Windows 7 or Windows Vista?

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by nomarjr3, Oct 5, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. whitedragon551

    whitedragon551 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Posts:
    3,264
    Location:
    USA
    That guy is making assumptions. Hes translating to what he believes is right.

    At the beginning of one of his paragraphs he writes:

     
  2. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,013
    He's just commenting on a conclusion one of his colleagues came to which he thinks is wrong. He's not making any large leaps that I can see, in fact I think what he says makes sense, more than just a little bit too.
     
  3. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    I guess we will have to wait until after the Professional Developers Conference on the 28th of this month to find out the real deal about Win7. It will be interesting for sure but I am happy with Vista now anyway.
     
  4. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,381
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Server 2008 and Windows 7 will use a very similar (that is very compatible) Kernel to Vistas (as Similar as XP was to 2000).

    MinWin - closest I know of is Server 2008's ability to run without a GUI, this is because the graphics subsystem is no longer tied to the Kernel and runs in userspace (this means better security and stability - gfx cannot crash the entire OS anymore), but slower performance (which with time should be tuned to point of insignificance).
    Without looking up, I cannot remember what else is tied to the Kernel in various guises of Windows.

    Anyhow, I assume by not loading these additional sub-systems, Windows 7 or Server 2008 can/could run with very low memory usage. Similar to how you can load Linux with 64 mb ram, not that you can do do much useful (maybe a minimalist firewall for example but no way a SOHO server or a desktop configuration).
     
  5. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    am i the exception then?:D
    i am running vista on a quad core pc with 2gb of ram.
    if i run a virtual machine with 256mb of ram it can majorly slowdown vista.
    which is franky insane IMO. the processer usage stays low.
    64bit vista is faster than 32bit vista but it still isnt as fast as XP.
     
  6. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    so why do unix based os's manage to not have a registry and to uninstall programs you just delete the folder? so to change options in firefox on linux i have to edit a file do i? no i use the GUI
    i was watching a video recently of a recent microsoft conforence. the guy from ms was talking about virtualization. he demostated minwin. he also explained the registry as a huge ball where everything is stored. along with saying it would be nice if you could take something else without interfering with anything else. the registry is the reason you need to reboot for the smallest of changes.
    why cant MS just finaly base there OS on unix?

    btw if you wanna here the guy from MS talk about minwin and the flaws of the windows see the following link
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2008
  7. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    the problem with server 2008 is that you install it with or without a GUI. if you want to get rid of the GUI or add the gui you need to do a complete reinstall. in unix based OS you can just turn off the gui if you dont need it on.
    and if you installed it without a gui you can easily install a gui.
     
  8. raakii

    raakii Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2008
    Posts:
    593
    Does vista support all the softwares like xp ,so that i may not have to switch back and forth.
     
  9. whitedragon551

    whitedragon551 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Posts:
    3,264
    Location:
    USA
    In order to get a speed gain from a 64-bit OS you need to have a multi-threaded application. Most applications are for threaded for dual core CPUs not quad cores yet. 64-bit OSs are also designed to have 4Gbs or more not 2.

    Unix doesnt have a registry because they use the equivalent of a Windows .inf file. Which is what I said previously.
     
  10. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    I don't think it is insane, just a natural progression of the operating system. The only difference is that instead of the usual 2-3 year development cycle, Vista went 6 years. During that period software has gotten bigger thus requiring more RAM and resources. Software writers may have been having to hold back some features because of hardware considerations (how many times you have read that software was way behind of hardware nowadays?). Now with the popularity of 64 bit rising at least the 3.2GB barrier has been broken.

    Imagine what it would be like if you ran XP in a 32MB virtual machine. Personally I saw the biggest improvement in XP going from 256 to 512MB with only small increases afterwards.

    But getting back to MinWin, in a way maybe that article isn't too far off saying that Vista had MinWin already in it. As Nickr noted, drivers that used to be tied to the kernel such as video and sound are now running "outside" the kernel in user modes. I really like this as when my one of my ATI Catalyst drivers start acting up all I get is a couple of seconds of black screen and then the desktop appears again with a balloon announcing that it has recovered from the driver shutdown. This is much more preferable than a BSOD, lol (in fact the only bluescreen I ever got with Vista was when I was trying to "force" XP sound drivers into it--if I knew then what I know now I would have known it was doomed to failure).

    So in a sense MS did "minimize" the Vista/Server 2008 kernel by taking these drivers out of the kernel.
     
