What is Digg?218 Comments
- Retuow, on 12/27/2007, -20/+147"Sounds great, as long as you don't hit those rare edge cases like USING YOUR HARD DRIVE or TRANSFERRING FILES OVER A NETWORK.
But hey, who does that?" - aaronm67, on 12/27/2007, -3/+59...I'm not sure you understand the DRM that's in Vista. The DRM in Vista only applies to HD video, not to playing music in iTunes or Winamp.
- cmost, on 12/27/2007, -1/+49I just love it when these tech sites run benchmarks using "typical" machines. An eight core Xeon class processor with 4 GB of RAM? Yeah, we all have one of those on our desks. Do these guys honestly believe that any laymen would possibly be able to discern any minute performance gains from Vista SP1 (or XP SP3) on such a machine? Give me a break! When you run the benchmarks on a typical Core2Duo, Pentium 4, or AMD Athlon processor sold within the last two years let me know. Maybe then I'll be interested in the benchmarks.
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 12/27/2007, -5/+51Windows XP SP2 vs Windows XP SP3, please.
- inf0, on 12/27/2007, -10/+51rc1 is alot faster.. specially for Crisis and some other games.. i gained 5 fps easy with sp1
- ericthegreat, on 12/27/2007, -2/+36I'm not sure what their problem with network transfers is but when I installed SP1 it greatly improved my network transfer rates. It would only copy to and from my server at about 12% of the 100mb. Once I installed SP1 it jumped up to 95% which is much faster than XP would copy without any hacks to go over the QoS limitations.
- AmazingAndrex, on 12/27/2007, -2/+34Yes, that was already posted.
- afx1, on 12/27/2007, -2/+28is it too late for Windows XP SP3 vs. DOS 6.22?
- googooly, on 12/27/2007, -9/+34Digg for network speed on XP compare to Vista
- Chirp08, on 12/27/2007, -4/+28exactly, the two things that actually matter, especially to the business world is where Vista fails miserably. What the hell happened with this latest round of OS's from apple and microsoft, both are really sucking when it comes to networking. Leopard took a huge step back with its windows compatibility, nothing but problems for me.
- iofthestorm, on 12/27/2007, -5/+29Interesting that Vista has a 15% higher PCMark05 score than XP on the same machine, although it could be because Vista has better multithreading code, since that beast has 8 cores. Not as impressed with the graphics card on that thing though, since I don't really know what the consumer equivalent is but I'm sure it's not worthy of the processor, especially since there's (only) one GPU.
- TheShad0w, on 12/27/2007, -3/+25My question is how does this affect the average users PC? Doesn't really help to test Vista RC1 on a machine 90% of the populous doesn't have.
- allyant, on 12/27/2007, -10/+31Shut up apple fan boy, go away and play your games...... ooo wait....
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 12/27/2007, -1/+223dMark05 != PCMark05
- sdub74, on 12/27/2007, -8/+28Whenever a new OS comes out, there are going to be issues with older hardware and software. It's the responsibility of the hardware/software manufacturer to come up with drivers/patches for Vista, not the responsibility of Microsoft to go out and make their OS compatible with every piece of hardware and software on the planet.
- Phocion55, on 12/27/2007, -2/+22Windows XP SP3 vs. Windows Vista SP1 as well!
- inactive, on 12/27/2007, -5/+21Vuja De
- IcyStorm, on 12/27/2007, -0/+16Is XP's write speed supposed to be faster than its read speed?
And there's other comments (primarily toward the bottom) that question the benchmarks by Gizmodo. - grumpyrain, on 12/27/2007, -0/+13Most people here were 9 when XP came out.
- UtopiaInTheSky, on 12/27/2007, -2/+14You missed his point entirely.
- iofthestorm, on 12/28/2007, -0/+11... Vista aggressively prefetches frequently used programs and loads as much of the OS into memory as possible so that everything runs smoothly. On my system with 2GB of RAM, 1GB is used for system cache which makes the OS extremely fast and the rest is used by services and apps. There's no "free" memory which is actually a good thing for people who want to use the memory they paid for. Memory doesn't help you by being free, it helps you by being used. As soon as something else needs the RAM Vista gives it up so I don't see why memory usage is a bad thing.
- antdude, on 12/27/2007, -1/+12It's massive if you only got 10 FPS originally. :)
- cawfee, on 12/27/2007, -0/+11"We'll take this here supercomputer that no mortal can afford and run a series of tests that will have little to no relevance or comparison to the common end-user". Sounds great, sign me up!
- NJank, on 12/27/2007, -6/+17cool! where's my $499 mac? (lcd, printer, scanner included, of course...)
- ericthegreat, on 12/27/2007, -3/+14That's what DOSBox is for. Now we need XPBox!
- crimsonnblue, on 12/27/2007, -3/+13That and it only comes in form of a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray disk... It depends on the media itself...You can still do NON DRM everything in vista just like you can XP...
