thai bear

vista is bad and slow... its the ultimate crap OS

see this page for a comaprisson chart between xp sp3 and vista sp1....
the naysaers will drop dead eventually...

http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...ista-sp1-again

exo.blog has at the request of their members re-run the original OfficeBench
test, this time with 2GB of RAM in the test system. Unfortunately the
outcome is unchanged bar a 4% improvement on the previous score. One can
argue that Windows XP system requirements are quite a bit lower than its
successor, and thats probably got a lot to do with it. This, coupled with
claims that Vista SP1 will not improve on performance but will in fact be
all about stability and reliability instead, doesn't offer much hope for
those people on older systems.

Make of it what you will, I personally don't have performance issues at all.
I use Vista with 2GB of RAM and I have a Sandisk 2GB memory stick that is
used for the "Ready Boost" feature, maybe they should re-run the test with
that scenario.

Chris Pirillo had this to say on all those negative articles surrounding
Windows Vista, enjoy!

Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]

This has been posted in here numerous times now, just do a search before
hitting the send button.
--
Andre
Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
My Vista Quickstart Guide:
http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
"thai bear" <ber@df.kol> wrote in message
news:474e108c@newsgate.x-privat.org...
> vista is bad and slow... its the ultimate crap OS
>
> see this page for a comaprisson chart between xp sp3 and vista sp1....
> the naysaers will drop dead eventually...
>
> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...ista-sp1-again
>
> exo.blog has at the request of their members re-run the original
> OfficeBench test, this time with 2GB of RAM in the test system.
> Unfortunately the outcome is unchanged bar a 4% improvement on the
> previous score. One can argue that Windows XP system requirements are
> quite a bit lower than its successor, and thats probably got a lot to do
> with it. This, coupled with claims that Vista SP1 will not improve on
> performance but will in fact be all about stability and reliability
> instead, doesn't offer much hope for those people on older systems.
>
> Make of it what you will, I personally don't have performance issues at
> all. I use Vista with 2GB of RAM and I have a Sandisk 2GB memory stick
> that is used for the "Ready Boost" feature, maybe they should re-run the
> test with that scenario.
>
> Chris Pirillo had this to say on all those negative articles surrounding
> Windows Vista, enjoy!
>
>

thai bear

I would assume you are getting used to seeing things again and again and
again and again...
UAC has given you lots of practice on that



Ï "Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]" <andred25@hotmail.com> Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
news:%23Owz3iiMIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> This has been posted in here numerous times now, just do a search before
> hitting the send button.
> --
> Andre
> Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
> My Vista Quickstart Guide:
> http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
> "thai bear" <ber@df.kol> wrote in message
> news:474e108c@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>> vista is bad and slow... its the ultimate crap OS
>>
>> see this page for a comaprisson chart between xp sp3 and vista sp1....
>> the naysaers will drop dead eventually...
>>
>> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...ista-sp1-again
>>
>> exo.blog has at the request of their members re-run the original
>> OfficeBench test, this time with 2GB of RAM in the test system.
>> Unfortunately the outcome is unchanged bar a 4% improvement on the
>> previous score. One can argue that Windows XP system requirements are
>> quite a bit lower than its successor, and thats probably got a lot to do
>> with it. This, coupled with claims that Vista SP1 will not improve on
>> performance but will in fact be all about stability and reliability
>> instead, doesn't offer much hope for those people on older systems.
>>
>> Make of it what you will, I personally don't have performance issues at
>> all. I use Vista with 2GB of RAM and I have a Sandisk 2GB memory stick
>> that is used for the "Ready Boost" feature, maybe they should re-run the
>> test with that scenario.
>>
>> Chris Pirillo had this to say on all those negative articles surrounding
>> Windows Vista, enjoy!
>>
>>
>
>

Mike Hall - MVP

The test was rigged. They didn't run Office 2007 on XP which would have
screwed up the result they so desperately wanted.

On the subject of desperation, how has your day been?

--
Mike Hall - MVP
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx




"thai bear" <ber@df.kol> wrote in message
news:474e1a36@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>I would assume you are getting used to seeing things again and again and
>again and again...
> UAC has given you lots of practice on that
>
>
>
> Ï "Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]" <andred25@hotmail.com> Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
> news:%23Owz3iiMIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> This has been posted in here numerous times now, just do a search before
>> hitting the send button.
>> --
>> Andre
>> Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
>> My Vista Quickstart Guide:
>> http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
>> "thai bear" <ber@df.kol> wrote in message
>> news:474e108c@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>>> vista is bad and slow... its the ultimate crap OS
>>>
>>> see this page for a comaprisson chart between xp sp3 and vista sp1....
>>> the naysaers will drop dead eventually...
>>>
>>> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...ista-sp1-again
>>>
>>> exo.blog has at the request of their members re-run the original
>>> OfficeBench test, this time with 2GB of RAM in the test system.
>>> Unfortunately the outcome is unchanged bar a 4% improvement on the
>>> previous score. One can argue that Windows XP system requirements are
>>> quite a bit lower than its successor, and thats probably got a lot to do
>>> with it. This, coupled with claims that Vista SP1 will not improve on
>>> performance but will in fact be all about stability and reliability
>>> instead, doesn't offer much hope for those people on older systems.
>>>
>>> Make of it what you will, I personally don't have performance issues at
>>> all. I use Vista with 2GB of RAM and I have a Sandisk 2GB memory stick
>>> that is used for the "Ready Boost" feature, maybe they should re-run the
>>> test with that scenario.
>>>
>>> Chris Pirillo had this to say on all those negative articles surrounding
>>> Windows Vista, enjoy!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Thee Chicago Wolf

>This has been posted in here numerous times now, just do a search before
>hitting the send button.

