WinVista faster?

I currently own WinXP pro 64bit and when I saw all the commercials on the
Windows site, I was persuaded that it was an upgrade to make, an improvement.
When I installed winVista 64bit I was excited since everything looked
nicer.. "BUT" here's the catch of my problems... I installed my ATI 64bit
compatible Vista drivers and Creative soundcard and rebooted, then I
installed SuperAntispyware (wich I usualy have) and rebooted again.. I
noticed that my pc did not boot faster as claimed, but a tad slower.. I ran
my games and most of them ran sluggish, showing glitches all over my screen
(dots like what you see when looking at a very old damaged movie). My PC
seemed to be slower overall and when I ran my spyware program, it seemed
windows has infinite spyware, like a virus that reinstalls itself when
removed. I had my spyware scanner attempt to remove the spyware over the
night but when I looked at my pc, it was totally ruined.. It was even more
slower and all the special effects had gone so I was forced to reinstall
WinXP. I have a friend with exactly the same problem and both of us own an
original copy of WinVista.
Can someone help me with WHY WindowsVista might work awfully crappy on my
system compared to WindowsXPpro?
Perhaps Vista requires specific hardware to NOT be slower?

My current system config =

AMD Athlon X2 4800+ 64bit
Kingston 4GB DDR2 PC3200 /800
Asus A8R32-MVP DELUXE
ATI 1900XTX 512MB x2 Crossfire
Philips 22" monitor
Creative SB Fatal1ty Xtremegamer
Creative inspire 7.1 speakers
Raptor 74GB & 140GB harddrives 10K (SATA)
OZC power supply 700W
4x DVD Writer 48x read 24x R 8x RW

The Tragedy called Vista, some astonishing revelations...

Some people cannot grasp even the simplest things regarding vista.

As a reply to Franks stupid accusations that I never post anything original,
or even worse that im not smart,
I thought I would take a few minutes to pulverize him.

Bear with me through some simple and amusing calculations, that will let
your jaw drop....


We all know that vista is slower than xp, some say its 40%, and some say its
the same as xp.

I will be very generous with vista and say its ONLY 5% slower than XP.

Now lets say that each computer in the world suddenly adopts Vista.. what
impact would this have?

If we could say that each computer is working on average 10 hours a day
we would have=

10x60 =600min per day of computer uptime per computer.

Now the %5 of that is 30 minutes. Or in other words each vista machine will
be working 30 minutes more
to do the same tasks XP would do.

Now lets say that all the windows computers in the world are 2 billion ( a
number bill gates stated a couple of months ago)

then we would have 2.000.000.000 x 30 = 60 billion minutes more of
processing time world wide each day just because of vista.
or one billion hours or about 41.6 million years of computing time PER DAY

if we had to run ONE computer for 41.6 million years it would consume (if we
say the pc is 300watts)

300 billion watt hours, or lets convert this to mega joules - 300 ^E9 x 3.6
k joules = 1080000 MJ
more than one million megajoules...!!!

Now, normal gasoline has the energy of 34.8 megajoules per liter, so lets
find out how many liters of gasoline all these vista machines are consuming
(because electricity is made by fosil fules mostly)
1080000/34.8 = 31034 liters of gasoline.... per day, that is about 31 tons
of gasoline since one ton is 1000 liters,

and to carry all this gasoline you would need 1 Medium Range tanker ship PER
DAY!!!! (since a medium range tanker can carry 25- 45 tons of fuel)

Now that is a very vista friendly estimate... in reality you would have
several tankers full of fuel burning and contributing to the carbon in our
atmosphere just because of vista...

So much for global warming.. lol

references for these calculations


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline#Energy_content
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanker_...anker_capacity
http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/dictW.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ton