  11. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    The table below lists the minimal requirements of each NT version:

    NT version CPU RAM Free disk space
    NT 3.51 Workstation 386, 25 MHz 8 MB 90 MB
    NT 4.0 Workstation 486, 33 MHz 12 MB 110 MB
    2000 Professional Pentium, 133 MHz 32 MB 650 MB
    XP Pentium MMX, 233 MHz 64 MB 1.5 GB
    Vista Pentium III, 800 MHz 512 MB 15 GB

    Now you can laugh at Vista's and XP's minimal requirements but it does reflect the longer passage of time in development between XP and Vista.
     
  12. ambient_88

    ambient_88 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    854
    Well, surely Microsoft can devise a way to store program settings without having to create many, many .INI entries. In Mac OS X, for example, uninstalling a program is as simple as deleting the program files. Why can't Windows do that? That's why I try to run PortableApps whenever possible--they don't mess with the OS at all.
     
  13. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    hmm i can see some of your points.
    i had a bsod due to a driver yesterday. i wanted to see how much ram costs now ive got now 64bit vista but the crucial ram checker caused a bsod.
    it does annoy me paying £50 for an os and having lots of problems.
    i should of done what i did with xp and waited until SP2.
    with linux do you have to wait two service packs before its stable? no
    if microsoft dont want to use unix as there base at least try to make something better and not worse.
     
  14. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,381
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    There are pros and cons to using a single storage DB for settings.
    Bad is that badly behaved programs/installers can mess up settings.
    On the positive side it standardises things and you can create an API that makes programming for easier and easier for different apps to access system wides settings.

    When you delete an app in a Unix system all the settings are left behind usually, in your user home for example, this can be good or bad.

    In theory it is quicker to look up settings required compared to traversing a text file, but as settings files tend to be so small, it is far easier to read in to memory on app/process load.

    Actually no its not :p . Changes can be read instantly. If the app/process was reading settings from any storage location it would have the issue, eg a config file, .ini file or xml file.
    What is the problem is that the app/process needs to re-read these settings, some can read changes without reloading, some can be reloaded, others are tied into the kernel or boot process and the only way to reload them is to reboot.
     
  15. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    yes but you also made the mistake of saying if windows just used .inf files you would need to edit them manualy and not use a gui which is just not true.
     
  16. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    why cant microsoft design an OS that doesnt need to reboot so often?
    i acually want to use my computer strangely enough.
    seems like bad design to me.
    unix based os's dont suffer from most of the issues that windows does.
     
  17. whitedragon551

    whitedragon551 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Posts:
    3,264
    Location:
    USA
    An .inf is a text file. You find me a program besides a text editor that can modify the coding in a .inf file with a GUI interface. Even for advanced options in some of todays programs you need to modify the .inf for advanced settings that the program itself doesnt incorporate into the options menu.
     
  18. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    thats because atm windows uses the registry. if microsoft got rid of the registry and replaced it with .inf files then it would be possible for applications to modify the files using a GUI.
     
  19. whitedragon551

    whitedragon551 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Posts:
    3,264
    Location:
    USA
    What makes you think that they would incorporate the modification of a .inf if the registry was gone?
     
  20. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    well if microsoft used the .inf files as a replacement as the registry that would have to.
    if you could only edit the files manually then the mainstream user wouldnt know what to do. most users know GUI's only.
    if the registry goes maybe microsoft may think of a better system than modifying .inf files but i dont know.
     
  21. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,013
    Somehow Linux manages to do famously without a registry......
     
  22. tradetime

    tradetime Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,000
    Location:
    UK
    So, to recap would I be right in saying that most of any early problems with Vista have been fixed now to the satisfaction of all users of Vista?
    Secondly, I know no-one can vouch for Vista 64 running all my programs (since you don't know what they are) but should I have any great reservations about taking up Vista 64 otherwise. I am rapidly approaching decision time XP or Vista 64.
    Compare to an XP 32 how much more RAM does Vista use at start?
    Thanx for any feedback
     
  23. whitedragon551

    whitedragon551 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Posts:
    3,264
    Location:
    USA
    If you optimize your Windows Services mine doesnt use more than 300Mbs at start up. Im make a thread with the tools I used to do this.

    I tried 64-Bit Vista a while ago and the only thing I didnt like was that my Spyware Doctor was compatible with it. Other than that everything else was fine.
     
  24. tradetime

    tradetime Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,000
    Location:
    UK
    Sounds great whitedragon, thanx for that, if I go the Vista 64 route will be fitting about 4GB of RAM
     
  25. whitedragon551

    whitedragon551 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Posts:
    3,264
    Location:
    USA
    You can fit 4Gbs in a 32-bit Vista OS.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.