This article was just re-released today. I didn't see it posted yet
but it's essentially the same article with 2GB tested instead of the
original 1GB.

- Thee Chicago Wolf

Thee Chicago Wolf

>The test was rigged. They didn't run Office 2007 on XP which would have
>screwed up the result they so desperately wanted.
>
>On the subject of desperation, how has your day been?

I think it's a lot closer to the industry standard. Businesses are not
running office 2007 no matter how badly MS wants to spin the numbers.
2003 is the current standard so it's on target testing.

- Thee Chicago Wolf

"thai bear" <ber@df.kol> wrote in message
news:474e1a36@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>I would assume you are getting used to seeing things again and again and
>again and again...
> UAC has given you lots of practice on that
>
>

I would assume that you are used to being a mental retard.. Again and Again
and Again. You have made sure of that.

Just FYI
>
> Ï "Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]" <andred25@hotmail.com> Ýãñáøå óôï ìÞíõìá
> news:%23Owz3iiMIHA.4912@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> This has been posted in here numerous times now, just do a search before
>> hitting the send button.
>> --
>> Andre
>> Blog: http://adacosta.spaces.live.com
>> My Vista Quickstart Guide:
>> http://adacosta.spaces.live.com/blog...3DB!9709.entry
>> "thai bear" <ber@df.kol> wrote in message
>> news:474e108c@newsgate.x-privat.org...
>>> vista is bad and slow... its the ultimate crap OS
>>>
>>> see this page for a comaprisson chart between xp sp3 and vista sp1....
>>> the naysaers will drop dead eventually...
>>>
>>> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...ista-sp1-again
>>>
>>> exo.blog has at the request of their members re-run the original
>>> OfficeBench test, this time with 2GB of RAM in the test system.
>>> Unfortunately the outcome is unchanged bar a 4% improvement on the
>>> previous score. One can argue that Windows XP system requirements are
>>> quite a bit lower than its successor, and thats probably got a lot to do
>>> with it. This, coupled with claims that Vista SP1 will not improve on
>>> performance but will in fact be all about stability and reliability
>>> instead, doesn't offer much hope for those people on older systems.
>>>
>>> Make of it what you will, I personally don't have performance issues at
>>> all. I use Vista with 2GB of RAM and I have a Sandisk 2GB memory stick
>>> that is used for the "Ready Boost" feature, maybe they should re-run the
>>> test with that scenario.
>>>
>>> Chris Pirillo had this to say on all those negative articles surrounding
>>> Windows Vista, enjoy!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Knudsen Knutsack

"thai bear" <ber@df.kol> wrote in message
news:474e108c@newsgate.x-privat.org...
> vista is bad and slow... its the ultimate crap OS
>
> see this page for a comaprisson chart between xp sp3 and vista sp1....
> the naysaers will drop dead eventually...

Maybe You Should Drop Dead. The naysayers will rejoice. Just FYI.. Just
FYI
>
> http://www.neowin.net/news/main/07/1...ista-sp1-again
>
> exo.blog has at the request of their members re-run the original
> OfficeBench test, this time with 2GB of RAM in the test system.
> Unfortunately the outcome is unchanged bar a 4% improvement on the
> previous score. One can argue that Windows XP system requirements are
> quite a bit lower than its successor, and thats probably got a lot to do
> with it. This, coupled with claims that Vista SP1 will not improve on
> performance but will in fact be all about stability and reliability
> instead, doesn't offer much hope for those people on older systems.
>
> Make of it what you will, I personally don't have performance issues at
> all. I use Vista with 2GB of RAM and I have a Sandisk 2GB memory stick
> that is used for the "Ready Boost" feature, maybe they should re-run the
> test with that scenario.
>
> Chris Pirillo had this to say on all those negative articles surrounding
> Windows Vista, enjoy!
>
>

thai bear

the vista losers are grabing at straws trying to find reasons why everyone
is calling vista trash.. lol

they can try all they want... vistas trash quality wont change


? "Thee Chicago Wolf" <.@.> ?????? ??? ??????
news:ro7sk31cc2vaclipfedj8c6pbsj5s2aj0m@4ax.com...
> >The test was rigged. They didn't run Office 2007 on XP which would have
>>screwed up the result they so desperately wanted.
>>
>>On the subject of desperation, how has your day been?
>
> I think it's a lot closer to the industry standard. Businesses are not
> running office 2007 no matter how badly MS wants to spin the numbers.
> 2003 is the current standard so it's on target testing.
>
> - Thee Chicago Wolf

Thee Chicago Wolf

>the vista losers are grabing at straws trying to find reasons why everyone
>is calling vista trash.. lol
>
>they can try all they want... vistas trash quality wont change

Well, for users of very old machines with low system resources, it's a
dog. I was just in a Vista deployment session at Microsoft this week
and even the instructor says that you can turn off some of the dumb
eye candy and other settings to bring it up to a more respectable
performance level. There have been some performance patches that were
released not too long ago that bring up performance a bit.

Like other IT longtimers, I know that Vista SP1 is what Vista RTM
*should* have been. Vista SP2 will likely bring up the performance.

- Thee Chicago Wolf