Ask Your Vista Questions Here.

have microsoft released SP3 on any OS? If yes, What's the most SP they released? I talked to bunch of people who knows a lot about programs and they told me to wait at least 2 years before upgradeing to new OS cause microsoft might just release a new one.

 

Windows 2000, they released a Service Pack 4 (SP 4) for it. Not sure how long ago but that was the highest amount of Service Packs I know of.

 

that's crazy!!! kudos for microsoft for keeping those updates. cause I always thought microsoft would ditch us when they release something new.

 

YE WANT VISTA DRIVERS I FOUND A BUS FULL

Don't waste your time searching dozens of vendor websites every month for the driver updates you need.
Just bookmark this page and come back whenever you need a new driver.

This FREE page lists the latest Windows Vista drivers and provides direct links to the files for downloads. We're offering this as a free service to the community, to help you all get through this challenging period of Vista-transitioning.

Listing of Vista Drivers


Posted by kdawson on Tuesday February 20, @12:35AM
from the crib-sheet dept.
Windows Microsoft
RadarSync writes to plug their page of links to Vista drivers. Listed are many drivers that Microsoft doesn't have and that aren't easily found on the manufacturer's sites. For Intel alone, 364 drivers are currently linked.

link
http://www.radarsync.com/vista/

 

The Vista Sales Numbers: Anatomy of a Wash
By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews
February 19, 2007, 4:01 PM
http://www.betanews.com/article/The_Vista_Sales_Numbers_Anatomy_of_a_Wash/1171917974
The abundant mix of both upward and downward slopes that have characterized Microsoft Windows Vista sales projections since last September, and the strangely dichotomous co-existence of expectations exceeded and fears realized, has led many experts to start asking serious questions about the role the operating system plays not only in the markets but in our lives: Has Windows evolved out of its shell as a consumer product, into the homogeneous commodity that Microsoft simultaneously hoped and feared it might become?

In other words, does Vista really matter?

Last Friday, BetaNews received word of preliminary numbers from an upcoming NPD report that seemed to sound some alarm bells -- at least we thought we heard them -- pointing to Vista retail sales that were 58.9% lower during its initial week than for sales of Windows XP during its initial week. But when we applied those numbers to previous volume sales figures from NPD, the numbers seemed impossibly bad, as though Vista sales were only one-fourth of what they were six years earlier.

In the back of our minds, we were saying, "This can't be," and NPD came back to us to say, "You're right; it can't." What we learned about the shifting economic landscape, and why "58.9% lower" wasn't lower than what we thought it was lower than, became one of the subjects of San Jose Mercury News reporter John Murrell's Good Morning Silicon Valley blog entry that day. There, Murrell cited a quote from Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer making the rounds, which tempered his earlier rosy sales projections: "[Vista] is primarily a chance to sustain what [Windows] revenue we have," said Ballmer. "Not every release is a revenue growing opportunity."

A later attempt by Ballmer to explain why things look rosy on one side and abysmal on the other, ended up confusing analysts so much that they prompted an unusual short-term selloff in Microsoft stock this morning.

Correctly estimating BetaNews' situation last week as "up to its waist in apples and oranges," Murrell's observations point to an increasingly evident truth: The world to which Vista has awakened in 2007 is significantly different than the one which greeted XP in 2001.

More businesses are purchasing Windows through a volume licensing program, which reduces the number of small businesspeople picking up copies at their local retailer. And Internet downloading is becoming more prevalent among everyday consumers. A good part of the reason there are fewer Vista retail customers is because the market has moved to other sales options.

There are other reasons, as Chris Swenson -- NPD's director of software industry analysis and the lead author of last week's preliminary numbers -- told BetaNews.

"Vista unit shipments were down 59%, but Microsoft gets approximately 80% of their OS revenue from the OEMs - PC manufacturers," Swenson reported. "So it's really important to focus on them predominantly when you're trying to figure out how well an operating system release is going to do; and when you look at that 2007 launch week versus the same week in 2006, PC unit shipments were up 67% year-over-year." Those numbers were provided by Swenson's NPD colleague, Steve Baker.

