Vista SP1 performance still AWFUL!

Full backup across my network:

Started 4/10/2008 1:37:55 AM
Scanning 'C:\'
Completed 4/10/2008 1:08:27 PM
Folders Compared: 17445; Files Compared: 0; Folders Created: 17445; Files
Copied: 145057 (26576807906 bytes)

Just short of 12 hours. Dreadful...just dreadful!

 

i got this defective vista on two computers now..it is a trip..everything is
slow,it is a pain to use your computer..every time you click on something.it
gives you a pop up.to make you approve.what you were trying to do..its
crazy..on this new toshiba lap top it was freezeing up..while on line.had to
shut it down take the battery out.i thought it was the computer.

last week.it down loaded sp1 and that went away..so it looks like it is the
defective vista..i have an old copy of win xp pro.i guess one day.i will put
it on my computers and stop useing vista..i am just seeing how much i can
take..i did not know about the 45 day thing.as far as being able to return
the os.i would of returned the first deal..hell you can use unbuntu for free..

bill gates robbed us..i dont think they can come up with enough updates or
service packs to make this mess right

 

So when Vista screwed up on your first computer, you thought, what the hell,
lets buy another one. If your product was defective you can return it
within 30-45 days for a refund. How is that being robbed?

 

i just told you stupid,that i did not know about the 45 five day return
deal.i bought the full version 5 months ago.this new lap top came with
vista.you cant send it back.dont any one listen..and you are trying to keep a
computer going..see frank..i know he has something to call you..

 

Wow, That Is Why My Dad Calls Me Slow. Because I Can't Comprehend. Just
FYI. But Guess What? I May Be Slow, But You Have Two Copies Of Vista. HA
HA HA HA. Guess Who Is Stupid Now?

Just FYI

 

--------------------------------------------------------

You lying sack of sh*t! You were told about it the very fist time you
posted your Vista rant.
Problem is, you're an idiot and should only use etch-a-sketch...well
even that might be stretch for you a loser like you....LOL!
Frank

 

Frank,

You are giving him way too much credit. I don't think he can handle an
etc-a-sketch. It has two knobs that need to be turned at the same time.
Way over his head. He needs something like Ubuntu. That will teach him.

Then he can fly to Spain and be with Alias at the Alias Ubuntu Memorial
Sewage Treatment Plant and Mental Institution. Famous througout
Spain!!!!!!!!!!

 

I guess much of that depends on the hardware being used, but no
mentioned

--
.Jo

_[image
http://uswave.net/vistax64/joetmvx64.png] (\"http://www.vistax64.com\")_
_*::Click_here_for_the_Vista_Forums::* (\"http://www.vistax64.com/index.php?referrerid=17621\")_
_Geekbench_Score:_4050 (\"http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/42901\")_
_CPU-Z_Verified (\"http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=323179\")_
_**_

 

:-D
Frank

 

This information by itself is meaningless. For all we know your network may
be a modem. I copy 5GB of digital photos across my wireless N network much
faster than the rate you claim.

 

every time you click on something.it gives you a pop up.to make you approve.

What are you doing when you get a pop up? I can't get anyone to tell me how
they get this to happen. With the exception of Acronis Drive Director and
True Image and another program or two, I don't get any prompts. Until someone
can prove it is Calculator or some other benign program, it is just FUD.

 

Are you nutts?

I have been comparing these last days vista network speed on a triple boot
with xp vista and ubuntu.

Vista is 1/3 or slower the speed of XP.
Linux is far faster than XP and Vista (you cant beat linux when it comes to
networking).

Perhaps you are not comparing vista with a serious OS? LOL
Have you compared your vista transfer rate with XP or Linux?
Because I have! (and you probably have not and are just a fanboy proclaiming
that vista is the best os MS ever made like that dork frank does)

Vista is S-L-O-W (and yes, all drivers are updated)

 

its not FUD. I have seen the exact same slow speed with Vista. I just
tried doing some network copying on Ubuntu to XP and XP to Ubuntu and
its 5 times as fast as with vista to XP. 5 times!!! can you believe it????

I think Microsoft wants to stop making OS, and focus on XBOX's and
ZUNE's, there is no other explanation why they put so much effort in
making this horrible unusable product.

The more people deny its problems like you are doing, the worse people
will come pouring in with the FACTS, and personal Testimonies against Vista.

