PDA

View Full Version : Optimizing VISTA



ted
11-27-2007, 12:29 PM
I hope to gather everyone's tips for streamlining Vista in one thread.
There are tips spread everywhere, but since so many of us are moving towards VISTA, it would be good to have a thread dedicated to streamlining VISTA.

Different opinions are welcome and no one method is perfect, but being able to turn off the bloat will help many of us just entering the waters.

THANKS!

Verlon
11-27-2007, 12:44 PM
FIRST
I turn turn off UAC-- immediately --at least on my personal computer. On a shared access computer, I might reconsider.

make sure you have 2GB of ram...VISTA is much better with the 2GB mark.

Aero isn't just bloat... Don't hate it.

There are a few useful tools for the sidebar...(drag and drop to print and cpu moniters -even for multicore if you look for them -- come to mind). Whether they are 'bloat' or wonderfully convenient is a matter of taste I suppose.

I trust spybot s&d more than Windows Defender. You may feel otherwise.

Just off the top of my head.

I make the registry edits to DL more than two things at a time. Proton never posts just two tutorials.....

IMI
11-27-2007, 08:19 PM
Use Vista for what it essentially is - an operating system with a superior memory management structure.
Left to its own devices, it is the equivalent of a very strict nanny. Turn off everything that it says is there to protect you. Don't use Internet Explorer. Don't use Defender.
Aero is cool, if you have the GPU power and RAM for it.
You can easily enough defeat microsoft's endeavor to create the ultimate idiot-proof software, and should do so wherever possible, but Vista as an OS and not as a guardian, is a very good thing. :D

zapper1998
11-27-2007, 09:45 PM
FIRST
I turn turn off UAC-- immediately --at least on my personal computer. On a shared access computer, I might reconsider.

make sure you have 2GB of ram...VISTA is much better with the 2GB mark.



Ok your "first" is cool, I turn it off, and I still get the little icon in the task bar, saying you need to turn it back on, So how do you turn that "OFF" ?????

Also I have 8 gig ram and a decent Vid card, runs great except the little icons in the task bar saying you need to turn these thingys back on....

ted
11-28-2007, 12:23 AM
The little warning in the task bar will just have to look that way...I think, and that's better then dealing with UAC.

How do you disable Defender, and what's the risk?

When I start VT5 windows says it's returning to "windows basic" look. Waz up wit that??? I should have plenty of resources.

Verlon
11-28-2007, 12:32 AM
SE is (or at least WAS through 1.2) not compatible with Aero for whatever reason (probably fighting over who gets the GPU accel privileges first). The Vista patch for SpeedEdit involved turning off Aero while it was running (and it should turn back on when you exit).

Not at home so I am not on Vista, but I believe you can turn off defender on the same screen where you tell MS what they can do with their software firewall (internet options? network? Sorry, just drawing a blank). Defender protects against ad-ware and spyware. I prefer Spybot Search and Destroy...run it every week or so and clean out everyone tracking my haunting of newtek forums. The risk depends on your surf habits, but I would run SOMETHING every now and then. Those spyware buffoons are really quite sneaky devils.

Same story when I turned off UAC....I turned it off when I got the OS in February, and it hasn't been a problem since.

Phil
11-28-2007, 01:00 AM
With all the things users apparently should be turning off, they need a centralised control panel with one big button labelled 'turn annoying crap off' :D

zapper1998
11-28-2007, 08:17 AM
cool thanks

Lito
11-28-2007, 08:24 AM
I also recommend disabling the driver signing "feature" when you boot especially in the 64bit environment. Unfortunately there is no way to keep it permanently disabled, you have to boot and press F8 and select it from the menu on each reboot. This is very useful if you plan on running apps like SiW (system info for windows), or other apps that use their own built in drivers. For most users this probably isn't necessary.

Phil
11-28-2007, 01:55 PM
It's like two or three little things that take 2 minutes combined. Big deal.

You did see the :D didn't you?

dweinkauf
11-28-2007, 02:32 PM
Yikes! I got tired reading this thread about how much time and effort is needed to deal with Vista. As for me, I just replaced my old toaster card with a new upgraded card. I then loaded VT5 software without any problems. As soon as the software finished installing, I put in my new registration code, opened VT5 up and went back to what I use my time for - video editing. Absolutely no need to deal with the OS. Thank god for XP Pro and XP 64!

ted
11-28-2007, 03:20 PM
dweinkauf, I don't want people to think I don't like Vista, I do.
But like with any new OS, Hardware or applications, there is the "Default" settings and then there are the "better" settings. :hey:

I'm just trying to organize a discussion of what works and doesn't for the various users here.
I honestly think the bashing of Vista, (even among my guys here), is usually overstated. No, I'm not saying it's perfect, but it ain't terrible as far as I've found.

For those with tips, questions or concerns, please mention how you use your Vista or soon to be Vista system most.
For us:
Editing 85%
GFX, (not 3D yet), 10%
Live productions 5%

Hopper
11-28-2007, 03:25 PM
With all the things users apparently should be turning off, they need a centralised control panel with one big button labelled 'turn annoying crap off' :D
They do... it's on your taskbar - called "Shutdown". :D

ok .. kidding... someone had to do it.

dweinkauf
11-28-2007, 06:46 PM
Ted,

If Vista works for you, I support you. I also support your efforts to gather information about how to tweak it. That information will be invaluable when we dinosaurs decide to look at it again. I personally hate dealing with OS issues and, instead, prefer to use my time to get my work done. I simply do not have the interest, expertise, or time to deal with the OS issues raised in this forum. I'm also an educator who wants the freedom to exercise my legal right to "fair use" of copyrighted material. XP allows me to do that - Vista doesn't. So, in effect, I have no choice but to stay with XP. Good luck on your information gathering. You're doing a great service for all of us. I look forward to your final results and conclusions.

Dave

archijam
11-29-2007, 01:44 AM
Is there a good (beginner level preferably) site for showing step by step how to turn off all the vista bollocks?

It's for a student of mine who is having problems ...

Cheers!

j.

-EsHrA-
11-29-2007, 05:10 AM
archijam, yes good one, a clear list would be appreciated.


mlon

dweinkauf
11-29-2007, 06:17 AM
I've never had a problem with XP allowing me to exercise my right to "fair use" of material at whatever resolution I need to use. I just don't have the time to find out if Vista does it any better. I also use a lot of older equipment inside and connected to my workstation and again, I don't have the time to find out if Vista will have a problem with this older equipment because it may or may not be certified for Vista. I simply can't take the chance that something won't work once the Vista OS is installed. And, I don't want to face the prospect of hardware upgrades just to satisfy Vista.

All I'm saying is I don't have the time to be a tester for something that so many people in these forums are struggling with. I have to get work done and XP allows me to do that. My rule of thumb is "If it's not broke, don't fix it." I applaud those who are doing research on how to deal with Vista and tweak it to work with things like the toaster. A manual on how to properly configure Vista will be invaluable to all of us. But until Vista becomes a lot easier to configure for dummies like me without taking our valuable working time, I can't waste my time on it. I have to get work done and XP allows me to do that without any hassles.

DogBoy
11-29-2007, 07:00 AM
All I'm saying is I don't have the time to be a tester for something that so many people in these forums are struggling with. I have to get work done and XP allows me to do that. My rule of thumb is "If it's not broke, don't fix it." I applaud those who are doing research on how to deal with Vista and tweak it to work with things like the toaster. A manual on how to properly configure Vista will be invaluable to all of us. But until Vista becomes a lot easier to configure for dummies like me without taking our valuable working time, I can't waste my time on it. I have to get work done and XP allows me to do that without any hassles.

You obviously don't remember all the crud that went down when XP was released. All the pain that went with moving from 98 or 2K pro. Vista is hardly difficult, nor do you need a manual to configure it, dummy or not. The fact is you have now learnt the foibles of XP, and how to live with them. Vista isn't that big a jump.

But each to their own.

archijam
11-29-2007, 07:11 AM
On Vista tweaks:

Found this (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9015738) , this (http://www.tweakvista.com/VistaPerformanceTweaks.aspx) and this (http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTMyNywxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==) .. any better links?

j.

IMI
11-29-2007, 06:20 PM
All I'm saying is I don't have the time to be a tester for something that so many people in these forums are struggling with.


I first tried Vista, hated it, denied it, insulted it, and wiped it off my PC. Then I tried it again, went through the same process, except for the uninstall part and found it to be just fine and better in alot of ways. I haven't had any issues since.
Vista's big problem is it's dummy-proofed, and a little bit of an inconvenience to bypass the idiot proofing, but that's all - just a little inconvenience, while the benefits far outweigh that.
It's funny - it was neverko here who pointed out I was not giving it a fair shake when I was whining about it, and it's because I had this attitude I just had to know what he saw in it that I was missing which caused me to dig into it. Once I did that, and learned its basic differences and how to deal with its inherent maternal instinct - and wipe that idea out of its head... Vista and I came to an understanding - it's an OS and I'm its Master. Without me, it's just a bunch of little ones and zeros sitting on a DVD getting lonely on a shelf. Once it learned it must cooperate, I can allow it some life and vitality. And, it complied, with surprisingly little resistance. :)
I'm not going back to XP. :D

Verlon
11-29-2007, 10:06 PM
IMI- Yeah, you know it can't be a performance hit if nerverko is using it :D

IMI
11-30-2007, 02:46 AM
IMI- Yeah, you know it can't be a performance hit if nerverko is using it :D


I'm not sure what you mean by "performance hit".
In any event, I only meant that he was the first person I ran across vehemently extolling Vista's virtues and I figured I owed it to myself to have another look at it. In the course of that I also found other articles saying the same things.

My own personal experience with it since then is why I'm keeping with it, and that's primarily in the way it manages memory.
And of course, DirectX 10. Maybe there haven't been any games put out yet which fully utilize DX 10, but there will be, and it won't be long before they'll be abandoning DX 9 entirely.
I don't use my PC to download music or movies, I have no I-pod or I-tunes. I use my TV for watching DVD's and my stereo for music. I buy those disks the old fashioned way - at the store... so none of that protection stuff will be an issue or a concern. i really don't even understand what it's all about, for that matter.