"SXTC" <> wrote in message
news:50E0D019-FFE9-48AF-BCFA-...
>I currently own WinXP pro 64bit and when I saw all the commercials on the
> Windows site, I was persuaded that it was an upgrade to make, an
> improvement.
> When I installed winVista 64bit I was excited since everything looked
> nicer.. "BUT" here's the catch of my problems... I installed my ATI 64bit
> compatible Vista drivers and Creative soundcard and rebooted, then I
> installed SuperAntispyware (wich I usualy have) and rebooted again.. I
> noticed that my pc did not boot faster as claimed, but a tad slower.. I
> ran
> my games and most of them ran sluggish, showing glitches all over my
> screen
> (dots like what you see when looking at a very old damaged movie). My PC
> seemed to be slower overall and when I ran my spyware program, it seemed
> windows has infinite spyware, like a virus that reinstalls itself when
> removed. I had my spyware scanner attempt to remove the spyware over the
> night but when I looked at my pc, it was totally ruined.. It was even more
> slower and all the special effects had gone so I was forced to reinstall
> WinXP. I have a friend with exactly the same problem and both of us own an
> original copy of WinVista.
> Can someone help me with WHY WindowsVista might work awfully crappy on my
> system compared to WindowsXPpro?
> Perhaps Vista requires specific hardware to NOT be slower?
>
> My current system config =
>
> AMD Athlon X2 4800+ 64bit
> Kingston 4GB DDR2 PC3200 /800
> Asus A8R32-MVP DELUXE
> ATI 1900XTX 512MB x2 Crossfire
> Philips 22" monitor
> Creative SB Fatal1ty Xtremegamer
> Creative inspire 7.1 speakers
> Raptor 74GB & 140GB harddrives 10K (SATA)
> OZC power supply 700W
> 4x DVD Writer 48x read 24x R 8x RW

''
"SXTC" <> wrote in message
news:50E0D019-FFE9-48AF-BCFA-...
> I currently own WinXP pro 64bit and when I saw all the commercials on the
> Windows site, I was persuaded that it was an upgrade to make, an
improvement.
> When I installed winVista 64bit I was excited since everything looked
> nicer.. "BUT" here's the catch of my problems... I installed my ATI 64bit
> compatible Vista drivers and Creative soundcard and rebooted, then I
> installed SuperAntispyware (wich I usualy have) and rebooted again.. I
> noticed that my pc did not boot faster as claimed, but a tad slower.. I
ran
> my games and most of them ran sluggish, showing glitches all over my
screen
> (dots like what you see when looking at a very old damaged movie). My PC
> seemed to be slower overall and when I ran my spyware program, it seemed
> windows has infinite spyware, like a virus that reinstalls itself when
> removed. I had my spyware scanner attempt to remove the spyware over the
> night but when I looked at my pc, it was totally ruined.. It was even more
> slower and all the special effects had gone so I was forced to reinstall
> WinXP. I have a friend with exactly the same problem and both of us own an
> original copy of WinVista.
> Can someone help me with WHY WindowsVista might work awfully crappy on my
> system compared to WindowsXPpro?
> Perhaps Vista requires specific hardware to NOT be slower?
>
> My current system config =
>
> AMD Athlon X2 4800+ 64bit
> Kingston 4GB DDR2 PC3200 /800
> Asus A8R32-MVP DELUXE
> ATI 1900XTX 512MB x2 Crossfire
> Philips 22" monitor
> Creative SB Fatal1ty Xtremegamer
> Creative inspire 7.1 speakers
> Raptor 74GB & 140GB harddrives 10K (SATA)
> OZC power supply 700W
> 4x DVD Writer 48x read 24x R 8x RW


Vista takes more resources than XP
so why would you expect it to be faster?

"SXTC" wrote:
>
> then I installed SuperAntispyware (wich I usualy have) and rebooted again..
>

you have installed some poorly written programs such as superantispyware
which slows down Vista

As philo says it takes more resources. That said I use SuperAntiSpyware on
Vista Ultimate 64 and it never finds anything except tracking cookies on a
full scan. Ever think you do have a virus.

"SXTC" <> wrote in message
news:50E0D019-FFE9-48AF-BCFA-...
>I currently own WinXP pro 64bit and when I saw all the commercials on the
> Windows site, I was persuaded that it was an upgrade to make, an
> improvement.
> When I installed winVista 64bit I was excited since everything looked
> nicer.. "BUT" here's the catch of my problems... I installed my ATI 64bit
> compatible Vista drivers and Creative soundcard and rebooted, then I
> installed SuperAntispyware (wich I usualy have) and rebooted again.. I
> noticed that my pc did not boot faster as claimed, but a tad slower.. I
> ran
> my games and most of them ran sluggish, showing glitches all over my
> screen
> (dots like what you see when looking at a very old damaged movie). My PC
> seemed to be slower overall and when I ran my spyware program, it seemed
> windows has infinite spyware, like a virus that reinstalls itself when
> removed. I had my spyware scanner attempt to remove the spyware over the
> night but when I looked at my pc, it was totally ruined.. It was even more
> slower and all the special effects had gone so I was forced to reinstall
> WinXP. I have a friend with exactly the same problem and both of us own an
> original copy of WinVista.
> Can someone help me with WHY WindowsVista might work awfully crappy on my
> system compared to WindowsXPpro?
> Perhaps Vista requires specific hardware to NOT be slower?
>
> My current system config =
>
> AMD Athlon X2 4800+ 64bit
> Kingston 4GB DDR2 PC3200 /800
> Asus A8R32-MVP DELUXE
> ATI 1900XTX 512MB x2 Crossfire
> Philips 22" monitor
> Creative SB Fatal1ty Xtremegamer
> Creative inspire 7.1 speakers
> Raptor 74GB & 140GB harddrives 10K (SATA)
> OZC power supply 700W
> 4x DVD Writer 48x read 24x R 8x RW

