Why is Vista 30 times slower than XP in File Transfering?

Earlier today I transfered c 150 files, 1.5gb from Vista to a usb2
drive and it took an hour
When I then transfered those same files from the usb stick to xp it
took 2 mins
Why is Vista so incredibly slow at file transfers?

using 2gb mem and 2 ghz on vista business laptop
and 1 gb mem 1 ghz on xp

weewillie;922928 Wrote:
> Earlier today I transfered c 150 files, 1.5gb from Vista to a usb2
> drive and it took an hour
> When I then transfered those same files from the usb stick to xp it
> took 2 mins
> Why is Vista so incredibly slow at file transfers?
>
> using 2gb mem and 2 ghz on vista business laptop
> and 1 gb mem 1 ghz on xp

weewillie, when you find out, let me know. SP2 was supposed to fix
this, but I haven't noticed a huge improvement since installing the
beta. I do know it is because Vista handles files differently than XP,
but what is different, I don't know

Norm


--
NormCameron

wrote in news:i5igl4ld6lb1prj4goh4a1833kqj5h05dm@
4ax.com:

> Earlier today I transfered c 150 files, 1.5gb from Vista to a usb2
> drive and it took an hour
> When I then transfered those same files from the usb stick to xp it
> took 2 mins
> Why is Vista so incredibly slow at file transfers?
>
> using 2gb mem and 2 ghz on vista business laptop
> and 1 gb mem 1 ghz on xp
>

Some have solved the slow network problem by disabling the on-board NIC and
replacing it with an inexpensive Vista-compatible PCI NIC....for a desktop.

"DanS" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9B835121A2F10thisnthatroadrunnern@85.214.1 05.209...
> wrote in news:i5igl4ld6lb1prj4goh4a1833kqj5h05dm@
> 4ax.com:
>
>> Earlier today I transfered c 150 files, 1.5gb from Vista to a usb2
>> drive and it took an hour
>> When I then transfered those same files from the usb stick to xp it
>> took 2 mins
>> Why is Vista so incredibly slow at file transfers?
>>
>> using 2gb mem and 2 ghz on vista business laptop
>> and 1 gb mem 1 ghz on xp
>>
>
> Some have solved the slow network problem by disabling the on-board NIC
> and
> replacing it with an inexpensive Vista-compatible PCI NIC....for a
> desktop.

that assumes the problem is with a piece of hardware.
it isn't, the problem is Vista...

"john" <> wrote in news:eluplnbaJHA.5488
@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:

> "DanS" <> wrote in message
> news:Xns9B835121A2F10thisnthatroadrunnern@85.214.1 05.209...
>> wrote in news:i5igl4ld6lb1prj4goh4a1833kqj5h05dm@
>> 4ax.com:
>>
>>> Earlier today I transfered c 150 files, 1.5gb from Vista to a usb2
>>> drive and it took an hour
>>> When I then transfered those same files from the usb stick to xp it
>>> took 2 mins
>>> Why is Vista so incredibly slow at file transfers?
>>>
>>> using 2gb mem and 2 ghz on vista business laptop
>>> and 1 gb mem 1 ghz on xp
>>>
>>
>> Some have solved the slow network problem by disabling the on-board
NIC
>> and
>> replacing it with an inexpensive Vista-compatible PCI NIC....for a
>> desktop.
>
> that assumes the problem is with a piece of hardware.

No, it doesn't.

> it isn't, the problem is Vista...

Yes, an interaction between Vista and a piece of hardware. Dumping the
on-board NIC results in a totally different NIC, connected in a different
fashion, and with different drivers.

"DanS" <> wrote in message
news:Xns9B835A72723F4thisnthatroadrunnern@85.214.1 05.209...
> "john" <> wrote in news:eluplnbaJHA.5488
> @TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>
>> "DanS" <> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9B835121A2F10thisnthatroadrunnern@85.214.1 05.209...
>>> wrote in news:i5igl4ld6lb1prj4goh4a1833kqj5h05dm@
>>> 4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> Earlier today I transfered c 150 files, 1.5gb from Vista to a usb2
>>>> drive and it took an hour
>>>> When I then transfered those same files from the usb stick to xp it
>>>> took 2 mins
>>>> Why is Vista so incredibly slow at file transfers?
>>>>
>>>> using 2gb mem and 2 ghz on vista business laptop
>>>> and 1 gb mem 1 ghz on xp
>>>>
>>>
>>> Some have solved the slow network problem by disabling the on-board
> NIC
>>> and
>>> replacing it with an inexpensive Vista-compatible PCI NIC....for a
>>> desktop.
>>
>> that assumes the problem is with a piece of hardware.
>
> No, it doesn't.
>
>> it isn't, the problem is Vista...
>
> Yes, an interaction between Vista and a piece of hardware. Dumping the
> on-board NIC results in a totally different NIC, connected in a different
> fashion, and with different drivers.