Sande
11-30-2007, 04:17 AM
I'm not sure what you mean by "performance hit".
...
And of course, DirectX 10. Maybe there haven't been any games put out yet which fully utilize DX 10, but there will be, and it won't be long before they'll be abandoning DX 9 entirely.
...
none of that protection stuff will be an issue or a concern. i really don't even understand what it's all about, for that matter.
Actually, no matter what you do with your Vista-PC, there will always be a slight performance hit caused by the DRM-mechanism. When you want to play games which use DirectSound3D (as many recent ones do), you are not going to have those hardware accelerated environmental effects anymore because Vista's DRM will not allow direct access to audio hardware with DirectSound anymore - you are stuck with plain stereo and even that won't always work. Many problems with drivers are either directly or indirectly caused by the implementation of Vista's DRM. Of course, if everything works well for you, all that probably doesn't affect you much - and in either case it's too late now to ditch that stupid DRM-system.

DX9 will not be abandoned for years - there are still way too few DX10 cards out there and the masses move slowly.

IMI
11-30-2007, 04:40 AM
Well maybe it will be years before DX 9 is ditched entirely, but in the meantime DX 10 will be pushed to its limits, and I intend on enjoying it. :)
As for the DirectSound, why would M$ come up with an OS which is the only one able to use DX 10, and then have the sound portion of that rendered unusable? That doesn't make any sense. I'm probably misunderstanding what you're trying to say though.
In any event, the sound I've been experiencing with Oblivion, Bioshock and Crysis are plenty good, particularly through my headphones, although the audio card I'm using is somewhat outdated. I was planning on buying a better one today, in fact, and I guess I'll see if there's any improvement or not.
I'll be the first to admit I don't understand the DRM mechanism thingy, and I haven't been able to find any articles on it that don't appear to be heavily slanted either pro-Vista or anti-Vista.

Sande
11-30-2007, 04:53 AM
Well maybe it will be years before DX 9 is ditched entirely, but in the meantime DX 10 will be pushed to its limits, and I intend on enjoying it. :)
As for the DirectSound, why would M$ come up with an OS which is the only one able to use DX 10, and then have the sound portion of that rendered unusable? That doesn't make any sense. I'm probably misunderstanding what you're trying to say though.
Yep, I'm also looking forward for the games that really utilize DX10.
We have to remember that the hardware accelerated DirectSound isn't the only available option in games (and not an option at all anymore). Vista has it's own sound libraries and there are also other 3rd party-solutions, like OpenAL which still work. DRM wasn't the only reason to leave that direct audio hardware access out - direct access to hardware may cause instability, so (at least in theory) Vista should be more stable because of that.

Verlon
11-30-2007, 06:01 AM
THey moved the audio to the user level from the kernel level to increase security and reduce crashes. If the audio crashes on you, now it shouldn't be able crash the whole OS. AFAIK, it has nothing to do with DRM, but I do not know everything.

There is still a way to get the environmental effects. They can use openAL. Positional effects still work, tested on this computer by way of filling my virtual enemies full of digital lead.

Weetos
11-30-2007, 08:15 AM
On Vista tweaks:

Found this (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9015738) , this (http://www.tweakvista.com/VistaPerformanceTweaks.aspx) and this (http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTMyNywxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==) .. any better links?

j.

Wow - Thank you so much for those links :bowdown:

Great tips !

dweinkauf
12-01-2007, 04:12 PM
I didn't go near XP until a NewTek dealer recommended it, installed it for me and worked out any lingering bugs (I don't remember many if any). When I upgraded my workstation this past summer, a Newtek dealer recommended staying with XP because Vista was taking too much of their time to configure it for new systems. There was also the issue of using my older hardware in the system that mitigated against using Vista. I had to rely on his advice that said not to install Vista. Had he recommended Vista, I would have it on my workstation. But, he didn't and that's why we went with XP pro and XP 64. I think I've said this before, but it's worth repeating - I absolutely refuse to deal with OS configurations and problems. That's why I pay a NewTek dealer who has that expertise to do the work for me. That's also why I will not take the route many of you are taking in doing the configurations yourselves. I simply don't have the time or expertise to go there. By the same token, I support all of you who are doing this important job to find ways to make Vista work with VT workstations. Perhaps when it's bulletproof and will work with VT workstations with older uncertified Vista components, I'll look at it. In the meanwhile, back to work.

IMI
12-01-2007, 04:44 PM
I can totally respect that, dweinkauf. You work with what you know, and XP is still a great OS, and will be for a good while. :) I know a few people who are still using Windows 2000, for that matter.
Myself, I had to learn how to deal with it. I bought it and I wasn't going to just let it sit there on the shelf - that's a pretty expensive bookend, considering it isn't even an antique. ;)

Stooch
12-01-2007, 05:28 PM
wow.

you know what i like about dinosaurs?

they failed to adapt and went extinct.


I've never had a problem with XP allowing me to exercise my right to "fair use" of material at whatever resolution I need to use. I just don't have the time to find out if Vista does it any better. I also use a lot of older equipment inside and connected to my workstation and again, I don't have the time to find out if Vista will have a problem with this older equipment because it may or may not be certified for Vista. I simply can't take the chance that something won't work once the Vista OS is installed. And, I don't want to face the prospect of hardware upgrades just to satisfy Vista.

All I'm saying is I don't have the time to be a tester for something that so many people in these forums are struggling with. I have to get work done and XP allows me to do that. My rule of thumb is "If it's not broke, don't fix it." I applaud those who are doing research on how to deal with Vista and tweak it to work with things like the toaster. A manual on how to properly configure Vista will be invaluable to all of us. But until Vista becomes a lot easier to configure for dummies like me without taking our valuable working time, I can't waste my time on it. I have to get work done and XP allows me to do that without any hassles.

dweinkauf
12-02-2007, 01:20 AM
wow. you know what i like about dinosaurs? they failed to adapt and went extinct.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but so far I think dinosaurs were on this earth a lot longer than our species. At the rate we're going, it's anyone's guess if we'll be able to adapt as well as they did so we can live as long as they did on earth. What I like about dinosaurs is that they get work done with tools that work for them.

By the way, this e-mail is being written on a P-III with Windows 2000 - a computer and OS that has never failed me in the long time I've had them. It is outstanding for the internet and written material and frees my VT5 workstation for graphics, editing, animation and similar work tasks. Perhaps someday I'll dust off my free copy of Vista and look at it, but not until it's bulletproof, my dealer recommends and installs it, and it doesn't require me to buy new hardware just to satisfy it. Don't get me wrong, I like new toys as well as anyone else, but with me being on Social Security, I have to be pretty selective about what I purchase these days.

Verlon
12-02-2007, 08:13 AM
no, dinosaurs are dead....they aren't doing any work now :devil:

If you are saying "if its not broke, don't fix it," please note that this argument requires you to assert that Windows (whatever you're using, lets say XP) is PERFECT. That a bold statement.

I think most people are more saying, "I'm used to it so don't change it," but what is happening is "I got it to work, so don't bother trying to improve it."

When Win95 shipped, we heard "DOS is better"
When Win98 shipped, Win95 was just fine.
WinMe came out, and no one could bear parting with 98.
WinXP came out, and it was a bloated resource hog that no one would EVER, EVER, EVER see installed on THEIR system.
I'll see you guys on Vista screaming about WinNext in 5 years.

IMI
12-02-2007, 08:33 AM
WinMe came out, and no one could bear parting with 98.


Win ME should never have been created. I'd agree with all the rest of what you said, but I was one of those who wasn't about to "upgrade" to it from 98 SE. ;)
I think the only thing it had in it that was good was the Restore Point. That was already a part of NT though, I think.

Stooch
12-02-2007, 11:34 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong.

you are wrong.

i am not impressed with your ancient technology and infact if I was a client it would turn me off from doing business with you.

as far as being able to afford your work tools, its tax deductible, no reason not to.

12-02-2007, 12:16 PM
Just chiming in to add my Vista experience to this thread. I've been in need of a complete system upgrade for over a year now and have mostly been holding off waiting for the hardware and as much software as possible to play nicer with Vista. It's the same thing I did with XP - though for XP I upgraded mainly because our studio did, which worked out well. This time I'm jumping the gun a bit, but I did more research as well, and had specific goals, like wanting to use XSI 64 bit and utilize more memory in general.

So when I finally took the plunge I said no to OEM and decided to build my own system again - something I haven't done in several years. Mainly to save money, but also to refamiliarize myself with the current gen hardware. I wanted to make sure that I put together a system that would have as little problem with Vista 64 as possible so I hand picked all my parts and still kept to a budget.

Setup was as easy as I've ever experienced. After putting everything together, the machine posted without any problems or adjustments required other than to shuffle my boot drive order so that vista would approve the HD I wanted to install it on. Installation was fine from there, was up and running on my wireless network in minutes and updating the OS and installing drivers.

I just finished installing a good chunk of the software I use, including XSI 64, mudbox, Zbrush3, Silo, UVLayout, plus a bunch of my utilities, browser, mail, IM, etc. Everything installed fine. The only snags I had were with Steam and Team Fortress 2, which I had to force to install as admin. I upgraded to photoshop CS3 but also have photoshop CS installed, but CS3 won't seem to install. It's the only real problem I've had so far. It's not a real deal breaker though since I've been using CS all this time anyway and I'm sure I'll work it out. Otherwise, my Vista experience has been fairly hassle free, much to my surprise. I went in having lower expectations, simply to be prepared for frustration and to deal with more issues, but that has not been the case. CS3 is my only real snag at this point.