"SXTC" <> wrote in message
news:50E0D019-FFE9-48AF-BCFA-...

>I currently own WinXP pro 64bit and when I saw all the commercials on the
> Windows site,

<snip>

> I noticed that my pc did not boot faster as claimed, but a tad slower..


a commercial that made false claims? oh my...

so, what did we learn today?

john;647519 Wrote:
> "SXTC" <SXTC@xxxxxx> wrote in messag
> news:50E0D019-FFE9-48AF-BCFA-EEDEA0F8B89D@xxxxx
> > > >
> > >I currently own WinXP pro 64bit and when I saw all the commercials o
> > th
> > > Windows site, > >
>
> <snip
> > > >
> > > I noticed that my pc did not boot faster as claimed, but a ta
> > slower.. > >
>
>
> a commercial that made false claims? oh my..
>
> so, what did we learn today

On a properly configured system, Vista should be just as fast as an X
system (all things being equal as far as hardware). There are som
things you can do to make Vista faster. Here's a link to an excellen
tutorial on speeding up Vista
http://www.vistax64.com/tutorials/81...ance-vista.htm

I hope this helps

--
.Jo

_ (\"http://uswave.net/joetmvx64v2.png\")
_[image: http://uswave.net/joetmvx64v2.png]
_Click_here_for_the_Vista_x64_Forums (\"http://www.vistax64.com/index.php?referrerid=17621\")
_CPU-Z_Verified (\"http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=323179\")_

I've test driven Vista for over a year now

I've given it good tires
a nice clear road
I've read the owners manual


Just as fast if not faster




Rich

What You Really Need Is A Copy Of Microsoft Windows Server 2008 RTM, Just
FYI. It's Much Faster Than Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, And Windows Vista
Combined, Just FYI.

"SXTC" wrote:

> I currently own WinXP pro 64bit and when I saw all the commercials on the
> Windows site, I was persuaded that it was an upgrade to make, an improvement.
> When I installed winVista 64bit I was excited since everything looked
> nicer.. "BUT" here's the catch of my problems... I installed my ATI 64bit
> compatible Vista drivers and Creative soundcard and rebooted, then I
> installed SuperAntispyware (wich I usualy have) and rebooted again.. I
> noticed that my pc did not boot faster as claimed, but a tad slower.. I ran
> my games and most of them ran sluggish, showing glitches all over my screen
> (dots like what you see when looking at a very old damaged movie). My PC
> seemed to be slower overall and when I ran my spyware program, it seemed
> windows has infinite spyware, like a virus that reinstalls itself when
> removed. I had my spyware scanner attempt to remove the spyware over the
> night but when I looked at my pc, it was totally ruined.. It was even more
> slower and all the special effects had gone so I was forced to reinstall
> WinXP. I have a friend with exactly the same problem and both of us own an
> original copy of WinVista.
> Can someone help me with WHY WindowsVista might work awfully crappy on my
> system compared to WindowsXPpro?
> Perhaps Vista requires specific hardware to NOT be slower?
>
> My current system config =
>
> AMD Athlon X2 4800+ 64bit
> Kingston 4GB DDR2 PC3200 /800
> Asus A8R32-MVP DELUXE
> ATI 1900XTX 512MB x2 Crossfire
> Philips 22" monitor
> Creative SB Fatal1ty Xtremegamer
> Creative inspire 7.1 speakers
> Raptor 74GB & 140GB harddrives 10K (SATA)
> OZC power supply 700W
> 4x DVD Writer 48x read 24x R 8x RW