 

YOU ARE CORRECT and dont let the FANBOYS tell you anything different!
I have seen the exact same slow network speed with Vista. I just tried
doing some network copying on Ubuntu to XP and XP to Ubuntu and its 5
times as fast as with vista to XP. 5 times!!! Can you believe it????
Im talking about the SAME machine, in triple boot configuration and a
laptop with XP.

I think Microsoft wants to stop making OS, and focus on XBOX's and
ZUNE's, there is no other explanation why they put so much effort in
making this horrible unusable product.

They are now scrambling to get windows7 ready, but MS has a downward
spiral that will drag them so low, that they could not have ever
imagined. And Vista is the cause.

The more people deny its problems, the worse people will come pouring in
with the FACTS, and personal Testimonies against Vista.

Thank you for posting this. Again. You are Correct: Vista is far slower
in network transfer than windows2k,XP, and ubuntu (and I can imagine
MacOSX too since its based on BSD)

 

I see 2 people that like each other.... Frank and Spanky.

I remember when AlexB and Frank had their own little thing going
together, supporting one another. Of course AlexB was a nazi luving
racist, with hate for everything living on this planet except fat rich
white hardcore republicans.

And now what? A coalition between frank and the most dreaded troll this
newsgroup has ever seen: spanky demonkey? You got to be kidding.

Frank I told you back then with AlexB, keep away from him, and Im
telling you this now again, but 100 fold. Keep away from spanky its a
worthless creature, im not sure its totally human...

Frank you are better than *it*. Sorry to have insulted you so in the past,
I was wrong saying that you were so bad, compared to trolls like Spanky,
you are an angel!

I get the vibes from that freak so negative that my stomach rolls.
Im not making this up.. its true.

If you want to be TRUE, then frank you should be hitting this spanky
troll hard every day. Why do you let this idiot get away with trolling
like this? Just because its not insulting Vista? It disrupts this
newsgroup like no one else has ever done before, and be assured that its
using at least 5 nicks SIMULTANEOUSLY posting from various servers at
the same time.
There is NO KEVPAN, its spanky with some multiple personality disorder.

Creepy! Keep away from this freakshow and bash it since its a troll...
not only those who criticize vista.

 

In my personal tests SP1 can be significantly faster depending on your
hardware configuration than non SP1 but still not as fast as XP performing
the same tasks on the same machine (dual boot system).
My personal finding is that Vista does best on Intel core duo processors
presumably because of the massive on board cache. I also presume Intel has
worked harder than other vendors to optimize drivers for Vista as Intel and
Microsoft are but two heads of the same beastie.
Machines with older chipsets, for example Nforce 4 for AMD socket 939 procs,
perform much worse than newer chipsets so mobo drivers appear to be a major
issue when processor speeds are otherwise comparable.
Consumer experience leads to the conclusion that Vista was constructed with
faulty programming for all operations which involve accessing the hard drive
and SP1 has not corrected this. More than anything about Vista I find this
mind boggling.
On one of my dual boot machines, an Intel Quad core, where Vista is on the
faster hard drive, Vista performance has notably improved for operations
involving disc access but still lags behind XP performance on the older,
slower (and half the memory on the XP hard drive) hard drive. Vista problems
are immediately obvious when installing the same programs on the Vista side
of a dual boot machine--again Vista having the faster hard drive, is time by
your wristwatch slower than on the XP side.
I am trying to switch to Vista on some machines but in truth I can find no
rational reason at present for anyone to install Vista. Vista performance is
acceptable on high end machines but still lags behind XP and Vista
peripheral drivers may not exist for hardware that is even 2 years old.

 

Neuron Net, a nobody (on Ubuntu, a real POS toy os) wrote:

----------------------------------------------------

hey capin' crunch...tell us all about you inability to get even one
little install of Vista to run properly ok?
Then tell us all just how much smarter you are than everyone else ok...LOL!
Frank

 

You're FUD.

I have seen the exact same slow speed with Vista.

You don't even know how to properly install Vista or your own software.
You're an idiot!

I just

Coming from a loser like you who can't figure out how to properly
install software...sure...you could fukk-up a ball bearing!

"You think"...now that's the real problem isn't it.

There are always a few idiot loser morons like you.
But only a few...LOL!
Frank

 

Been looking into those English classes yet?

 

Been looking into those English classes yet?