13. Larry

    Larry Guest

    Thank you for the good information I have done all of the things suggested
    b4 sending this message 1 Gig ram
    Disk keeper 10 for Vista I will keep my eyes open for things that could be
    running that I do not need


    "gs" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > pardon me for jumping in, how would a amd athlon x64 3700+ on Asus A7N-Vm
    > with !gb behave?
    > It does NVIDIA Nforce 4 chip set GPU 64MB
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Not knowing anything about your computer, who can say?
    >>
    >> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375/en-us
    >>
    >> "Larry" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    Larry, Jul 4, 2006
    #13
  14. "jonah" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sat, 1 Jul 2006 18:11:13 -0400, "Larry" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?

    >
    > Yeah and its like watching paint dry if you put office 12 beta in as
    > well, speeds up noticably with 1Gb + ram though.


    1gig is min for beta 2 to be 'friendly' . But the MS team known that they
    cant expect people to have to buy 2 gig of ram for the Gold version of
    Vista.
    (1 gig right now feel so tiny )
    Their goal is to have something running decently in 512 meg...

    But time is running out :(

    Stephan



    >
    > Jonah
    Stephan Schaem, Jul 5, 2006
    #14
  15. make sure you kill all the searching tools and whatnot... made a huge
    diference.
    Not using Aero also is a big speed boost.

    To ship, I think MS need to liscense technology from google for fast search
    indexing :(

    Stephan


    "Larry" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Thank you for the good information I have done all of the things suggested
    > b4 sending this message 1 Gig ram
    > Disk keeper 10 for Vista I will keep my eyes open for things that could
    > be running that I do not need
    >
    >
    > "gs" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> pardon me for jumping in, how would a amd athlon x64 3700+ on Asus A7N-Vm
    >> with !gb behave?
    >> It does NVIDIA Nforce 4 chip set GPU 64MB
    >>
    >> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Not knowing anything about your computer, who can say?
    >>>
    >>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375/en-us
    >>>
    >>> "Larry" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    Stephan Schaem, Jul 5, 2006
    #15
  16. Larry

    John Scott Guest

    I have a IBM NetVista with P4 2.0 gig and a Nvidia FX5200. I definately think
    Vista runs slower than XP. Im not sure speed will improve that much. I can
    just imagine how slow a computer from Dell will be out of the box. With all
    the other junk they have preinstalled and loaded at boot. I guess thats why
    Office 2007 has been delayed again to the general public because of beta
    testers complaints of slowness.
    Vista seems to be heading in that direction! Other than the slowness mine
    5384 has been running nicely no real problems. I would like to see more third
    party software work with Vista. Especially some of the plugins for IE 7. I
    guess they are coming!

    "Larry" wrote:

    > Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    John Scott, Jul 6, 2006
    #16
  17. It is because the build still contains debugging code and has not been
    optimized yet. Both cause a performance hit.

    "John Scott" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I have a IBM NetVista with P4 2.0 gig and a Nvidia FX5200. I definately
    >think
    > Vista runs slower than XP. Im not sure speed will improve that much. I can
    > just imagine how slow a computer from Dell will be out of the box. With
    > all
    > the other junk they have preinstalled and loaded at boot. I guess thats
    > why
    > Office 2007 has been delayed again to the general public because of beta
    > testers complaints of slowness.
    > Vista seems to be heading in that direction! Other than the slowness mine
    > 5384 has been running nicely no real problems. I would like to see more
    > third
    > party software work with Vista. Especially some of the plugins for IE 7. I
    > guess they are coming!
    >
    > "Larry" wrote:
    >
    >> Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    Colin Barnhorst, Jul 7, 2006
    #17
  18. Larry

    Chad Harris Guest

    Re: MSFT Searches and MSN Searches are primitive-ought to contract to Google or others for help

    Google search would be a good start for MSN Search and MSFT. They hired one
    of a few Distinguished Scientist's Dr. Gary Flake from Yahoo Search to
    revamp search. So far not much in the way of results in Vista,
    www.microsoft.com , MSDN's sites or Technet. Certainly not much progress in
    the MSKB search as well.