I now have a very current gen system for all my gaming and work needs. Since my work is in games as well I've always needed one machine to handle both. So far so good. Crysis and UT3 are gorgeous and run very smoothly, and so does TF2. I love the aero interface... though I was also a dabbler in winidow blinds for xp etc, and also have a macbook pro at home. Aero is a nice way to keep me from looking at macs again for awhile to come and still use all my windows only software and games. I haven't had any hitches with Aero yet where I had to turn it off.

Some specs: Core 2 Quad @ 2.4 GHz, 4 gigs ram, GeForce 8800 GT, 512 megs. Not bleeding edge but impressive enough to meet my needs for awhile.

I'm mostly posting this for others who may be on the fence over upgrading and are still taking notes. I waited till I needed a new machine rather than upgrading. My past experience has at least proven that this is generally the path of least resistance with a new OS. Hardware standards have changed and i made sure that all of my hardware was built to work with Vista in the first place.

dweinkauf
12-02-2007, 12:27 PM
Yes, the dinosaurs are dead, but the jury is still out on the question of our species adapting as well and lasting as long as they did.

OK, let's replace the phrase, "If it's not broke, don't fix it" with "It works for what I do now so there is no need to change or upgrade until the need arises." Does that sound better?

This old dinosaur spends time researching new technology and upgrades but will not move in that direction without a real need. For example, I upgraded my VT workstation because I had a need to move into Hi-Def and four channel sound. I'm planning to purchase a Hi-Def camera this summer. I had hoped to do that sooner with a purchase of the HVX-200 but along came that new Sony camera that I want to do some research on before deciding. I'm waiting on the Hi-Def burner because of the current format war. It makes no sense to upgrade that yet. I also have no doubt that the cost of a hi-def burner will be coming down as time passes.

When I did my VT workstation upgrade, the NewTek dealer recommended keeping my old SCSI raid in the system in addition to the new SATA raid he installed. I also have an old scanner that performs as well as anything on the market today and at higher resolutions than my own work even demands. It goes without saying, however, that if that scanner didn't serve my work needs, I'd be the first in line to get a new one - but that's moot point isn't it? Similarly, when my old P-III dies (if it ever will), I'll be ready for an upgrade. I only have $300 invested in that old machine that has more than satisfied my work needs for internet, text writing, and desktop publishing without any problems for about 8 years. Can anyone give me a reason why I need to do an upgrade there? The point is, my scanner and the SCSI raid work extremely well and more than serve my current work needs, so there is no reason to spend money on new ones. In addition, they're both, I'm sure, not Vista certified. So, can anyone tell me if these two items will work with Vista?

If I had to purchase each new thing that came on the market, I'd be broke in no time - that's why I'm judicious in my purchases. Again, for me, a need has to be there first before any purchase is made. So, once again, here are my requirements for new purchases:
(1) There has to be a need in my work that requires a new purchase or upgrade. XP more than handles my current workload (better than even I expected), so there is no need to upgrade to a new OS.
(2) Any new upgrade needs to accommodate older workable hardware already in the system. From what I've read here and other places, Vista won't work with older hardware.
(3) With respect to NewTek products, a NewTek dealer has to recommend the purchase and install it without problems. To this date, the NewTek dealer I worked with does not recommend putting Vista on new VT workstations.
(4) Any installation cannot take time away from my work.

Having said all that, let this dinosaur express another opinion - IT IS THE WORK THAT COUNTS, NOT THE TOOLS. My former place of employment was never properly funded and suffered through a hand to mouth existence taking hand-me-down technology and scratching for every dollar to keep things going. We taught Lightwave because it was inexpensive and easy to teach. We were always under pressure to teach Maya to be current with other institutions, but could never afford to do so. Ironically, we had a animator apply for a job since her institution shut down its animation program because it had invested so heavily in Maya and couldn't afford to continue funding it.

Believe me, if we had the money, we would have the best technology we could afford, but that was not to be. What we did, instead, was train working artists who could solve problems even if they had to use old technology and software to do it. You might even put them in the category of dinosaurs for having to work under these "primitive" conditions. But, they all became much stronger for it.

Virtually every person who comes out of our program gets a job immediately even though he or she doesn't have Maya experience. What these students have instead are damn good portfolios and problem solving abilities. It would take too long to list the hundreds of feature films, TV series and commercials my former students have worked on, but here are a few of the current credits... "Beowulf" (this former student now teaches Lightwave here), "Water Horse" (to be released at Christmas. This student worked on "Narnia" within a year of graduation and is now working on James Cameron's "Avatar" at Peter Jackson's studio), "Harry Potter" (last three installments), "The Simpsons Movie" (this student is another dinosaur still doing 2D animation the old fashioned way. He'll be rejoining Disney Features this spring to continue his non-computer hand-drawn work), "Ice Age II" (this student became supervising animator of the film about three years after graduation). Another former student was assistant director of a TV series shortly after graduation, directed segments for another popular animated TV series and and went on to head a division at Lucasfilm. Still another recent graduate works at Pixar.

I'd say these dinosaurs are doing pretty well. Wouldn't you agree?

Stooch
12-02-2007, 02:06 PM
I'd say these dinosaurs are doing pretty well. Wouldn't you agree?

no. they are dead because they failed to adapt.

you are posting an awful lot in this thread even though this is about vista tweaks, not your personal sob story of not being able to afford the latest technology and being stubborn (or trying to downplay your plight with flawed logic)

this isnt even about dinosaurs evolution, you are missing the analogy of you being stuck in the past while the rest of the world moves on, using the same line of arguments people have used for all previous incarnations of windows. feel free to start a thread about how you dont need the latest software to do your work though. why not just stick to lightwave 4.0 as well? that way you can save even more money.

Stooch
12-02-2007, 02:14 PM
do better work, get better clients, earn more money. true - software shouldnt hold back talent and if you are really as talented as you imply, you should have plenty of cash to buy as much software as needed and write it off when doing your taxes. anyway ill get back to my weekend project that is worth about 10 licenses of vista. (that are tax deductible so essentially they are free)

ted
12-02-2007, 02:19 PM
We all have to decide when to upgrade. Not right or wrong by someone elses standards.
We just went Vista Ultimate 64 in Edit Bay one because I wanted the latest hardware software and not change it for a while.

BUT...today I just had to put a new system drive and re-install the OS on my office computer and guess what? I stayed with XP.
That's what worked for me with dozens of aplications I need on that box.

So to each their own. I can understand trying to convince someone either way, but it shouldn't be taken to a personal level.
I wish you all well. By the way, any more tips? :D

Stooch
12-02-2007, 02:38 PM
exactly. what i get from dwein are reasons not to switch to vista when this thread is for people who already have switched and are looking to tweak it. Im giving counterpoints when really there is no need for it in this thread.

IMI
12-02-2007, 03:47 PM
By the way, any more tips?

Not really a tip, but... I bought a new Audigy Creative Soundblaster audio card, and Vista couldn't install the drivers or the software through either autoplay or double-clicking on the CD icon, or the main Setup.exe. That also happened with some other software, but I can't remember now what. however, in both those cases I was able to install by opening the CD folder and finding the relevant exe files and bypassing the main setup. Strange.
But, one cool thing, Vista found the 64 bit driver for it somewhere.. "out there".. and installed that, instead of the 32 bit driver that was on the CD. pretty cool. :)

Stooch
12-02-2007, 04:09 PM
there isnt much to tweaking vista. just turn off UAC (with the UAC tool prefereable, do a search for UAC tool)

and turn off indexing for your harddrive for fast seaches, it grinds the hdd too much.

other than that, be sure to have latest drivers and you are good to go. there isnt much more than that really. its a nice stable, fast OS otherwise. for me there are no other problems or tweaks needed like XP used to have because it seems to run perfectly as is.

all my 3d software seems to be running with no hitches.

as far as reasons why to go with vista? well 64 bit will be much better supported since its a new os and more vendors have the incentive to support 64bit drivers. also the power management is far more advanced and system boot and shutdown (standby) is faster than ever. faster than macs in fact.

p.s. dont forget to run windows update tool... of course. i found that it even found alot of my drivers for me.

some of the sidebar apps are buggy, but i dotn even bother with it. it offers nothing useful for me and seems to have memory leaks in some of the plugins.

Stooch
12-02-2007, 04:23 PM
I just finished installing a good chunk of the software I use, including XSI 64, mudbox, Zbrush3, Silo, UVLayout, plus a bunch of my utilities, browser, mail, IM, etc. Everything installed fine. The only snags I had were with Steam and Team Fortress 2, which I had to force to install as admin. I upgraded to photoshop CS3 but also have photoshop CS installed, but CS3 won't seem to install. It's the only real problem I've had so far. It's not a real deal breaker though since I've been using CS all this time anyway and I'm sure I'll work it out. Otherwise, my Vista experience has been fairly hassle free, much to my surprise. I went in having lower expectations, simply to be prepared for frustration and to deal with more issues, but that has not been the case. CS3 is my only real snag at this point.



Interesting. I have the CS3 Suite and it installed without a hitch. Same goes for steam and TF2. maybe its hardware related?

i have a q6600 as well with abit IP35-Pro and Corsair 1066mhz ram.

p.s. Becareful with old optical drives, they have the potential to cause alot of trouble, so be sure that the firmware and drivers are up to snuff. i just bought a new SATA pioneer DVD burner for 50 bucks because my old burner wouldnt get recognized by the media player, however it was time for a new one with a SATA connection anyway, no more ribbons in my box. (and yes i know about twisted cables, but they are still too thick and clunky, and slow).

basically if you are building a new pc right now, you really have no reasons not to go with vistas, all the stuff released post vista is pretty much guaranteed to have driver support.

p.s.s. I am using the 32bit install for now since i believe in letting the drivers for 64 bit mature a little bit more and because i really dont need 64 bit at home yet.

Stooch
12-02-2007, 04:34 PM
and another note. if you have an older rig and it does what you need then stick with your current install of XP. you run a higher chance of having issues with vista, especially if your hardware was released a long time before vista or using 2nd tier brand hardware.

