Win XP SP3 vs Vista SP1

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...over-vista-sp1

---
After a disappointing showing by Windows Vista SP1 (see previous post),
we were pleasantly surprised to discover that Windows XP Service Pack 3
(v.3244) delivers a measurable performance boost to this aging desktop
OS. Testing with OfficeBench showed an ~10% performance boost vs. the
same configuration running under Windows XP w/Service Pack 2.

Since SP3 was supposed to be mostly a bug-fix/patch consolidation
release - unlike w/Vista SP1, Microsoft made no promises of improved
performance for XP - the unexpected speed boost comes as a nice bonus.
In fact, XP SP3 is shaping-up to be a "must have" update for the
majority of users who are still running Redmond's not-so-latest and
greatest desktop OS.
---

I don't think that is a surprise.
I haven't been impressed with Vista since the first Beta build.
The RTM isn't anything that I prefer to use, but since I have to support it,
I suffer through it.
When XP was released, I could see the improvements over NT, W2K and W98/ME.
To me, this pig they call Vista isn't an improvement.

--
A Professional Amateur...If anyone knew it all, none of would be here!

Change Alpha to Numeric to reply
"occam" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...over-vista-sp1
>
> ---
> After a disappointing showing by Windows Vista SP1 (see previous post), we
> were pleasantly surprised to discover that Windows XP Service Pack 3
> (v.3244) delivers a measurable performance boost to this aging desktop OS.
> Testing with OfficeBench showed an ~10% performance boost vs. the same
> configuration running under Windows XP w/Service Pack 2.
>
> Since SP3 was supposed to be mostly a bug-fix/patch consolidation
> release - unlike w/Vista SP1, Microsoft made no promises of improved
> performance for XP - the unexpected speed boost comes as a nice bonus. In
> fact, XP SP3 is shaping-up to be a "must have" update for the majority of
> users who are still running Redmond's not-so-latest and greatest desktop
> OS.
> ---

occam;523634 Wrote:
> 'Neowin.net - Windows XP SP3 Yields Performance Gains Over Vista SP1'
> (http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...over-vista-sp1)
>
> ---
> After a disappointing showing by Windows Vista SP1 (see previous post),
> we were pleasantly surprised to discover that Windows XP Service Pack 3
> (v.3244) delivers a measurable performance boost to this aging desktop
> OS. Testing with OfficeBench showed an ~10% performance boost vs. the
> same configuration running under Windows XP w/Service Pack 2.
>
> Since SP3 was supposed to be mostly a bug-fix/patch consolidation
> release - unlike w/Vista SP1, Microsoft made no promises of improved
> performance for XP - the unexpected speed boost comes as a nice bonus.
> In fact, XP SP3 is shaping-up to be a "must have" update for the
> majority of users who are still running Redmond's not-so-latest and
> greatest desktop OS.
> ---

How can a comparison be made accurately between XPSP3 & VSP1 when both
are still in beta? There are bound to be some issues that have yet to be
plugged that will results in current "disappointing" results.

Rather wait for both service packs to be able to make a better
comparison.


--
dzomlija

____________________________________
Peter Alexander Dzomlija
Do you hear, huh? The Alpha and The Omega? Death and Rebirth? -And as
you die, so shall I be Reborn-...

- ASUS A8N32-SLI-Deluxe
- AMD Atlon 64 Dual-Core 4800+
- 4GB DDR400
- ASUS nVidia 6600
- Thermaltake Tai-Chi Watercooled Chassis
- 1207GB Total Formatted Storage
- Vista Ultimate x64
- CodeGear Delphi 2007'http://dzomlija.spaces.live.com/' (http://dzomlija.spaces.live.com/)

Not Me wrote:
> I don't think that is a surprise.
> I haven't been impressed with Vista since the first Beta build.
> The RTM isn't anything that I prefer to use, but since I have to support it,
> I suffer through it.
> When XP was released, I could see the improvements over NT, W2K and W98/ME.
> To me, this pig they call Vista isn't an improvement.
>

You obviously haven't used it very much if you haven't noticed any
improvements. That or you are incapable of handling changes that are
introduced with a new operating system.

I'm a beta tester of both SP1 and SP3 and both will give you a small
speed increase but only in certain situations. I hear so much crab being
sad about SP1&SP3 that it makes my hair stand on end.
Wake up People.