"Long story short, that is such a great number that it counterbalances the negative growth that we're seeing in the shrink-wrapped box [segment]," Swenson added. "And if you think about it, if there is a 'Vista effect' - if there is a bump in PC shipments that will result from Vista - there has to be a corresponding negative Vista effect for the shrink-wrapped box [segment]."

So already NPD has a clear reason for lower Vista sales figures being reported by its current list of participating retailers: A great many of those customers are still getting their Vista elsewhere. The channels are just different now.

"The reason why I think that is," Swenson continued, "is because at least with this release, the hardware requirements are so stringent that this dual trend - an increase in PCs and a decrease in shrink-wrapped box - might be an indicator that more consumers are going to opt to get Vista through a new PC versus upgrading an older machine." He cited reviews from sources such as the Wall Street Journal's Walt Mossberg, who noted some Vista features performing slowly on a new Dell XPS laptop.

So are we seeing a situation where the retail channel NPD has been tracking for years, and whose evolution NPD admits caused generational shifts that make six-year spans of comparisons implausible, if not impossible, is less pertinent to the overall picture?

"I think that's true to a degree," Chris Swenson responded cautiously. "We've seen digital downloads have more of an impact on the game side than on the non-game side, especially for key applications. If it's for a small utility, an IM program, Skype, people don't mind downloading a little thing and then running it; they do that all the time. For an office suite, for an operating system, oftentimes you see consumers wanting to get that CD or DVD as a backup, in case their machine blows up."

E-commerce, Swenson said, is a much larger percentage of NPD's sample than it ever was, and Amazon is a major player in its current sales figures, where it was much less of one in 2001. Microsoft itself, he said, can fuzzify the picture of e-commerce sales in two directions: first, by generating Internet consumer interest in Vista and then link that consumer directly to Amazon and other retailers; and in the opposite regard, the company's Test Drive program for trial downloads has been, in NPD's view, extremely successful, driving revenue directly to Microsoft and away from the Amazons, NewEggs, and other e-commerce retailers it covers.

Not to mention all the conventional retailers NPD covers, such as Circuit City and Best Buy, who operate their own Web storefronts, and who report their offline and online sales to NPD.

Next: Is Vista the last "new version of Windows?"



So if the conventional sales channel is indeed becoming the online channel for software, whereas physical storefronts are becoming the "legacy" channel, has the software market evolved past the need for operating system overhauls every five or six or seven years, in the vein of Vista?

"That is a hypothesis; I don't want to say it couldn't happen," Swenson responded. His case in point is Apple's .Mac online subscription service, which Apple sells through retail outlets. It contains nothing more than what a Macintosh user might purchase online - literally a license key for a software subscription that the user registers over the Web. Yet retail sales for this item that doesn't theoretically require a box, remain strong and growing by NPD's estimate.

"Apple realizes something fundamental about the retail channel," said Swenson. "It raises awareness about products that enables a sales rep to throw that additional sale onto the hardware...Stuff is tangible in the retail channel. [But] there's also awareness. People still like to browse aisles, and there's search costs involved with doing heavy Web surfing. People have limited time, they've got stuff to do, they can't sit there and search for 50 hours to find the best deal on the Web."

By "search costs," he's referring to the economics concept advanced by Nobel laureate Prof. George Stigler, beginning in the 1960s. Stigler researched consumers in the era before e-commerce, when they researched major purchases by perusing catalogs and shuttling themselves between shopping malls.

He came to the conclusion that consumers will research their purchase until the point where they conclude that their "search costs" -- perhaps weighed more psychologically than monetarily -- will have exceeded the value of any further information they might acquire. At that time, Stigler believed consumers would decide to make the purchase or not.

Swenson is taking this idea a few steps further. Despite online tools such as PriceGrabber, he believes the online shopping experience for most consumers remains daunting, even if they're doing online research for products they'll purchase in conventional retail stores later. In a strange way, consumers may be becoming more exasperated through the online experience than through retail browsing, based on his read of NPD surveys of consumers and their shopping habits.