Of course im not saying you are guaranteed to have issues but i think its perfectly fair and logical if you do, since its the hardware vendors job to keep up with the latest OS.

as far as actual user experience, I personally would not want to go back to XP or OSX. I feel that with vista i have best of both worlds, a nice pretty ui and the kind of spectrum of compatibility that i demand, the performance hits that everyone is so afraid of are not noticeable on my mid to high end pc..

personal opinion of course.

dweinkauf
12-02-2007, 07:52 PM
and another note. if you have an older rig and it does what you need then stick with your current install of XP. you run a higher chance of having issues with vista, especially if your hardware was released a long time before vista or using 2nd tier brand hardware.
STOOCH,

Thanks for answering one of the questions I raised in my post.

Some notes about your posts. My last reference to dinosaurs was to the students I trained under technical limitations, who not only adapted, now have successful careers in the industry, and use state-of-the-art technology. They didn't get there because they used the latest technology, they got there because they worked hard, were trained as artists who could solve problems, had great reels, and were able to adapt. My advise to all of my students was to always strive for the best (and that includes technology), be flexible (read "adapt"), but be sure to keep tools other than technology in your arsenal.

About an hour ago, I finished judging a film festival with two of my former students who now do commercial video and graphic design work. One of them told me most of his client base comes from people who like the work in his personal (done on his older home computer) rather than his commercial (done on state-of-the-art technology he has access to) reel. Obviously he has something other than technology to offer his clients and they hire him for it.

I never claimed to be talented or rich. I did imply that my students were talented and the proof, as they say, is in the pudding. I'm not rich because my career was in teaching and everyone knows that doesn't pay much. In retirement, I'm running a non-profit to help at risk youth - something that can be a money loser at times. So on a fixed income, any purchase I make has to be based on need and the rest of the requirements I outlined previously.

By the way, I don't even have a vague recollection of Lightwave 4.0. That's probably because I'm using the 64-bit version of 9.3.

Enough of this. Let me say again, I support all of you who working out the kinks in Vista. Your work is invaluable to all of us XP users who may have to cross the Vista bridge in the future. You'll be doing a real service for all of us who choose not to deal with OS issues. I look forward to reading all the information you come up with. Keep up the good work.

RedBull
12-18-2007, 10:19 PM
I just loaded Vista x64 on two new machines. (Yes i am asking for trouble, and i wish i could avoid it) But i notice that i cannot browse .zip files across on a netowork drive with Vista, when trying to right click on a .zip file, i receive:

"Security Alert:
Your current security settings do not allow this action:"

This happens by default after a new Vista install. (I can copy/browse .rar, .exe files, it's only .zip files. I can copy/browse on local machines. Ironically Winrar will let me extract them, so i don't know what obscure security setting this is stopping this, but it's quite useless anyway.
I imagine a setting in the group policy editor, but where?

Any Vista Fanbois have any advice to fix it? :)

ted
12-18-2007, 11:43 PM
I'm new to Vista 64 as well, but have you set all your sharing permissions? Are you also running Norton? I won't have a computer without it, but you do have to get used to the double security settings.
Hopefully some of the experts or smart beginners can help! :D

I have a question as well. What's up with the new "Drive useage" meter in task manager? Should that be showing so much activity and peak about 10% of the time? I just noticed this the other day and have been meaning to ask.

RedBull
12-19-2007, 12:26 AM
I'm new to Vista 64 as well, but have you set all your sharing permissions? Are you also running Norton? I won't have a computer without it, but you do have to get used to the double security settings.
Hopefully some of the experts or smart beginners can help! :D .

No Nortons, I have disabled UAC, i seem to have no troubles on 32bit Vista, it's only my 2 Vista x64 machines that have the issue. (And yes i have driver signing disabled on those) Google searches reports nobody else with the issues, but it's like that out of the box..

I will search search the security policies, what a major pain the security in Vista is, now it's Microsoft that gets to deem which of my own files I'm allowed to use, and not me the Administrator.

Doesn't even warn or prompt where one might look for online help, or which setting is issuing the warning, no wonder i read this today:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,140583-page,5-c,techindustrytrends/article.html

PS. I also noticed the disk read/writes are high, i believe superfetch could be the culprit..... Not sure...

RedBull
12-19-2007, 02:08 AM
Superfetch will be highly active for the first week or so, as it moves stuff around on your HD according to how much it's used.

I haven't heard about your particular problem and I don't use network volumes myself and thus can't test for the issue.

Thanks Neverko, i was hoping someone such as yourself was aware of what was the cause. I'll keep digging, Hoping some 64bit LW people would know, as nobody else seems to on this one. I don't seem to remember this issue being a problem on my personal 32bit Vista machine, only on 64bit...

Vista has been a headache today, I also found that Nvidia are really crap, and NF4 mainboards are advertised as Gigabit Ethernet are only working at 100 and not 1000 under Vista. (It was working fine in XP64 yesterday) But unlike other companies Nvidia don't seem accountable at ever fixing problems, (They just release another one)the last Nforce4 update was 6months back.. Grrrrrrrr! I repeat Grrrrrr! :) I found a thread..http://forums.nvidia.com/lofiversion/index.php?t36178.html. You will notice no change or reply from Nvidia! Sorry! Just had to vent.

IMI
12-19-2007, 12:13 PM
I have a question regarding Vista too.
I'm running Vista Ultimate 64-bit and not having any problems with it - not anymore, that is. It was rough at first, but that's now past.
But, does anyone know of any good utilities for Vista? Mostly for tweaking and registry cleaning and defragging. I hate Vista's defragger. It doesn't even have a graph anymore, or tell you how long it's going to take or what's happening. I'm reluctant to use the same tools I used for 32-bit XP for these things under Vista, for obvious reasons. ;)

Stooch
12-19-2007, 02:07 PM
"tweaking" vista isnt the same as it used to be in XP. the defragger is actually quite good and does its thing proactively. not sure what exactly you are trying to fix but vista is working for me as fast as it did with a clean install even with a heavy compliment of software. ill give it a full year and then decide if vista really needs any tweaking to keep running in top shape but so far i really dont see any reasons to. (And i prefer it that way ;) )

RedBull
12-19-2007, 02:28 PM
It's easy to be wise after the fact, but people should try to avoid nForce chipsets, especially for workstations. The drivers are usually not as solid as those for Intel chipsets. They also tend to be more finicky about memory, especially if you go above 2Gb. It's like nForce isn't really designed for 4Gb+ memory.

Kind of I knew the Nforce board would come back to haunt me, Nvidia always does. But i guess the Nforce board ran fine in XP64 for over 18months, and never had a problem, it was just moving it to Vista that would make me pay
Anyway i will take that machine back to XP64SP2.


I had originally planned to build around the Striker Extreme, but my retailer said it would be on my head if I had various issues including memory trouble. He strongly advised against it and recommend that I went with a slightly cheaper, dedicated workstation card. I took his advice and my system has been an absolute rock of stabiity... so far. (6 months).

Touch wood! :) Yeah like the XP64 machine was the most stable good version of Windows I've used since W2K. But Vista has upset the balance, i expect it because Nvidia suck, and after a new model is launched you can forget support for issues of old.


I lost SLI ability, which I hadn't really planned on using anyway (And some fancy lights/LCDs that don't amount to much in every day use). And I gained two PCI-X 133MHz slots that I don't really put to use, as well as Crossfire ability that I don't plan to use seeing as I don't use AMD/ATI graphics.

Out of the Vista installs, this was the only difficult one a lot of things were fixed with 160Mb of MS updates, but it's amazing how XP64 CD had drivers for things like AC97 sound, but Vista did not... So i guess i done well to just lose gigabit....


Everything including gigabit ethernet is working on Vista x64. The only things I had to go out of my way to get working in Vista was my ASUS WiFi-g card which I had a little trouble finding x64 drivers for, but I found them on the website of the company which manufactures the card ASUS slap their brand on :) I also needed to download newer x64 RAID drivers for Vista x64 as the ones on the mobo support CD wouldn't pass driver signing. The updated revision did.

Yeah both an old Duron (Via chipset) and Q6600 have no problems installing without any updated raid and all run gigabit ethernet, i think only videocard drivers really needed updating.

For some reason my Q6600 is far slower on a new install of Vista x64 than my AMD X2 machine, despite the Q6600 getting a 5.8 and AMD a 4.8 score by Windows, the AMD machine is far more responsive when do everything.
Must investigate, it could be the extra HDD size and twice the amount of RAM that is doing it.... Weird though.. Thanks! (It may be i still have SpeedStep enabled)


I hate Vista's defragger. It doesn't even have a graph anymore, or tell you how long it's going to take or what's happening. I'm reluctant to use the same tools I used for 32-bit XP for these things under Vista, for obvious reasons. ;)

Yeah i must admit i laughed when i used it yesterday...
"This operation could take minutes to hours"

Wow how specific of you Vista, once apon a time in Windows 3.11, we had a graphical defragmenter, that showed sector/cluster info and gave you an idea of how bad it was fragmented. 15 years of development, and billions of dollars later... Now just a silly little icon that cannot even estimate it.

I'm still amazed that MS cannot come up with a way to do a disk scan (chkdsk, when the OS is running after this many years) Ahhhh DOS6 memories.....

RedBull
12-19-2007, 05:16 PM
For anyone else that ends up having my initial security issues with zip files across the network, I thankfully was given this link with a fix:

http://dinomite.net/archives/your-current-security-settings-do-not-allow-this-action

"Windows Server 2003 (or maybe itís just Internet Explorer 7) has a number of wonderful features that will make every day a cheery adventure. Among them are draconian security policies that, beyond making little sens, are controlled from places they donít belong."

I knew it was somewhere, i turned down all of the sliders in Intranet/Internet/Safe areas, Damn you Microsoft, damn you to hell......
Should be controllable all from the one damn policy editor!

