# For Those Frustrated with Vista (Free MEMORY trick!)



## Quag (14 Aug 2007)

Anybody sick of the slow performance of Vista?

Well, we all probably know of Readyboost technology, the technology that uses a simple USB memory stick to dub as RAM.  But it has to be a special memory stick, and it is pricey and hard to find.

This is a way to use any memory stick, and let me tell you, it works wonders!  Don't believe me? Try it and I promise you won't be disappointed!

1.  First things first. Plug the Stick in. Ignore AutoPlay if you have the enabled, and go to Computer in the start menu. When it pops up, right-click the USB stick and select properties.

2.   Click on the Readyboost tab on the properties menu and check Do not restest this device. Click okay and unplug the stick from your computer.

3.  Next, you need to open regedit, by opening the start menu and typing regedit, then enter. The registry window should load up.

Using the left-hand pane, work your way through the following folders: HKLM (Local Machine) -> SOFTWARE -> Microsoft -> Windows NT -> CurrentVersion -> EMDgmt. You'll have a list of USB devices the computer has encountered, one of which should be your USB stick. Click on it.

Here there's a few details you need to edit. Double click on Device Status and change the value to 2, then ok. Do the same for ReadSpeedKBs and WriteSpeedKBs, changing their values to both 1000. Exit the regedit.

4.  Now all that's left to do is put the stick back in and once again go to the device properties (Computer > Right-click on drive). If you look under the Readyboost Tab, you'll be able to now select Use this device. 

Now enjoy your faster PC!!!


----------



## Rocketryan (14 Aug 2007)

This work only with Vista?


----------



## Quag (14 Aug 2007)

Rocketryan said:
			
		

> This work only with Vista?



Yes unfortunately.  It only is capable of the Readyboost technology...

Personally, I would stick with XP.  Just my HO, though.


----------



## geo (15 Aug 2007)

Heh... my "new" PC came with Vista preinstalled.... XP was not an option


----------



## geo (15 Aug 2007)

ReadyBoost is a disk caching technology first included with Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system. It aims to make computers running Windows Vista more responsive by using flash memory on a USB 2.0 drive, SD card, CompactFlash, or other form of flash memory, in order to boost system performance.

ReadyBoost is also used to facilitate SuperFetch, an updated version of Windows XP's prefetcher which performs analysis of boot-time disk usage patterns and creates a cache which is used in subsequent system boots.[1]

Using ReadyBoost-capable flash memory (NAND memory devices) for caching allows Windows Vista to service random disk reads with performance that is typically 80-100 times faster than random reads from traditional hard drives. This caching is applied to all disk content, not just the page file or system DLLs. Flash devices are typically slower than the hard drive for sequential I/O, so to maximize performance, ReadyBoost includes logic to recognize large, sequential read requests and then allows these requests to be serviced by the hard drive.[2]

When a compatible device is plugged in, the Windows AutoPlay dialog offers an additional option to use the flash drive to speed up the system; an additional "ReadyBoost" tab is added to the drive's properties dialog where the amount of space to be used can be configured.[3] 250 MB to 4 GB of flash memory can be assigned. ReadyBoost encrypts, with AES-128, and compresses all data that is placed on the flash device; Microsoft has stated that a 2:1 compression ratio is typical, so that a 4 GB cache could contain upwards of 8 GB of data.[1]

According to Jim Allchin, for future releases of Windows, ReadyBoost will be able to use spare RAM on other networked Windows Vista PCs.[4]

For a device to be compatible and useful it must conform to the following requirements:

The capacity of the removable media must be at least 256 MB (250 after formatting) 
Devices larger than 4 GB will have only 4 GB used for ReadyBoost 
The device should have an access time of 1ms or less 
The device must be capable of 2.5 MB/s read speeds for 4 KB random reads spread uniformly across the entire device and 1.75 MB/s write speeds for 512 KB random writes spread uniformly across the device 
The device must have at least 235 MB of free space 
NTFS and FAT32 are supported 
The initial release of ReadyBoost supports one device 
The recommended amount of memory to use for Windows ReadyBoost acceleration is one to three times the amount of random access memory (RAM) installed in your computer 

The performance improvement seen by using this idea with low-cost (<$100) flash drives is questionable. In the cases where a system has 512 MB of RAM (the bare minimum for Windows Vista - not advisable), the largest gains are 47% (the test benchmark included Adobe Photoshop CS3 along with 22 images, iTunes, Microsoft Word 2007, Adobe Reader 8 and an Explorer Window). However, on systems with 1 GB or more, ReadyBoost has a negligible effect (small enough to be explained as experimental error)[citation needed].

The core idea of ReadyBoost is that a flash drive has a much faster seek time (less than 1 millisecond), allowing it to satisfy the requests fairly quickly compared to a hard drive when booting or reading certain system files. It also leverages the inherent parallelism of having two sources to read data from. Unfortunately, low-cost flash drives are very slow in terms of sequential reads and writes, compared to modern desktop hard drives -- fast 7200 rpm hard drives can sustain 60-80 MB/s, which is 6 to 8 times faster than the 10 MB/s sustained by the fastest low-cost flash drives. The only advantages these flash drives have are a seek time of around 1ms, compared to the 8-12ms typical on modern SATA drives.