The exasperated customer is a dangerous one for conventional retailers to approach. But Swenson believes this is where conventional methodologies can close the sale, including the presentation of a simple box that's packaged and marketed well enough to warm up the consumer's heart. The box itself becomes the product's best advertising.

"If you're not advertising heavily, how are potential customers going to become aware of your product? It's hard if you completely ignore retail; it's an added weapon in your arsenal of things to target."

So the picture Chris Swenson paints is an unexpected one, which perhaps none of us anticipated: a picture of a market that has shifted more toward e-commerce, but in such a way that is agitating the consumer rather than satisfying him. In that picture, conventional retail still plays a role: as not just the solution but the cure for the consumer's headache.

As long as there's shelf space for Windows, there may continue to be a "next version," a "Vienna" or "Blackcomb" or whatever. The market may have shifted, however, and the headaches will have shifted with it - from the consumers to the analysts.

 

64-Bit Vista Is Hard to Get
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 2007-02-20 09:58:06 UTC, submitted by george
Microsoft is keen to stir up enthusiasm for Windows Vista, but when it comes to the 64-bit edition of the recently released operating system, the software giant is sending decidedly mixed messages. Vista is available in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions, with the latter targeted at owners of recent computers with 64-bit processors. However, customers who purchase the retail version of Vista Home Basic, Home Premium or Business don't have the option of buying the 64-bit version directly. It also seems Microsoft will toughen its anti-piracy policies.

Vista users get the 64-bit blues

By Angus Kidman, ZDNet Australia
20 February 2007 11:49 AM
E-Mail Story Printer Friendly Tell Us Your Opinion ZDNet Alerts

Microsoft is keen to stir up enthusiasm for Windows Vista, but when it comes to the 64-bit edition of the recently released operating system, the software giant is sending decidedly mixed messages.

Vista is available in both 32-bit and 64-bit versions, with the latter targeted at owners of recent computers with 64-bit processors. However, customers who purchase the retail version of Vista Home Basic, Home Premium or Business don't have the option of buying the 64-bit version directly.

Instead, they have to purchase the 32-bit version and then order a replacement CD from Microsoft, for which they are required to pay a postage charge. The charge is described as "minimal" by Microsoft, but comes in at just under AU$15 for Australian users.

The online ordering scenario is not straightforward either. To ensure that people don't try order upgrades based on pirate copies, or install the 32-bit OS on one system and the 64-bit OS on another, users have to provide the software product key. Credit card payment is the only option offered.

The issue doesn't apply to the top-of-the-line Windows Vista Ultimate release, which does include 32- and 64-bit releases in the same package. Enterprise customers on subscription arrangements can also download the 64-bit versions directly.

Where's the 64-bit version?
Despite those complications, Microsoft is keen to spruik the 64-bit edition. "If your system features a 64-bit processor, you can take advantage of its advanced design by ordering 64-bit software media," its upgrade site proclaims.

"You'll get the same interface, features, and functions, but you'll get them in an operating system that takes advantage of access to vastly more memory.

One irritated user who contacted ZDNet Australia was shocked to discover that the 64-bit version had not been included. "Why didn't [Microsoft] just put it in the box or even on the same DVD as the 32-bit version?" the user, who did not want to be named, asked. "It isn't even clearly written on the outside of the box that it is only the 32-bit version inside -- it is written in very small print on the bottom."

Such a strategy wouldn't be tolerated in other market segments, according to the user. "Imagine going into a shop and buying a music CD only to get it home and open it up and find a bit of paper inside telling you to go online to pay to have the actual CD mailed out to you at an additional cost."