IMI
12-19-2007, 06:21 PM
"tweaking" vista isnt the same as it used to be in XP. the defragger is actually quite good and does its thing proactively. not sure what exactly you are trying to fix but vista is working for me as fast as it did with a clean install even with a heavy compliment of software. ill give it a full year and then decide if vista really needs any tweaking to keep running in top shape but so far i really dont see any reasons to. (And i prefer it that way ;) )


I'm not so much concerned with "fixing" anything as I am in keeping it all running smoothly. We all know Windows tends to degrade over time, and I don't know how Vista's going to be responding in another six months.
I'd just as soon keep it going smooth as possible, because reinstalling all this is a nuisance I don't want to have to repeat too often.
I'm just wondering mostly if the registry, for one thing, still works the same as it has. Did Vista improve on it, or does junk still build up like it has in all previous versions of Windows?

Like I said, just trying to plan ahead. I know how to use Vista, but I don't think there are a whole lot of people who know how it will be, say, after a year with no or little optimization...or if Vista's own built-in tools are good enough for those of us who try alot of demos and routinely shuffle huge files around our drives.

Stooch
12-19-2007, 08:32 PM
well id give it some time before trusting other people to write programs to tweak your vista. it seems to have addressed alot of the crap xp had in terms of bad install shields and registry optimization. keep in mind that xp got all these tweaks after it has been around long enough. alot of the "optimizations" people are trying with vista could actually hurt its performance as it seems to be pretty smart about resources anyway. if your stuff is running fine, let it be!

Stooch
12-19-2007, 08:45 PM
Yeah i must admit i laughed when i used it yesterday...
"This operation could take minutes to hours"

Wow how specific of you Vista, once apon a time in Windows 3.11, we had a graphical defragmenter, that showed sector/cluster info and gave you an idea of how bad it was fragmented. 15 years of development, and billions of dollars later... Now just a silly little icon that cannot even estimate it.

I'm still amazed that MS cannot come up with a way to do a disk scan (chkdsk, when the OS is running after this many years) Ahhhh DOS6 memories.....

you really feel the need to complain about that??? the reason why there is no specific time anymore is because the software is written to load ballance. meaning if you are using your harddrive, it attempts to do its thing in the background without interrupting you. its also written to be more proactive now, reducing the need to do a defrag periodically.

RedBull
12-20-2007, 12:48 AM
you really feel the need to complain about that???"

Ummmm, who was i complaining too?

I love people who have to complain about what they perceived to be a complaint, one should also be able to tell the difference between observation, and complaints. Doesn't that make you twice as bad, complaining about others complaining? How about an idea, don't like what i "complain about" simply don't respond, read something else, and reply to them instead?

I only complain to people who can fix things, not to people such as yourself who are without power and cannot.


the reason why there is no specific time anymore is because the software is written to load ballance. meaning if you are using your harddrive, it attempts to do its thing in the background without interrupting you. its also written to be more proactive now, reducing the need to do a defrag periodically.

Umm, thanks for the irrelevant information, that i never asked for....?
Why should this make any difference? Yesterday it took hours, obviously it could be far more convenient to tell me it was going to take 2 hours or 2mins.

Or is it too much to ask?
Is there some reason you think MS Defrag should omit this information despite giving it in all previous incarnations, How is your justification of MS's crap defragmenter done exactly? (What would take a basic programmer 5mins to implement)

Would it be acceptable to LW9's render panel to tell me i have 1minute or 15hours to complete a render? We already know how much slower and inaccurate the copying files time remaining is is Vista, may as well keep it the same across the board.

PS I'm really surprised i bothered to reply back to this, however i'm a little bored today.... :)

ted
12-20-2007, 01:12 AM
Somebody should cut back on the Red Bull. :)
Just playing with ya!

IMI
12-20-2007, 07:56 AM
well id give it some time before trusting other people to write programs to tweak your vista. it seems to have addressed alot of the crap xp had in terms of bad install shields and registry optimization. keep in mind that xp got all these tweaks after it has been around long enough. alot of the "optimizations" people are trying with vista could actually hurt its performance as it seems to be pretty smart about resources anyway. if your stuff is running fine, let it be!

Very true. Good advice, I'd say!

As for the defragging, I see that Vista has decided on its own to defrag my OS partition (and none others) at 1:00 A.M. every Wednesday morning. I guess they figured that's a safe default time, because I never set it up that way, as far as I remember. I generally discourage allowing any programs to run anything on their own. But in this case, I'm going to allow it. Apparently it's been going on for awhile, and I've never even noticed.

IMI
12-20-2007, 08:03 AM
Oh wait, looking at that a second time, I see there doesn't appear to be an option for what disks or what partitions. I have 4 SATA drives here, plus an external IDE, with a total of 9 partitions.
I hope it's not actually defragging all of them. They don't all need it that often.
The defragger says it will defrag your disk at the set time of..blahblahblah... it allows you to change the schedule, but I don't see an option for selecting disks or partitions.
I guess Microsoft is still operating under the assumption everyone is buying an OEM Dell with one HDD and one partition for OS and one for "Restore"...

Stooch
12-20-2007, 09:09 AM
Ummmm, who was i complaining too?

I love people who have to complain about what they perceived to be a complaint, one should also be able to tell the difference between observation, and complaints. Doesn't that make you twice as bad, complaining about others complaining? How about an idea, don't like what i "complain about" simply don't respond, read something else, and reply to them instead?

I only complain to people who can fix things, not to people such as yourself who are without power and cannot.


oh my god unwind your panties and stop complaining about my observation.

Stooch
12-20-2007, 09:12 AM
Very true. Good advice, I'd say!

As for the defragging, I see that Vista has decided on its own to defrag my OS partition (and none others) at 1:00 A.M. every Wednesday morning. I guess they figured that's a safe default time, because I never set it up that way, as far as I remember. I generally discourage allowing any programs to run anything on their own. But in this case, I'm going to allow it. Apparently it's been going on for awhile, and I've never even noticed.

thats the way it should be! and really only your main partition should be defragged anyway. thats the only thing that really affects your system performance, sure you could defrag your other storage drives and should do it once ina blue moon, but its the partition that gets the most use and file activity that needs a periodic defrag. to be honest defrag was always good out of the box, even with XP, there wasnt a appreciable improvement from using aftermarket defrags, infact from what i hear the windows defrag was licensed from a third party anyway. btw im farly certain that you could select which partition. atleast you could in XP, i havent really bothered with manual defrag in vista yet (might have to use command line).

to be honest i like how i dont have to fuss with selection paritions. i prefer to just set it and forget it, btw it hits ALL partitions by default.

IMI
12-20-2007, 09:19 AM
Well if you figure out a way, please let me know. I couldn't find any options other than to set a schedule. I'm assuming it's only doing the OS partition, or at least starting with that one.

I use Ultimate Defrag in XP. It has alot of options for how the fragmented files can be reassembled. Plus, a pretty cool GUI. I don't think it did any better than the defragger in XP, but it looked alot better. ;)

ted
12-20-2007, 11:11 AM
Yeh, Norton 360 has taken the "options" out of our control. We're too stupid to handle our own systems i guess. :thumbsdow

It bugs me that I cant' tell Norton what drive or drives to defrag like before.
It also bus me that you can't select what drive/folders to back-up and specifically to what drive or folder.

Don't get me wrong, I love what Norton does, it just irks me that so many software manufacturers don't think we can handle the options.
Oh yeh, Nortons and Vista's progress bar has become virtually worthless. Sure you see it going and going, but I'd like to know what percentage is done, hence the name PROGRESS BAR.
There, I feel better now! :)

IMI
12-20-2007, 06:55 PM
I'm wondering if it isn't some kind of new trend to create the ultimate dummy-proofed software.

It's funny - I run across far more people who have nice computers than ever before, but overall seem to know far less about them than people with home PC's just a couple years ago. I mean, people who will take their machine to get it serviced when all they needed to do was run Adaware or something.

I also have to wonder if these automatic functions are to help cut down on the amount of work their tech departments have to do. Nobody's going to ask for a tech ticket for how to undo an option if you can't create the option in the first place.

I was pretty pi$$ed of at Vista at first for this reason. To me, it was the ultimate in Nannyware, until I learned how to cow it into submission. Still, there seem to be things one can't control, such as I mentioned regarding selecting which physical or logical disk to defrag.

Another example - I use the AVG internet security suite. if there's an option to control updates, I sure can't find it. It just does it whenever it feels like it. I've all kinds of things interrupted by a sudden AVG update. Like I'm incapable of remembering to manually check for updates. Probably alot of people are, or don't think about it.

Software should come in two flavors: Clint Eastwood for those of us who know how to deal with it, and Mary Poppins for the rest. ;)

zapper1998
12-20-2007, 07:17 PM
When I first started up Vista Ultimate.

Had over 70 processes running in background.

It took me a couple of days to shut down 40+ of them.

I did not need all those unnecessary things running in the background...

Its running allot faster now...

I just have to do allot of things manually thats all, but I rarely need to do the updates, once a week, or during a long render, I will check for updates..

Mike

ted
12-20-2007, 09:28 PM
Mike, can you list the services you shut down? That was the reason for this thread. I'll be interested how many services can be shut off.
I hope those in the know will not only list what they shut off, but what the heck those services were for! :D

IMI
12-21-2007, 01:29 PM
I'm a little leery of trying that - shutting down a whole lot of services.
You can see all of them in Task Manager under Sevices and some under Processes, if they're running.
You can run a search on each on Google and find alot of them explained, but of course some of them won't be for Windows, but for other software.
here's an interesting page I just found which might help:
http://www.speedyvista.com/services.html

ted
12-21-2007, 11:21 PM
Mike, thanks for the link. I didn't go through it all right now, but that's the sort of detailed information I've been looking for. Great late night reading! :thumbsup:

IMI
12-22-2007, 06:09 AM
No problem, Ted. :)
There's alot of information there, and I don't recall ever having seen that page the last time I was seeking out Vista information such as that.
Could be within a short time there will be alot more of this, as people learn it inside and out thoroughly.