How is replacing a network card going to change the speed of file transfer
over a USB connection? It won't. The network card is not being used. This
isn't a network problem. It is a Vista problem.

On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:39:26 -0800, "Alex Clayton"
<> wrote:

>That's not the reason, it is Vista. This is one of the things covered in the
>book Vista Annoyances , but I don't feel like digging the book out to see
>how they explained it. You see it when you use any kind of removable media
>to move stuff. Even with my MP3 players my XP machines are WAY faster than
>this Vista one. It's just one of the things I have learned to live with till
>the next OS comes out.

No, no, no, it CAN'T be Vista! Vista has no problems! Just ask the fan
boys around here.

"+Bob+" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:39:26 -0800, "Alex Clayton"
> <> wrote:
>
>>That's not the reason, it is Vista. This is one of the things covered in
>>the
>>book Vista Annoyances , but I don't feel like digging the book out to see
>>how they explained it. You see it when you use any kind of removable media
>>to move stuff. Even with my MP3 players my XP machines are WAY faster than
>>this Vista one. It's just one of the things I have learned to live with
>>till
>>the next OS comes out.
>
> No, no, no, it CAN'T be Vista! Vista has no problems! Just ask the fan
> boys around here.

You don't seem to understand, Vista moves the files more thoroughly....which
takes longer!

"+Bob+" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:39:26 -0800, "Alex Clayton"
> <> wrote:
>
>>That's not the reason, it is Vista. This is one of the things covered in
>>the
>>book Vista Annoyances , but I don't feel like digging the book out to see
>>how they explained it. You see it when you use any kind of removable media
>>to move stuff. Even with my MP3 players my XP machines are WAY faster than
>>this Vista one. It's just one of the things I have learned to live with
>>till
>>the next OS comes out.
>
> No, no, no, it CAN'T be Vista! Vista has no problems! Just ask the fan
> boys around here.

Keep taking those drugs. They are good for your system.

"Fritz" <> wrote in
news::

> "DanS" <> wrote in message
> news:Xns9B835A72723F4thisnthatroadrunnern@85.214.1 05.209...
>> "john" <> wrote in news:eluplnbaJHA.5488
>> @TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl:
>>
>>> "DanS" <> wrote in
>>> message news:Xns9B835121A2F10thisnthatroadrunnern@85.214.1 05.209...
>>>> wrote in
>>>> news:i5igl4ld6lb1prj4goh4a1833kqj5h05dm@ 4ax.com:
>>>>
>>>>> Earlier today I transfered c 150 files, 1.5gb from Vista to a usb2
>>>>> drive and it took an hour
>>>>> When I then transfered those same files from the usb stick to xp
>>>>> it took 2 mins
>>>>> Why is Vista so incredibly slow at file transfers?
>>>>>
>>>>> using 2gb mem and 2 ghz on vista business laptop
>>>>> and 1 gb mem 1 ghz on xp
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Some have solved the slow network problem by disabling the on-board
>> NIC
>>>> and
>>>> replacing it with an inexpensive Vista-compatible PCI NIC....for a
>>>> desktop.
>>>
>>> that assumes the problem is with a piece of hardware.
>>
>> No, it doesn't.
>>
>>> it isn't, the problem is Vista...
>>
>> Yes, an interaction between Vista and a piece of hardware. Dumping
>> the on-board NIC results in a totally different NIC, connected in a
>> different fashion, and with different drivers.
>
> How is replacing a network card going to change the speed of file
> transfer over a USB connection? It won't. The network card is not
> being used. This isn't a network problem. It is a Vista problem.


DOH! I totally glanced over the USB thing.

(The above still applies to slow network transfers though.)