Microsoft did not respond to repeated questions from ZDNet Australia about why it had pursued this strategy, or its expected level of demand for 64-bit packages. Its upgrade site confirms take-up may be limited. "The 64-bit version of Windows Vista is not for everyone. Please confirm that your system, applications, and devices are compatible with a 64-bit edition of Windows Vista before installing."
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/softwa...the_64_bit_blues/0,130061733,339273707,00.htm

 

The Most Annoying Things About Windows Vista
From screens that mysteriously black out to search that's limited by default, here are the things that really bug us about Microsoft's new operating system.
Edward N. Albro and Eric Dahl, PC World
Tuesday, February 20, 2007 01:00 AM PST

There's lots to like in the newest version of Windows. Vista's look is stunning, the OS should be more secure, and finding things is often easier. But Windows wouldn't be Windows without those aspects, big and small, that just drive you nuts with frustration. Here's our list of Vista features that just make us wonder, "What were they thinking?"
Home Basically-There's-No-Reason-to-Buy-This
Windows Home Basic

The cheapest version of Vista, Home Basic, is so crippled it can't run the Aero interface. Theoretically, that's a boon for owners of machines that aren't capable of running Aero.

But it's time for some tough love, people: If your PC can't run Aero, you have no need for Vista. Period. On machines that aren't Aero-capable, the rest of the OS will run slowly enough that you're better off sticking with XP until it's time to buy a new Vista PC. So why does Home Basic exist? So Microsoft can say that Vista costs "as little as $100."

Not fixable: Unless you consider not buying Vista Home Basic a fix.
Ahhgh! My Screen Blacked Out!

Okay, Microsoft. We get that Vista is all about security. We get that you've sensibly limited what programs can do without explicit approval. We can even buy the idea that there's probably a good reason behind the incessant prompting from the User Access Control code built into Vista, warning about everything from installing software to changing fonts. So clearly you'd want a UAC alert to stand out a bit--to be something a user couldn't simply ignore. That's fine. But blacking out the entire screen as if the monitor were switching resolutions? That's the best you could do?

We thought you guys spent all this time designing a nifty new hardware-accelerated interface for your new OS. And you couldn't come up with something that looks even remotely 21st century for the UAC alerts? Really?

Seriously, UAC is a decent enough idea, but Vista's implementation pulls in two different directions. On one hand, the appearance of a UAC alert looks like the end of the world (or at least the end of some bit of computer hardware). On the other, the alerts' all-too-frequent appearances encourage users to give the warnings rubber-stamp approval. We're way too close to boy-who-cried-wolfsville here.

Somewhat fixable: You can turn off UAC alerts if you wish, but you give up a measure of Vista's enhanced security by doing so. Head to the User Accounts section of the Control Panel and click Turn User Account Control on or off. Uncheck the box labeled Use User Account Control (UAC) to help protect your computer, and then reboot your system. The UAC prompts will be gone.
The Large-Print Edition
Vista shortcut

If you like your current desktop-icon layout, you won't like what you see when you upgrade to Vista. Perhaps overly enamored with Vista's new photo-realistic icons, Microsoft went all AARP-friendly on us and bumped up the default size for desktop icons. That's okay, we guess. Plenty of people want bigger icons. Problem is, Vista's upgrade installation makes this layout-destroying change without asking you. And if you want to move all your icons back to their appointed places, you'll have to find the icon-size setting in its new location.

Fixable: Right-click your desktop and choose View, Classic Icons. Then spend far too long dragging your icons back to their proper positions. When you're done, you'll notice that the shortcut arrow now covers approximately a quarter of each supposedly beautiful new icon.



Costly Editions, DRM, and Upgrade Surprises

Ultimately Expensive
Windows Vista Ultimate

Apparently all those years Vista was in development were more inflationary than we thought, because in the five years since XP was released, Windows got real expensive. Sure, Home Premium isn't much more than XP Professional--but look at all the cool stuff it's missing, like Complete PC Backup, BitLocker Drive Encryption, and Shadow Copies (which automatically keeps copies of previous versions of your files). For more features, you'll need the pricier Business Edition, which still doesn't come with BitLocker and lacks Media Center. Want the whole enchilada? You'll drop megabucks for the Ultimate version ($259 for an upgrade or $399 for the full-price version).

Not fixable: Short of sailing with the software pirates, there's no way around this one.
Is This My OS or Hollywood's? (Or, Why Do I Have to Buy a New Monitor Again?)

This arguably isn't Microsoft's fault, but the high-definition situation on PCs in general and Vista specifically certainly qualifies as annoying. If your video card and monitor don't support HDCP (and unless you bought them recently and did your research beforehand, they don't), you'll need new models if you want to watch full-resolution Blu-ray or HD-DVD movies on your PC.