Stooch
12-22-2007, 01:36 PM
lol took a look at the list and I see an awful lot of "but it probably will never run anyawy IF YOU DONT USE IT". no **** really?

I dont think you will free up much by doing those steps frankly, if you have an older machine, i guess you need to squeeze out the most out of your car right? this is like removing your power steering...

ted
12-22-2007, 03:27 PM
I dont think you will free up much by doing those steps frankly, if you have an older machine, i guess you need to squeeze out the most out of your car right? this is like removing your power steering...

Well said. I don't think you'll go from unusable to screaming. But it's nice to streamline the computers operation to only use what you need. We'll all have slightly different adjustment prefs. But this article will help us understand Vista better.

Cageman
12-22-2007, 04:19 PM
and another note. if you have an older rig and it does what you need then stick with your current install of XP. you run a higher chance of having issues with vista, especially if your hardware was released a long time before vista or using 2nd tier brand hardware.

Exactly! My first thought about Vista when it was released was: I'll never install that on my current machine" (old 32-bit architecture with dual AMD MPs and 1GB ram). But now I have a brand new QuadCore with 4GB ram, so I created a dualboot of WinXP 32-bit and WinVista 64-bit. Pretty nice setup. No-one is forced to only have one OS installed the machine, and XP32 will be handy for those older games and whatnot that may not work with 64-bit Vista.

Greate initiative with this thread. There are some really annoying things with Vista, but boy does it look good! :) Ohh... and what happened/is happening with XP x64?

IMI
12-22-2007, 06:28 PM
I bought XP x64 Pro shortly after it was released, planning on building a 64-bit machine far sooner than I ended up doing. Then as I procrastinated, eventually Vista x64 came out, so I got that too, knowing I'd eventually have to use it.
Finally got the 64-bit machine built and installed both XP x64 and Vista x64 in a dual boot, but found I like Vista alot better.
XP x64 and x86 are still being patched and serviced by MS, as far as I know. i think they extended that another 6 months or so. I think I read something about a Service Pack 2 for XP to be released, and that was going to be the end of support for XP.
Although with the trouble they're having getting people to accept Vista, it wouldn't surprise me if support continued for a good while. I think there are actually some new OEM PC's still shipping with XP.

IMI
12-22-2007, 06:52 PM
It looks as though Service pack 2 is available now, and also for XP x64:
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=893FD6C0-6283-44C3-BB84-B2F0315B2AE6&displaylang=en

Also, several updates for XP x64 can be found through the Windows Update site. The image attached is what it had for me.
So it looks as though XP is still rolling along, for now, at least.

IMI
12-22-2007, 07:13 PM
Just ignore me - I meant Service Pack 3 for XP. Shows how long it's been since I've been worrying about XP. ;)

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/operating_systems/windows_xp_service_pack_3_not_until_2007.html

inkpen3d
12-23-2007, 05:40 AM
I'm not sure if anyone's posted this link previously, but I came across it today and thought it might be relevant to this thread: http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/06/dont_shut_off_v.html

Regards
Peter

Stooch
12-23-2007, 07:25 AM
actually there is a far better way its called the UAC tool. it saves you all the ******** and turns off the dialogs withouth crippling what UAC is meant to do. it basically only turns off the stuff thats annoying. :) search for it, its the best way imo.

ted
12-23-2007, 06:17 PM
Stooch, most of us have found and killed UAC right off the bat. That is probably the first and most useless tool to kill with little downside.
But there are many more things running that we are all in search of answers to. Of course, we'll all have different variations on what's important. :hey:

Stooch
12-27-2007, 01:19 AM
we'll all have different variations on what's important. :hey:

thats all you had to say. Which is already pretty obvious to begin with.

IMI
12-27-2007, 11:49 AM
Does anyone else using Vista see this happening? I have two older SATA drives, both about three years old, both the same Western Digital size and model in my Vista machine, which I use for backup and overall temporary storage.
Every now and then, Vista will boot up and not even list one of them - for all intents and purposes it doesn't exist anywhere, not even as an unrecognized device in Device Manager. It's just not there. And it's always the same HDD.
But sometimes I can log off and back on and it's back again. Sometimes if I put the PC into sleep mode and wake it back up right away, it comes back, sometimes I have to reboot.
But it always comes right back after doing one of those three.
I was wondering if I had a bad power or SATA cable, but it hasn't happened in XP, ever, while it happens maybe one out of five times I boot up in Vista. Nothing devastating, just annoying.

I also have a couple of programs which load at startup, and are in fact running, but the icon doesn't make it into the task bar sometimes, but that's something completely different.

ted
12-28-2007, 07:22 PM
Mike, we had that happening recently on our second XP Edit system. After every test showed the drive was fine, countless other tests, and swapping the Power supply, I finally replaced the drive and all is fine???
Sometimes the computer voodoo is just too much and throwing money at it is easiest. :D
I wish you luck.

IMI
12-28-2007, 08:21 PM
Well that's the strange thing - I can't get it to happen in XP, only Vista. Maybe it's something like the watched pot never boils adage. ;)
Anyway, I already lost one HDD full of stuff this year, and I'm not about to let it happen again. I moved all the data off that disk and am going to replace it. Could be it is in fact in its death throes.

ted
12-28-2007, 11:35 PM
One more thing, since it's only happening to you in Vista, do you have a controller card for your drives? I know I had to wait for 3Ware to give me a Beta Driver to get my drive array recognized by Vista.

IMI
12-29-2007, 12:01 AM
No, it's SATA, but not in any RAID array. Just plugged into the mobo, along with the other three which are doing fine and never act like that one does.

Cageman
12-29-2007, 01:02 AM
Sounds really wierd... I wonder if someone at Microsoft is rotfl:ing because he coded a software that monitors harddrives and when the harddrive is about to die it starts to behave the way you describe. :D

I wouldn't be surprised if it was true... :)

IMI
02-04-2008, 05:59 PM
Well here's a weird one.
I've been going along with no recent problems with Vista 64 until just now. I thought I was past the weirdness. ;)
I wanted to copy a DVD. I have two DVD R/RW drives in this box, with the drive letters U and V assigned to them, which I did in Computer Management.
So I stick the DVD I want to copy (The Oblivion disk, since you can use a copy to play the game, so you don't wear out the original) into the U drive and open Nero, expecting to be able to copy it to a blank DVD in the V drive.
Not so. Seems it wants to copy it to the I drive... which Device Manager reports as being a CD/ROM drive.
Oddly enough, I have no CD/ROM drive. I wasn't even aware I had an I drive. Disk Management doesn't acknowledge it at all, but there it is, in My Computer, listed as CD Drive ( I: ).
And I can't figure out a way to get rid of it. Nero is now completely useless for making a direct copy from disk to disk, since it doesn't even give me the option of using the DVD RW drive at V - it's not even in the drop-down under Options.

Very weird. I have no idea how it came about, and no idea how to remove it. Just a virtual drive which *poofed* into existence out of the clear blue sky.
Now I have to spend who knows how long searching the 'net to figure out how to get rid of it. :compbeati

Titus
02-05-2008, 06:44 AM
I wanted to copy a DVD.

To me it sounds the problem is Nero, or maybe the DRM friendliness of Vista.

IMI
02-05-2008, 12:03 PM
Could be, but I would think it would simply deny me, rather than manufacture a bogus drive and then say that was my only option.
In any event, I have a dual boot with XP 64, with Nero 8 installed under it as well, and it sees no additional drive, and didn't create one, and allowed me to make the copy.
I don't think it's Vista though. I do now think it's Nero installed under Vista, where it comes to directly copying a DVD. As far as copy protection goes, Bethesda Softworks intentionally designed the DVD to be copied for this reason, so you don't ruin the original. You have to have the original to install Oblivion, but a copy can be used to play.
I think it's just Nero doesn't work well under Vista. I've had a few other problems with it as well, but it never gives me a problem with drag-n-drop burning to CD or DVD.
Unfortunately I haven't learned how to rid myself of the nonexistent I drive. :(

CreatvGnius
02-08-2008, 12:05 AM
...Not at home so I am not on Vista, but I believe you can turn off defender on the same screen where you tell MS what they can do with their software firewall (internet options? network? Sorry, just drawing a blank).

Aw, that was just too funny! (Italics, mine).
-PeterG


Defender protects against ad-ware and spyware. I prefer Spybot Search and Destroy...run it every week or so and clean out everyone tracking my haunting of newtek forums. The risk depends on your surf habits, but I would run SOMETHING every now and then. Those spyware buffoons are really quite sneaky devils.

Same story when I turned off UAC....I turned it off when I got the OS in February, and it hasn't been a problem since.

CreatvGnius
02-08-2008, 12:36 AM
I think it's just Nero doesn't work well under Vista. I've had a few other problems with it as well, but it never gives me a problem with drag-n-drop burning to CD or DVD.
Unfortunately I haven't learned how to rid myself of the nonexistent I drive. :(

Try this:
Control Panel > Administrative Tools > Computer Management > Storage > Disk Management See any drives in there?

I used to see them in this panel in XP Pro -- but on this Vista notebook, for some odd reason (to me, at least) it's blank!

There, I was able to disassociate drive letters, in exchange for others. Are you finding the same, curious absence of the interface for creating volumes and mapping physical drives to device letters? This Vista really has me pokin' around to discover more and more of its "newness".

-PeterG

Stooch
02-08-2008, 12:16 PM
I have this feature on home premium version and have used it successfully, sounds like its a problem with your system.

IMI
02-09-2008, 09:37 AM
Try this:
Control Panel > Administrative Tools > Computer Management > Storage > Disk Management See any drives in there?


No, as I already mentioned above, it doesn't show in Disk Management, only in Windows Explorer, and of course, Nero thinks it's there. Of course, my other HD's and partitions show up too, like normal.
But again, only in my Vista 64 install. XP 64 doesn't have any such weirdness, and Nero under XP 64 sees no "I" drive and can record with either the U or V DVD/RW drives.
I'll also say again, this is on the same computer, with a dual boot. The problem isn't in the system or the hardware, but some kind of bug with either Vista or a combination of Vista and Nero. Although I don't think it's anything random. it's probably something I did somewhere along the way, but I have no idea what that might have been.