--
caretaker

dzomlija wrote:
> occam;523634 Wrote:
>> 'Neowin.net - Windows XP SP3 Yields Performance Gains Over Vista SP1'
>> (http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...over-vista-sp1)
>>
>> ---
>> After a disappointing showing by Windows Vista SP1 (see previous post),
>> we were pleasantly surprised to discover that Windows XP Service Pack 3
>> (v.3244) delivers a measurable performance boost to this aging desktop
>> OS. Testing with OfficeBench showed an ~10% performance boost vs. the
>> same configuration running under Windows XP w/Service Pack 2.
>>
>> Since SP3 was supposed to be mostly a bug-fix/patch consolidation
>> release - unlike w/Vista SP1, Microsoft made no promises of improved
>> performance for XP - the unexpected speed boost comes as a nice bonus.
>> In fact, XP SP3 is shaping-up to be a "must have" update for the
>> majority of users who are still running Redmond's not-so-latest and
>> greatest desktop OS.
>> ---
>
> How can a comparison be made accurately between XPSP3 & VSP1 when both
> are still in beta? There are bound to be some issues that have yet to be
> plugged that will results in current "disappointing" results.
>


Easily. You run officebench - that is what it is there for. Your
experience so far should have told you that *all* MS software is 'beta'
at best - no matter what the label says. (Remember Vista 'Gold' ?)

occam;525340 Wrote:
> Easily. You run officebench - that is what it is there for. Your
> experience so far should have told you that *all* MS software is 'beta'
> at best - no matter what the label says. (Remember Vista 'Gold' ?)

I can't say that I do. What is Vista "Gold"?

An no, not all Microsoft software can be considered BETA. I'm curious
as toi what prompted you to make such an inaccurate statement?


--
dzomlija

____________________________________
Peter Alexander Dzomlija
Do you hear, huh? The Alpha and The Omega? Death and Rebirth? -And as
you die, so shall I be Reborn-...

- ASUS A8N32-SLI-Deluxe
- AMD Atlon 64 Dual-Core 4800+
- 4GB DDR400
- ASUS nVidia 6600
- Thermaltake Tai-Chi Watercooled Chassis
- 1207GB Total Formatted Storage
- Vista Ultimate x64
- CodeGear Delphi 2007'http://dzomlija.spaces.live.com/' (http://dzomlija.spaces.live.com/)

dzomlija wrote:
> occam;525340 Wrote:
>> Easily. You run officebench - that is what it is there for. Your
>> experience so far should have told you that *all* MS software is 'beta'
>> at best - no matter what the label says. (Remember Vista 'Gold' ?)
>
> I can't say that I do. What is Vista "Gold"?
>
> An no, not all Microsoft software can be considered BETA. I'm curious
> as toi what prompted you to make such an inaccurate statement?
>
>

dzomlija, go to
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/f...tasp1beta.mspx
and read

----
PressPass: Isn’t that a long time between Windows Vista RTM (or “gold
code”) and the release of first service pack, at least compared with
past versions of Windows?

DeVaan: [blah, blah]
In fact, the use of the term “gold code” is somewhat of an anachronism
in an environment where we have product feedback mechanisms available to
us that help us continuously identify and diagnose real-world software
issues and the update mechanisms in place to regularly deliver fixes for
those issues to hundreds of millions of customers. We think like most
major software projects, WindowsVista was designed to improve
continuously from the time it is purchased.
----

The last sentence "We think like most major software projects,
WindowsVista was designed to improve continuously from the time it is
purchased." says exactly what I said - Vista is 'beta' ... until the
release of Windows 7.

Gold usually means the original RTM release of a product.
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
"dzomlija" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> occam;525340 Wrote:
>> Easily. You run officebench - that is what it is there for. Your
>> experience so far should have told you that *all* MS software is 'beta'
>> at best - no matter what the label says. (Remember Vista 'Gold' ?)
>
> I can't say that I do. What is Vista "Gold"?
>
> An no, not all Microsoft software can be considered BETA. I'm curious
> as toi what prompted you to make such an inaccurate statement?
>
>
> --
> dzomlija
>
> ____________________________________
> Peter Alexander Dzomlija
> Do you hear, huh? The Alpha and The Omega? Death and Rebirth? -And as
> you die, so shall I be Reborn-...
>
> - ASUS A8N32-SLI-Deluxe
> - AMD Atlon 64 Dual-Core 4800+
> - 4GB DDR400
> - ASUS nVidia 6600
> - Thermaltake Tai-Chi Watercooled Chassis
> - 1207GB Total Formatted Storage
> - Vista Ultimate x64
> - CodeGear Delphi 2007'http://dzomlija.spaces.live.com/'
> (http://dzomlija.spaces.live.com/)

On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 11:02:18 +0100, occam wrote:

> The last sentence "We think like most major software projects,
> WindowsVista was designed to improve continuously from the time
> it is purchased." says exactly what I said - Vista is 'beta' ...
> until the release of Windows 7.

Rubbish!

--
Chris Game

"A facility for quotation covers the absence of original thought."
-- Dorothy Leigh Sayers