Not legally fixable: Hackers are finding ways to break through the encryption on high-def discs--but as long as the DMCA stays on the books, their argument for why these tools should be legal ("They're for making backup copies") won't hold water in court.
The Downgraded Upgrade Disc

An OS upgrade is a nice occasion to start your computer off with a clean slate. But prepare for an annoying additional step if you plan to back up your data files, wipe out your drive, and start fresh: If you bought a Vista upgrade disc, you'll have to reinstall Windows XP on the machine first.

For XP installs, you could start a clean installation on a bare drive and simply insert the disc of a previous Windows version to verify that you qualified for an upgrade. But Microsoft dumped this capability in Vista, so a clean install from an upgrade disc will entail one more (probably 30-minute-long) step. You can still get a clean installation of Vista from an upgrade disc, but you just can't do it without installing XP first.

Kinda sorta fixable: While there is a workaround that lets you perform a clean Vista install with just an upgrade disc, it requires installing Vista twice. That might actually take longer than installing XP first.


Virtualization Limits, Constant Nagging, and Needless Shuffling

Only the Rich Shall Virtualize

Here's another bit of Microsoft licensing larceny: If you'd like to run a virtualized copy of Vista on top of this or another OS, you'd best be prepared to fork over some serious coin. The licenses for Vista Home Basic and Home Premium both contain this handy clause: "USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system."

Want a version you can virtualize? You'll have to step up to the $299 Business or $399 Ultimate edition.

Not legally fixable: Well, this is only a licensing provision, so nothing in the software will prevent you from running either Home version in a virtual machine. But that would be wrong.
Yes, Mom, I Really Do Want to Install This Software
Click to view full-size image.

We often worry about Microsoft playing Big Brother, but now it's playing Big Mother, attempting to protect you from your own rash impulses to run new software. Try to download a program, and Internet Explorer will block it. ("It's for your own good. You can't be too careful, you know. Who knows where that program has been!") Unblock it, and IE will ask if you really, truly want to download the software. ("These programs can be dangerous, you know. I just don't want you to get hurt.")

Once you manage to get the program onto your machine, Windows tosses up its own roadblocks, forcing you to authorize the installer program to run, sometimes as an administrator. ("You're going to have to convince me you really know what you're doing here, young man.") Click through enough dialog boxes, and you'll eventually be running your new software, but you can almost hear Windows grumbling in the background. ("Fine! Ruin your life! But don't say I didn't warn you!")

Fixable: Turning off UAC alerts (see how above in "Ahhgh! My Screen Blacked Out!") will silence Windows. And trading IE for Firefox is like moving away from Mom and into your cool older brother's apartment.
Who Rearranged the Furniture?

Here's a note for the programmers working on the next version of Windows: Moving stuff around doesn't necessarily make it better, just harder to find. Vista's chock-full of settings and tools that have been rearranged, renamed, or reorganized for no apparent reason.
Vista's Personalize command

Want to change your display properties? In XP you would right-click the desktop and then go down to 'Properties'. In Vista, it's 'Personalize'. Want to use 'Add or Remove Programs' to uninstall some software? Sorry. That capability is now under 'Programs and Features' in the Classic Start Menu or just plain 'Programs' in the default view.

It's not that the new names and locations are harder to use, it's that there's no particular need for the changes. And the new names tend to be vaguer than the ones they replace.

Not fixable: Continually getting lost is just one of the many prices you pay for upgrading to Vista.


Search Woes, Administration Problems, and More

Search Instantly Anywhere (As Long As by 'Anywhere' You Mean 'Where Microsoft Thinks You Should')
Click to view full-size image.

We're certainly glad that Vista finally uses indexing to radically speed up searching. And we're ecstatic that we no longer have to watch that damn dog scratching himself while XP performs an interminable search of the hard drive.

But Vista's default search is instance #3456 of Microsoft trying to nudge you into using the computer the way it thinks you should, not the way you want to. By default the OS indexes only the folders found in your user-name folder (like Documents, Pictures, and Music). That's because the folks at Microsoft seem to think you should use only their generic folders for your data. If, like lots of people, you store important files outside of the user-name folder, you're back to stultifyingly slow searches.