Stooch
02-09-2008, 11:45 PM
I did mention before that i ended up buying a new burner when getting vista. if you buy a third tier manufacturer drive (no name brands, they happen to be sold by even legit companies, but rebranded and with no support, i had an HP burner that ended up being a no name, unsupported drive)

so if you have one of these shady drives, dont blame vista, they are just not supported as well as they should be by their own manufacturers. I couldnt even find the firmware or who actually made my drive. apparently hp sourced from different manufacturers under the same model name... So i ended up getting a pioneer sata cd/dvd burner combo and it works pefectly (cost me like 60 bucks). As far as i know, pioneer actually makes the drives they sell.

IMI
02-10-2008, 05:43 AM
No, I have two brand new SATA Lite-On Lightscribe DVD R/RW's. Supported by Vista. My four SATA Western Digital HDD's are also all brand new, now that I replaced both the older two I had put in there to begin with.
This is a fairly new machine. I just built it and got it up and running on October 10th.
Although I'm not blaming Vista. I did say above in my last sentence above it's probably something I did somewhere along the way.

Norman
02-10-2008, 06:22 AM
I realize I'm late putting in my 2 cent, but ALL dinosaurs are not dead, some have evolved into birds and other creatures, that avoid us as much as possible, except to drop one or two...

IMI
02-10-2008, 07:10 AM
I realize I'm late putting in my 2 cent, but ALL dinosaurs are not dead, some have evolved into birds and other creatures, that avoid us as much as possible, except to drop one or two...

How's that again? :stumped:

IMI
02-10-2008, 07:27 AM
I think I found the source though at least, if you want to call it that. I have a 320 GB external IDE Western Digital USB HDD. It's only a year old, and I'm not sure if it's supported by Vista or not, though it works well, and I haven't had any trouble with it.
I see now that the virtual "I" drive points to that external drive under the Properties>Hardware tab.
Still no idea how or why, but I suspect I won't be able to get rid of it without reformatting that drive.
I'd still like to know though why Nero refuses to acknowledge my V drive under Vista, while it works perfectly using Vista's burn function, and under XP as well. There doesn't seem to be an option to add a burner in Nero. None that I can find anyway. Not only that, but Nero thinks "I" is a CD/ROM, not a CD/R-RW, so it doesn't make any sense it would include it in the list of available burners.

Stooch
02-10-2008, 11:57 AM
I realize I'm late putting in my 2 cent, but ALL dinosaurs are not dead, some have evolved into birds and other creatures, that avoid us as much as possible, except to drop one or two...

actually they are dead. death is part of evolution. no death = no evolution.

dweinkauf
02-11-2008, 09:29 PM
I heard the word "dinosaur" and decided to rise from the dead to add my 2 cents. I have been away from the forums for about a week as the result of the death of my ten-year-old PIII internet computer (great computer - may it rest in pieces). Late this afternoon I received my brand new dual core computer with its DL burner, extra hard drive, 1-gig RAM, keyboard, mouse, preinstalled XP os and other software. It took me about an hour to set it up, install my software including Mirage (SE, VT, LW, VUE6 etc. are installed on my other computers), configure it to the way I work, hook up my old scanner and printer, reestablish my e-mail accounts, and set up the internet. After dinner I transferred about 40 gigs of data from the data drive on the old computer and (using my right to "fair use") copied a couple of short sections off DVD's for a presentation I'm doing in a couple of weeks. All this without one glitch or hitch. Thank god for that other dinosaur called "XP!" By the way, this new computer only cost me $465 (sales tax and shipping included).

CreatvGnius
02-11-2008, 09:47 PM
...[I] Thank [God] for that other dinosaur called "XP!" By the way, this new computer only cost me $465 (sales tax and shipping included).

Nice! I can't help but wonder how fast SpeedEDIT would be on this here notebook, were it not bogged down with Vista Home Premium 32-bit. Good thing TriCaster STUDIOô yet sports XP! :thumbsup:
-PeterG

CreatvGnius
02-11-2008, 10:04 PM
Control Panel > Administrative Tools > Computer Management > Storage > Disk Management on my Vista Home Premium reveals absolutely no drives in that Disk Management folder! Whazzup'widdat?


I have this feature on home premium version and have used it successfully, sounds like its a problem with your system.

Oh, really? Care to treat us to a screen shot (showing the hierarchy)? :heart:
-PeterG

gareee
02-13-2008, 11:51 PM
On th efirst page of this thread a registry change was mentioned to increase th enumber of files that can be downloaded at once.. anyone have a reference so I can change it?

Vista64 installed fairly well, with the usual 45 reboots to update everything.

I grabbed the 64 versions here now, installed th e64 bit sentinel driver, and need to install lightwave now.

Are the old config files at least compatible, or will I have to rebuild them from scratch?

IMI
02-14-2008, 02:43 AM
Are the old config files at least compatible, or will I have to rebuild them from scratch?


You can still use your old config files, provided your LW is still installed to the same path, i.e. Drive letter:\whatever\whatever, although I think it's a better idea to save out cfg files for menus and keys and then reload them, but let LW make new configs for the rest of the program when reinstalling. And reinstall the plugins. Not to say it wouldn't still work, but you never know.

gareee
02-14-2008, 11:59 AM
Cool..I'm reinstalling today. how do I get the new key for the 64 version?

gareee
02-14-2008, 04:57 PM
Found part of the problem after they reregistered it for me.. the only installer available is a unified 32 bit/64 bit 9.3.1.. the guy on the phone kept telling me that there was a 64 bit version available, and we started looking into my vista 64 bit install to make sure it truly WAS 64 bit.

I installed 9.3, and it worked fine as 64 bit.

A followup call with a tech revealed that you onlt see the 64 bit install option on the 32 bit names installer if you have a 64 bit os installed.. so I uninstalled 9.3, installed 9.3.1, saw the 64 bit install option, and installed fine, and the key worked without issue.

It appears I CAN then use all my old config files then, so I'll try next to move plugins over, and see if the configs work with them,. backing them up along the way testing them.

CraigEncer
04-30-2008, 06:07 AM
I don't know if anybody else has experienced this little annoying problem, I think is associated with the MS. Vista operating platform. When selecting on points mode, the lassoo tool works but the blue drag line is invisible. In addition the polygon and edge selection tools also work, but the polygons / edges selected is only visibly highlighted (the sel: box does record the correct number though) when the model is moved, rotated or zoomed into), so there is time wastage each time a new selection is made to ensure I have selected the correct polygons.
Of course it could be a problem with my system configuration / power but I think unlikely as there are no added programs to cause potential conflict (apart from scanner software), and I have plenty of Ram (2 gig). I give the full specification of my labtop just to make sure this is enough to run lightwave efficiently:
Acer Aspire 5920, Intel dual core 2.0 Ghz (GM965 Express chipset with Intel Graphics Media Accelerator X3100), 2 ghz ram, 32 bit, Vista HomePremium edition. UAC is disabled.
Thanks for any help.

sammael
04-30-2008, 06:24 AM
I don't know if anybody else has experienced this little annoying problem, I think is associated with the MS. Vista operating platform. When selecting on points mode, the lassoo tool works but the blue drag line is invisible. In addition the polygon and edge selection tools also work, but the polygons / edges selected is only visibly highlighted (the sel: box does record the correct number though) when the model is moved, rotated or zoomed into), so there is time wastage each time a new selection is made to ensure I have selected the correct polygons.
Of course it could be a problem with my system configuration / power but I think unlikely as there are no added programs to cause potential conflict (apart from scanner software), and I have plenty of Ram (2 gig). I give the full specification of my labtop just to make sure this is enough to run lightwave efficiently:
Acer Aspire 5920, Intel dual core 2.0 Ghz (GM965 Express chipset with Intel Graphics Media Accelerator X3100), 2 ghz ram, 32 bit, Vista HomePremium edition. UAC is disabled.
Thanks for any help.


That's not a Vista problem, sounds like possibly the graphics card. Is it upgradeable?

CraigEncer
04-30-2008, 06:36 AM
Thanks for the reply, and yes this isn't the answer I wanted, unfortunately I chose the mid-version of this labtop, the higher one has GeForce 8600 graphics card, though not necessarily that will work with Vista as well, until somebody out there tries it and says yes.
To isolate the problem, I tried out multiple versions of Lightwave, 7.5, 8.0, 8.5, 9.3.1 and 9.5 open beta. Same issue. Modelling is certainly possible in all (except 7.5 where window expansion box seems to be lost), just a bit more time and frustration factor...

cresshead
04-30-2008, 11:06 AM
craig you really need to post this to tech support email>.

also on the beta forum under the 9.5 workshop bug, problems etc area

your graphics chipset is a KNOWN and very POPULAR chipset...you'll need to TELL newtek that and also
WHAT your chipest is and how much ram it has and if your on service pak 1 of vista or not also what is your current driver
for your graphics chipset.

the beta area is at the bottom of the page and only seeable IF your on the beta...

...there the tech guys WILL see it and adress it
as with any technical request they will need as much info as possible to solve the bug..and it IS a bug...open gl bug...