- bart5986, on 12/27/2007, -8/+18I always knew Vista copied things slower then XP, but just look at XP vs Vista! What the hell were Microsoft thinking.
- crimsonnblue, on 12/27/2007, -4/+14Quote "their networks upgraded to Vista"...
Ugh
I know for a fact it doesn't take this long to transfer this much data over a LAN with Vista. I've done it on a Wireless Lan and its faster than the 15 minutes they've stated here. - shawnz, on 12/27/2007, -0/+10software doesn't need to use resources to be good. even if developers think it's true.
- elementfire, on 12/27/2007, -1/+11It's too early to tell, but preliminary tests indicate a 999999999x increase in mouse responsiveness right off the boot.
- ninja0, on 12/27/2007, -23/+32I couldn't help but chuckle when I read this comment from gizmodo:
"BY MULLINGITOVER AT 12/26/07 03:07 PM
Sounds great, as long as you don't hit those rare edge cases like USING YOUR HARD DRIVE or TRANSFERRING FILES OVER A NETWORK.
But hey, who does that? " - widgetmaker, on 12/27/2007, -1/+10buried for NSFW screenshot and no warning at all.
- nebion, on 12/27/2007, -1/+10With 4GB of RAM in the machine, and XP vs. Vista, was either or both of the systems 64-bit, and was either or both of the systems using PAE?
Without knowing those things, it's kind of difficult to determine which (if any) of the systems were making use of all of the memory installed.
To be fair, the tests didn't seem like ones that would be dependent on the amount of memory, so maybe that isn't relevant - but it is relevant to anyone considering using such a system themselves. - shawnz, on 12/27/2007, -0/+9that's the.... only logo.
- defektiv, on 12/27/2007, -3/+12i wonder sometimes if my vista partition will ever see more than an occasional visit only to justify the hundreds of dollars i spent on it before i returned to my xp partition. never again microsoft, will i EVER buy one of your OSs until at least the first FINAL release SP. i was suckered into ME and now Vista. XP seems to be the only wise purchase i ever made from them.
- darkzealot89, on 12/27/2007, -1/+10If "deja vu" didn't work the first 2 or 3 times, why keep going on to a 5th time?
- AmazingAndrex, on 12/27/2007, -1/+9See comment above yours.
- Noctem, on 12/27/2007, -2/+10No? Anyone who implies that is probably a troll.
- SpectralSounds, on 12/27/2007, -1/+9XP sucked ass when it was first released too. People around here don't seem to remember that.
- HonoredMule, on 12/27/2007, -2/+10But plagiarized, not credited. Now I wanna go back and bury the other guy, but I already dugg him up.
- HonoredMule, on 12/27/2007, -1/+8Maybe because you shouldn't have to turn indexing off. It's a feature most people want, and the scenario then resembles upselling a product by extolling the virtues of features you can't use.
- Durinthal, on 12/27/2007, -2/+9There's software to protect you from those things.. at least there is on the PC.
- IcyStorm, on 12/27/2007, -2/+9You talk as if most of us have never used Ubuntu and Compiz before >_>
- skyteria, on 12/27/2007, -0/+7I'm dual-booting your ass because that comment made no sense!
- Chunken, on 12/27/2007, -8/+15I've been dual booting Vista and XP since Vista came out but Vista was so much slower I couldn't handle it and only used XP for months. But 2 weeks ago I decided to give Vista another shot. Installed all the updates and wow what a difference. Vista is running sooooo much faster than it used to I can use it as my primary OS now. For example Alt + Tabbing out of WoW used to take 20-30 seconds in Vista (and drove me crazy). Now it takes about 3 seconds. I used to have problems shutting down and those have been fixed too. Huge improvement. Can't wait for SP1.
- teh_techie, on 12/27/2007, -0/+6right, hence the need for DOSBox...
- HonoredMule, on 12/27/2007, -2/+8Good point. It's like deja vu all over again.
- Ryosen, on 12/27/2007, -1/+7Indexing is turned on by default in Vista. There's a ton of tweaks that you could do to both systems to improve performance. Almost all of them, however, require a level of understanding that exceeds the typical user. Your example, for instance, requires that the user know understands Windows services and knows how to identify the indexing service. Further, it trades one performance measurement for another (searching).
It is a much fairer comparison to test each system in its default configuration. - MacParrot, on 12/27/2007, -0/+6Good God, please don't drag Apple into this. Who needs the headaches of all the pissed off Windows users mass commenting in Apple posts about how much they suck? Get enough of that crap now as it is.
Good for Microsoft for patching a few problems in Vista. No OS (Yes even OS X) is perfect. - Eallan, on 12/27/2007, -2/+7I noticed about a 7fps increase with Tabula Rasa across the board.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 216 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is