Fixable: Go to Control Panel, System and Maintenance, Indexing Options and choose the folders that Windows should be indexing.
Who's in Charge Around Here?

You might think you're the boss, if you're running Windows as an administrator. But when you try to run certain commands from Vista's command prompt, you'll learn that in Vista's eyes you're still a peon. Vista will say that you can't run the command because you don't have the proper administrator rights. Huh?

Fixable: Click Start, All Programs, Accessories, right-click Command Prompt, and choose Run as Administrator. Finally, you'll be master of your domain.
Anorexic Feedreader
Vista's Feed Headlines

Vista's Sidebar, a transparent panel with widgets (Gadgets in Vista-speak), is pretty, and if you have enough screen real estate, it can be quite useful. But so far the selection of Gadgets is sparse, and some of the applications themselves are feeble. As an example, take the Feed Headlines applet that displays news from RSS feeds.

We've yet to meet a pair of people with exactly the same preferences about how they want to read blogs and news feeds. Some like to see lots of headlines from lots of blogs, others want to limit the field. Some people must have updates every few minutes, others are happy to wait. But the Feed Headlines gadget is almost completely uncustomizable. You can't resize its window, even if you pull the Gadget out to run on your desktop. You can display headlines from one feed or every feed you've subscribed to, but not a selection of your feeds. And you can't tell it how often to update the headlines. The app doesn't report how often it checks for new headlines, but our experience indicates that the answer is "not very often."

Fixable, eventually: Independent developers are already writing new Gadgets for the Sidebar, and eventually a smart coder will build a much better feed reader. But it isn't here yet.
Where, Oh Where Are My Network Places?

Previous versions of Windows had the Network Places link prominently displayed in Explorer and in the Start menu. Adding locations to Network Places was a pain, but once you did, it was a handy way to get to just the network folders and drives you used most often.
Click to view full-size image.

Vista's equivalent, the Network link, seems to be based on the idea that more is more. On our machines it shows every PC, printer, and server on our network, from 172.18.0.137 to WXU-8250, 95 percent of which we never want to access. And Vista frequently goes out and repopulates that list when you click the link, a process that on our admittedly crowded network here at PC World takes over a minute.

Fixable: You can replicate the old Network Places. Create a folder (call it, oh, we don't know, Network Places, perhaps) and put inside it shortcuts to the network locations that you most frequently need to access. Simply drag that folder into Explorer's left panel, and it'll be available when you need it.
Vista: Game Off!

Just to recap: Vista took five friggin' years to develop, and yet graphics card makers still didn't have their drivers in shape for the launch of the OS? We'd expect that the early Vista drivers wouldn't be the fastest around--ATI and nVidia have been tweaking XP drivers for years, after all--but the number of games that are flat-out unplayable is just ridiculous. And we're talking popular games here, too: Unreal Tournament 2004, The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, and Need for Speed: Most Wanted, to name just a few.

The problem has even spawned a possible class-action lawsuit by nVidia-equipped gamers upset that the DirectX 10-ready GeForce 8 series boards they spent hundreds of dollars on won't even run older games on Vista.

Fixable, eventually: Patience is the only fix for these issues. ATI and nVidia will iron the problems out, and hopefully everyone will be playing in a DirectX 10-accelerated world soon. Until then, it's time to break out your old XP disc and start dual-booting.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,129126-page,4-c,vistalonghorn/article.html

 

Windows Vista Hardware Assessment
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/solutionaccelerators/hardwareassessment/wv/default.mspx

Windows Vista Hardware Assessment
Overview
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/solutionaccelerators/hardwareassessment/wv/default.mspx


Vista Hardware Assessment Tool Addresses Upgrade Dilemmas
By Scott M. Fulton, III, BetaNews
February 20, 2007, 5:25 PM

Perhaps the most oft-asked question by consumers with regard to whether they should adopt Windows Vista is whether their six-month-old or older hardware is too obsolete for Vista to make good use of it. Users have already been told to expect to say, "Wow!" but is this necessarily a good kind of "Wow?" This morning, Microsoft released for free download the XP version of its Vista Hardware assessment tool, whose aim is to tell consumers what they may need to upgrade in order to put the best polish on those heavily anticipated exclamations.