...esp as the mac mini and mac books also run intel graphics chipsets
you need to make it crystal clear that 'limiting' lightwave to only a couple of graphic cards will not be a good move to not bother fixing it...

also let them know this issue has risen up before with the g4 mac mini and lightwave 8.0 with the mac mini's ati chipset...it's not new and it is solvable...

if i understand you correctly...

i can'ty discuss the beta here...you need to go to the restricted area of the beta forum below>>:)




you need to>>tell them 'details'>>
your running vista premium btw....32bit.


your laptop spec>>
* Intel Core 2 Duo T7300
* Memory: 2*1GB RAM
* Hard Drive: 120GB Hard Disk Drive
* Graphics Card: Mobile Intel� GM965 Express chipset with Intel Graphics Media Accelerator X3100
* Optical Drive: DVD SuperMulti, CD/DVD reader/writer for all types of CD/DVD discs
* Audio: Dolby Home Theater surround sound
* Connectivity: Wireless LAN A/B/G, 4 x USB 2.0 Ports, 5 in 1 Card Reader
* Operating System: Windows� Vista Premium:Additional Software: Acer Empowering Technology, Acer Arcade, Norton Internet Security Trial, Adobe Reader, NTI CD Maker
* Display Size: 15.4" WXGA TFT Display with Acer CrystalBrite technology
* Webcam:0.3MP Built in Crystaleye Camera

link to said laptop>>
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Acer-Aspire-5920-Hard-drive-GraphicsX3100/dp/B000VPJDUW/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1209575125&sr=1-3

cresshead
04-30-2008, 11:15 AM
That's not a Vista problem, sounds like possibly the graphics card. Is it upgradeable?


no it's a laptop....
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Acer-Aspire-5920-Hard-drive-GraphicsX3100/dp/B000VPJDUW/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1209575125&sr=1-3

as you can see it's using the VERY popular intel chipset as seen in acer's and dells so it DOES need to be addressed...and promptly either with a video driver update or rollback from intel or a open gl tweek from newtek.

btw macbooks have intel chipsets for video:-
ntel GMA X3100 graphics processor with 144MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory

as does the macmini
intel GMA 950 graphics processor with 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory

so i think the mac's maybe in trouble too....

cresshead
04-30-2008, 11:48 AM
also i'd add that locking you into ONLY opengl means newtek really must be on top form with compatibility...other apps have 'options' for when a particular viewport display type fails to work correctly..with lightwave if it doesn't work okay your 'stuck'...in 3dsmax for example you have options for software only 'heidi' and whilst it's SLOW it always works!
also they have direct x as you may already know...so 3 options...

lightwave 1 option!

Pavlov
05-01-2008, 03:49 AM
luckily i've XP on all my 12 machines, but sooner or later i'll have to face Vista.
I've it on a laptop and i simply hate it, and i find its organization and management paths utterly stupid.
I want plain old XP navigation style, my beloved control panel and so on, not a stupid systems that stupidly wants to guide me in each operation, segmenting the whole PC management in a maze of paths and useless gadgets.
I'm surprised nobody wrote a "behave and look exactly like XP" tool, in order to make Vista disappear and work underskin, i'd buy it immediately.

Paolo

cresshead
05-01-2008, 06:59 AM
The X3100 is the lowest end/cheapest graphics solution you can possibly get. It's used in budget products that aren't designed for graphics performance. Dell, Acer, Apple etc. use them as they're very cheap. Unfortunately they're at a whole other level (a very low level) than even the low end solutions from nVidia and AMD/ATI.

Don't expect 3d software to ever work on a X3100. You simply can't expect developers to cater for a solution like this.

As to being "very popular" I've never heard anyone say anything good about Intel integrated graphics. It's always something bad, so I don't see the popularity from a user perspective. Of course it's popular with hardware vendors selling machines built from lowest cost, crap components. But they forget to tell you that you can't expect high end applications to run on them. It's pretty simple, low end, low cost components aren't suitable for specialized OpenGL tasks.

Don't blame NewTek, blame whoever produced your hardware. And blame yourself for expecting Intel integrated graphics to actually work for OpenGL. It sucks, but when you save a few buck on your hardware, it bites back.

The games industry has to fight people running to Walmart, getting told that little Ronny's new PC will play all games just fine. Only to realize once they get it hooked up that the el-cheapo Intel integrated graphics runs like a one-legged dog. They of course get pissed off and blame the game, instead of reading the actual requirements and blaming Walmart for selling them a garbage PC. But they wanted it cheap!

Now apparently this is spreading to 3d software as well. As long as system builders use those integrated solutions, you need to yell at them. You also need to stop buying systems with integrated graphics and expect them to work on par with the latest offerings from nVidia and AMD/ATI.

incorrect:)

whilst they are not as capable as a nvidia 8800gt they have been benchmarked as being similar capabilites as nvidia 7900 graphics cards..they are NOT of course designed for top level gaming but they are quite capable of running many opengl and direct x games, they have 384mb of memory and if you keep abreast of current trends intergrated chipsets are the way forward in many respects especially in laptop pc's..that's why AMD bought Ati.

a dismissive tone about such laptops as the mac book, mac mini, imac and acers with these g chipsets will do little to help people who bought lightwave thinking it was quite capable of being run on most if not all current pc's.

other 3d apps seem to manage just fine...with options to cater all types of g cards.

if this is the way forward [not making lightwave run on such] then newtek need to post a list of graphics cards that lightwave will 'perform properly' on....and that'll take lightwave into the realms of softimage/houdini where is becomes cumbersome to install the app on anything BUT a top level workstation...no so great for lightwave as it aims for the lower/mid end of the 3d app seletions.

of course i'm more interested in seeing a reply from newtek than anyone's 'informed opionion' however well intended that maybe.

cresshead
05-01-2008, 08:07 AM
this is starting to sound like a school yard conversation but that benchmark for the intel chip is correct..same with the game reviewer running various games on it...i'm NOT saying it's the 'prefered' graphic card type...but many 3d apps should be able to be run correctly if slower than a dedicated graphics card.

my old celreon sony with inbuilt 11mb of graphics ran lightwave and 3dsmax okay as in NO glitches...that's ALL i'm demanding wioth 3d apps..slower..is fine...NOT displaying correctly is no good and needs to be fixed.

someone from newtek need to wade in and say where newtek is heading.

cresshead
05-01-2008, 08:43 AM
info>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA

Oedo 808
05-01-2008, 09:41 AM
someone from newtek need to wade in and say where newtek is heading.

Out of curiosity, does anyone from newtek ever wade in and say anything about anything on issues being discussed?

cresshead
05-01-2008, 11:25 AM
well sometimes yes, they do actually

i hope craig takes this topic on his laptop over to the beta area where he shoudl be heard a bit better.

CraigEncer
05-02-2008, 07:45 AM
Thanks all who have contributed in their own way to this issue. I am not into apportioning blame, as the newtek site said nothing about avoiding the intel chipset, so assumed it would work, but possibly slower. I have now posted the nature of my problem, with full system configuration details in open beta 9.5 area and await responses. Vista is now almost unavoidable when buying a new laptop as are these 'mid-range' chips, so a solution would be helpful to a lot of other people as well.
Regards

Verlon
05-02-2008, 08:53 AM
Let me apologize in advance if this comes across a bit harsh. Such tone is directed towards the manufacturers, not the people of this thread.

The intel Graphics card is NOT equivalent to an Nvidia 7900 anything. It MIGHT be the equivalent of an Nvdia 790 chipset with integrated graphics, but I doubt even that. Sometimes the optimizations to make things faster require the use of new features not supported in older hardware. Intel doesn't make a graphcs chipset with the latest features. They are 1-2 generations behind at all times. Most (as in all but 1) inegrated graphics chipsets in the last 10 years are like this. By the time they get the heat and power requirements down to mobile levels, they have already used the same techniques to create a bigger and badder PCI/AGP/PCIe card for the desktop (think about it - would you rather get $300 or $30 for your part? compare the cost of a high end GFX card to the cost of a chipset - and don't bring up economy of scale, new processes have lower yields than mature ones. I have been on the development end of semi-conductor manufacturing for over a decade now).

1. Intel creates 'optiomized' benchmarks. They can, will, and do rewrite drivers, and sometimes even the benchmarks themselves (to help the people see the benefits ofthe new hardware, of course. They would NEVER disable features if they detected a competitor's hardware *WINK WINK*), to artificially inflate their scores (they write one of the better C compilers out there -which, by the way, disables features on non-intel processors), and of course they know more about the latest SSE instructions than anyone - they have been using this trick at least since MMX or did MMX really make your PC an average of 65% faster? ).

2. Intel pressured Microsoft into certifying its graphics chipset as Vista compatible. Said chipset isn't really strong enough, and there is a lawsuit over this very issue. If it can't run Windows Aero, expecting it to run Lightwave on Windows is more than a little optimistic.

3. Wikipedia can kiss my heatsink if that article BEGINS to claim that an Intel graphics chipset that addresses 384MB of ram that it shares with the system is anywhere in the ballpark of an Nvidia 7900 dedicated graphics card. AMD just released a chipset that boasts ALMOST 7900 like performance, and even the Intel biased Tom's Hardware calls it revolutionary.

I am sorry, but Neverko is right. The hardware isn't up to snuff. I am sorry you were mislead.

In the interest of completeness, Intel is hardly the only one guilty of this crime. Nvidia and ATI (pre-amd purchase) have both done it to some extent. I got burned on the Radeon 2 (google Radeon Quake Quack) chipset from ATI. I do not think AMD has the leverage or the money to pull it off, but they will certainly choose bechmarks that show them in a favorable light.

RedBull
05-03-2008, 01:36 AM
3. Wikipedia can kiss my heatsink if that article BEGINS to claim that an Intel graphics chipset that addresses 384MB of ram that it shares with the system is anywhere in the ballpark of an Nvidia 7900 dedicated graphics card.


Well in a few areas at least the Intel is superior, Intel have Open drivers unlike Nvidia and Ati, and allow them to be developed by the open source community, and are much more Linux friendly.

Above that the x3100 being a cheap integrated solution, still offers some advantages compared to 7900 like SM4.0 and DX10.1 support.
No current Nvidia cards support DX10.1, and the X3100 also has hardware T&L.

The performance is actually quite good on the tests i've done (considering it's intention) The one area where it fails is OGL, where the x3100 only supports OGL 1.5, and of course LW and other 3D applications will need OGL 2 or 2.1 minimum to support many features... Like VBO's for example... :)

Lord Snarebotto
05-07-2008, 05:07 AM
50 is the new 40

Vista is the new ME