    CH


    "Stephan Schaem" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > make sure you kill all the searching tools and whatnot... made a huge
    > diference.
    > Not using Aero also is a big speed boost.
    >
    > To ship, I think MS need to liscense technology from google for fast
    > search indexing :(
    >
    > Stephan
    >
    >
    > "Larry" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Thank you for the good information I have done all of the things
    >> suggested b4 sending this message 1 Gig ram
    >> Disk keeper 10 for Vista I will keep my eyes open for things that could
    >> be running that I do not need
    >>
    >>
    >> "gs" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> pardon me for jumping in, how would a amd athlon x64 3700+ on Asus
    >>> A7N-Vm with !gb behave?
    >>> It does NVIDIA Nforce 4 chip set GPU 64MB
    >>>
    >>> "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Not knowing anything about your computer, who can say?
    >>>>
    >>>> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375/en-us
    >>>>
    >>>> "Larry" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
    Chad Harris, Jul 10, 2006
    #18
  19. Larry

    Chad Harris Guest

    Re: MSFT is paying outside developers 3-4 grand per day to debug Vista

    At 3-4 grand a day for outside developers to debug, (which is what MSFT is
    paying them at this very moment to come to Redmond and bail them out, you'd
    think there would be a scintilla of progress but I don't see much.

    CH


    "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    news:%23CQM%...
    > It is because the build still contains debugging code and has not been
    > optimized yet. Both cause a performance hit.
    >
    > "John Scott" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I have a IBM NetVista with P4 2.0 gig and a Nvidia FX5200. I definately
    >>think
    >> Vista runs slower than XP. Im not sure speed will improve that much. I
    >> can
    >> just imagine how slow a computer from Dell will be out of the box. With
    >> all
    >> the other junk they have preinstalled and loaded at boot. I guess thats
    >> why
    >> Office 2007 has been delayed again to the general public because of beta
    >> testers complaints of slowness.
    >> Vista seems to be heading in that direction! Other than the slowness mine
    >> 5384 has been running nicely no real problems. I would like to see more
    >> third
    >> party software work with Vista. Especially some of the plugins for IE 7.
    >> I
    >> guess they are coming!
    >>
    >> "Larry" wrote:
    >>
    >>> Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?

    >
    >
    Chad Harris, Jul 10, 2006
    #19
  20. Larry

    Alan Simpson Guest

    Re: MSFT is paying outside developers 3-4 grand per day to debug Vista

    Hey, it's over 50 million lines of code. It's gonna take some time to get
    all the kinks out no matter how many outsiders you hire. Just have to wait
    and see what the next build looks like.



    "Chad Harris" <Bushisamoron.net> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > At 3-4 grand a day for outside developers to debug, (which is what MSFT is
    > paying them at this very moment to come to Redmond and bail them out,
    > you'd think there would be a scintilla of progress but I don't see much.
    >
    > CH
    >
    >
    > "Colin Barnhorst" <colinbarharst(remove)@msn.com> wrote in message
    > news:%23CQM%...
    >> It is because the build still contains debugging code and has not been
    >> optimized yet. Both cause a performance hit.
    >>
    >> "John Scott" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>>I have a IBM NetVista with P4 2.0 gig and a Nvidia FX5200. I definately
    >>>think
    >>> Vista runs slower than XP. Im not sure speed will improve that much. I
    >>> can
    >>> just imagine how slow a computer from Dell will be out of the box. With
    >>> all
    >>> the other junk they have preinstalled and loaded at boot. I guess thats
    >>> why
    >>> Office 2007 has been delayed again to the general public because of beta
    >>> testers complaints of slowness.
    >>> Vista seems to be heading in that direction! Other than the slowness
    >>> mine
    >>> 5384 has been running nicely no real problems. I would like to see more
    >>> third
    >>> party software work with Vista. Especially some of the plugins for IE 7.
    >>> I
    >>> guess they are coming!
    >>>
    >>> "Larry" wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Is Vista Dog crap slow because it has so much debug code ?

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    Alan Simpson, Jul 10, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. c-howdy

    slow slow slow

    c-howdy, Jun 27, 2007, in forum: Windows Vista Performance
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    353
    c-howdy
    Jun 27, 2007
  2. JB1300

    Vista Windows are (Not Responding) - Slow Slow Slow

    JB1300, Feb 11, 2007, in forum: Windows Vista General Discussion
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,076
    Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]
    Feb 11, 2007
  3. Darren Jensen

    slow fast slow fast slow fast MP3 playback

    Darren Jensen, Nov 17, 2004, in forum: Windows Media Player
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    251
    Darren Jensen
    Nov 17, 2004
  4. Guidogabby windows 98SE

    KB891711 IS RUNNING AND MY PC IS SLOW SLOW SLOW

    Guidogabby windows 98SE, Mar 11, 2005, in forum: Windows Update
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    272
    Robert
    Mar 14, 2005
  5. QuotaMan

    Slow Slow Slow

    QuotaMan, Feb 9, 2006, in forum: Internet Explorer
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    158
    sdittmar
    Feb 11, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page