As a "bonus," the Windows Hardware Assessment tool installs SQL Server 2005 Express, which is its database tool built on the .NET Framework. It isn't SQL Server 2005; if you've already installed that, Express will still need to be installed separately.

Of course, since you need SQLS '05 Express, you need .NET Framework 2.0, which means by the time consumers have installed the Assessment tool, they're already partway to Vista. The Assessment tool uses SQL Server Express to build a local database of systems throughout your network, scanning their capabilities remotely if necessary, so you don't have to install the tool on every system.

What's most impressive about this tool is its remote access capability. It prefers to use Active Directory to contact the installed systems in your network, but for peer-to-peer networks where no AD is installed, the tool tries using NetBIOS - not the preferred method for networking in the Windows Server era, mind you, but this tool will probably be assessing a few Windows for Workgroups networks.

One interesting problem - if you can call it that - that we observed during our tests was that the Assessment tool could not peer through an active firewall. For the tool to work properly on our test network, which included three remote computers, we would have had to have turned off our ZoneAlarm Pro firewalls - which we might do sometime if we truly feel like a downgrade.

Last year, Microsoft introduced a concept called the Windows System Performance Rating (WSPR), which is a five-point scale that characterizes the relative capability of users' computers, in a similar way that "Yellow" characterizes the US' terrorism readiness state. At that time, graphics card producer ATI (which has since been absorbed into AMD) touted the WSPR rating as essential to buyers' ability to match system hardware with the games and high-end applications they want to run in Windows. ATI's hope was that software manufacturers, especially in the gaming categories, would advertise their wares with the appropriate WSPR rating for hardware to take full advantage of them.

Since that time, Microsoft has throttled back its WSPR promotion, which during the Vista beta period seemed as though it would be one of the new operating system's defining elements. The Vista Assessment tool now outputs its results as a Word document and an Excel database (the latter of which requires Office 2007). The spreadsheet only lists the systems requiring upgrades, rather than logging the specific tests performed, which might have been more adequate.

According to the report, there are now three plateaus to which the Vista user may want to ascend: Vista Ready, which simply enables the operating system to run and to run programs; Vista Capable, which is described by Microsoft as capable of running Vista but not likely the 3D Aero environment; and Vista Premium Ready, which Microsoft describes as enabling Aero.

Windows Vista Hardware Assessment Tool reportIn our initial test, the only system the tool was able to scan without firewalls was the local one on which the tool was run: an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600-based system using a Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 motherboard with an Intel P965 Express northbridge, 2 GB of DDR2 DRAM, and an XFX graphics card with an nVidia 7900 GT GPU and 512 MB of GDDR, a top-of-the-line Asus DRW DVD burner, and an 80 GB and 160 GB hard drive, all running Windows XP SP2.

Certainly no slouch of a system, though I was surprised to find that the Assessment tool doesn't think it's ready for prime time as far as Vista is concerned. The tool declared it "Vista Ready," though "Not Vista Capable." The graphics card was fine, though for hardware upgrade recommendations, the tool said it didn't like our hard drive capacity. Whether it tested the two drives in combination was not clear. For the full Premium experience, the tool recommended we upgrade our optical disc drive, though it did not say how or to what level.

If there was a lesson learned here, it's that Microsoft appears to be assessing a computer's relative Vista worthiness not on its ability to run applications but instead to stream video from hard drives. Streaming video is typically more data-intensive than other categories of applications. If you're an XP user, we'd like to hear what Microsoft says you need to buy, versus the level of performance you've already invested in.
http://www.betanews.com/article/Vista_Hardware_Assessment_Tool_Addresses_Upgrade_Dilemmas/1172009674

 

I'm really starting to wonder if microsoft would come up with better OS within a year to cover up vista.

I disagree cause good OS last about 7 years for me. It's going to be 7 years next year. who knows maby i'll use windows xp for 8 years if they never release sp1.

 

VIsta is like most games a hodge podge and stuff with nary a focus on what it needs to do....(nary?!?!?! damn to much POTC)
anyway XP was kinda a mess to when it came out altho I think vista is not a mess its more a nightmare....

 

4 GB May Be Vista's RAM Sweet Spot


Posted by kdawson on Tuesday February 20, @07:09PM
from the honkin' dept.
Windows Microsoft
jcatcw writes "David Short, an IBM consultant who works in the Global Services Division and has been beta testing Vista for two years, says users should consider 4GB of RAM if they really want optimum Vista performance. With Vista's minimum requirement of 512MB of RAM, Vista will deliver performance that's 'sub-XP,' he says. (Dell and others recommend 2GB.) One reason: SuperFetch, which fetches applications and data, and feeds them into RAM to make them accessible more quickly. More RAM means more caching."


Buying a new PC? 'Windows Vista Capable' barely hits the mark
IBM'er says Vista's RAM sweet spot is 4GB

February 20, 2007 (Computerworld) -- Configuring a PC around the minimum hardware requirements of an application or operating system is lot like agreeing to live in a basement apartment. Sure, it will work as a place to live -- if you don't mind damp and dim living conditions.

Such may be the case for Windows Vista's minimum requirement of 512MB of RAM.

Microsoft's on-the-box minimum RAM requirement "really isn't realistic," according to David Short, an IBM consultant who works in its company's Global Services Divison. He says users should consider 4GB of RAM if they really want optimum Vista performance. With 512MB of RAM, Vista will deliver performance that's "sub-XP," he warned.

Short has been beta testing Vista for two years and was at the IBM-oriented Share user group conference in Tampa, Fla., last week discussing some of Vista's performance requirements. His XP system has 2GB of RAM, which he calls the "sweet spot" for that operating system, but on Vista, 4GB of RAM may be closer to its "Nirvana," he said.

That's due in part to Windows SuperFetch, which takes data from the hard drive, stores it in the available RAM and makes it readily accessible to the processor. SuperFetch depends a great deal on user predictability and takes snapshots of user activity. If SuperFetch determines that an application is launched at a particular time, it will have it loaded into the available RAM. With more RAM, there's more caching and better software response, said Short.

Hardware vendors, of course, will offer systems built on Microsoft's minimum hardware requirements called "Windows Vista Capable," configured with 512MB of system memory and a processor that is at least 800MHz. But their heart may not really be in it.

For instance, Dell offers a Windows Vista Capable configuration that isn't capable of much, according to what Dell says about it on its Web site: "Great for ... Booting the Operating System, without running applications or games."

Dell recommends 2GB of system memory.

Microsoft may be using PCs loaded with 4GB of RAM for some of its customer demos; At least that's what Ann Westerheim, president of Ekaru LLC, reports. A Microsoft representative recently demonstrated Vista on a system with 4GB of system memory to some of its customers, and the performance was so impressive that it drew some "ohs and ahs" from the audience, said Westerheim. The Westford, Mass.-based company provides technology services for small and mid-sized business.

Westerheim said that for her personal use she may configure a system with 2GB RAM, only because of the cost of loading 4GB on a laptop.

Mueez Deen, director of graphics memory and consumer DRAM at Samsung Electronics, also recommends 2GB of RAM, calling that amount the "optimal density for the complete Vista experience - economically and technologically."
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9011523

 

they need to fix the quote glitch >>

 

4gb on laptop would cost so much money.

 

its not cheap to max out XP ,vister will be a nightmare to max out.

 

is there alot of spyware in vista? there is in xp at least xoftspy thought so it said microsoft view point was spyware

P.S. i switched to AVG anti spyware if that was spyware xoftspy found will AVG find it to?

is xoftspy just bad or was it right?

 

isn't alexia or whatever installed with XP?

 

It is.
And it's there again in Vista, right next to microsoft's own spying gear.

 

how do i remove it?

 

what do you think I bet MS is using it to track keys and pirated copies behind the scenes *L*