On laptop computers the performance shifts more in the favor of flash memory, laptop memory being priced relatively higher than that for desktop systems, and with many laptops using relatively slow 4200 rpm and 5400 rpm hard drives. Additionally, on a laptop, the ReadyBoost caching can reduce hard drive access, allowing the hard drive to spin down for increased battery life.

The performance of NAND flash caching (in the form of Intel's Turbo Memory technology) has also been called into question by some computer manufacturers.

However, it has to be considered that high-cost ($1,000-$50,000) flash memories currently have speeds up to 3 GB/s as random sustained external throughput with latency under 0.015 ms and up to 400,000 random IO/s


----------



## Jorkapp (15 Aug 2007)

Be advised, however that NAND flash in all forms (CF, SD, USB Mass Storage) has a limited amount of read/write cycles, and caching is very read/write intensive. I would not recommend storing any data on a flash drive which is being used by ReadyCache.


----------



## TheWildOne (15 Aug 2007)

Jorkapp, i agree with you about read/write cycles and that a flash drive used for readyboost technology should not be use for anything else. However, even with a limited amount of read/write cycles, this number is pretty high so a memory stick will last long enough to justify buying one just for that.

Another trick that will boost performance is disabling the Gadget bar and the Aero interface. I know it's cool features but it's eating up so much memory. It is also recommended to disable both when you use a laptop on battery. I'm doing it and my battery last twice the amount of time.


----------



## Quag (15 Aug 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> ReadyBoost is a disk caching technology first included with Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system. It aims to make computers running Windows Vista more responsive by using flash memory on a USB 2.0 drive, SD card, CompactFlash, or other form of flash memory, in order to boost system performance.
> 
> ReadyBoost is also used to facilitate SuperFetch, an updated version of Windows XP's prefetcher which performs analysis of boot-time disk usage patterns and creates a cache which is used in subsequent system boots.[1]
> 
> ...



OK? That's just huge a lifted exerpt from Wikipedia?!?  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReadyBoost

Good information though for those wanting to know what Readyboost is / is capable of.

Anyway it is true.  The lower speed / lower price USB flash drives aren't the best, and that is why you have to use this trick to allow Vista to use it.

Regardless, it works excellent for my Laptop, if only it increases performance by 47% (not a bad figure!).

I just wanted to pass on the info to those looking for a fast and easy fix (without buying new RAM).

Cheers!


----------



## dapaterson (15 Aug 2007)

There's another great optimizer for Vista systems.

It's called FDISK  >


----------



## Jorkapp (15 Aug 2007)

TheWildOne said:
			
		

> Jorkapp, i agree with you about read/write cycles and that a flash drive used for readyboost technology should not be use for anything else. However, even with a limited amount of read/write cycles, this number is pretty high so a memory stick will last long enough to justify buying one just for that.
> 
> Another trick that will boost performance is disabling the Gadget bar and the Aero interface. I know it's cool features but it's eating up so much memory. It is also recommended to disable both when you use a laptop on battery. I'm doing it and my battery last twice the amount of time.


Exactly. Around these parts, a 1GB flash drive costs less than $20. Easy and cheap enough to buy one for caching, and one for data storage.


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (17 Aug 2007)

> There's another great optimizer for Vista systems.
> 
> It's called FDISK



I must agree!

I've been using Microsoft since the DOS days, including, win3.1, 95, 98, XP and then I bought Vista. I found the same problem with all of them, they all "Sucked". The memory hogs winners are XP and Vista. It seems everytime Microsoft comes out with a new OS, they add more useless junk that looks good to the layman, but for those of us who know better, it's a just another bunch of useless utilities that hog memory. Even with 4GB of the fastest  DDR625 it's still slow, Vista is like and eight cylinder running on only four cylinders, sometimes, worst than win95 running on an old 486. The "MSCONFIG" utility in Vista is a joke to say the least. I still can't figure out why it's even there, because it certainly doesn't disable anything. 

Vista is Cheaper and a bit more secure. Otherwise stick with XP. Vista Home Basic doesn't offer anything new except a bit more security. I get the feeling a lot of people are going to be disappointed to find out they won't even have Aero on Home Basic. 

And buggy, don't get me started on the bugs, but what windows OS doesn't have them, but Vista has them in droves. I thought XP was bad. Patch this, patch that. somethings never change.

Last year my bother-in-law put me on to Linux, I was skeptical at first, but soon found that my machine ran smoother, faster and "No virus's" Wow to say the least, I has finally ridden my self of the giant virus magnet called the Windows OS. 

To sum up it takes abit more a learning curb to run Linux, but after the initial break in period, my Windows OS soon went the way of the recycle bin. It's been eight months now and I couldn't be happier, I run all the same programs as a windows machine, play the same games, but the biggest bonus, is I always have the same consistent performance I initially built my machine for and much fewer bugs to worry about. 

I realize Linux is not for everybody, for those who like the concept of "out of the box computing" stick with windows. Linux doesn't come without it's problems and glitches either, but I would say after having used both, Linux has about 70% less problems than any windows OS.

But for those who have a broader knowledge base and are bit more adventurous and want the power of their PC to be consistent, Linux is the way to go. And you don't have to buy a flash drive to speed up your machine.


----------



## mysteriousmind (17 Aug 2007)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> There's another great optimizer for Vista systems.
> 
> It's called FDISK  >



An other way to optimize Viste : dont use it...use a mac like me    :blotto:


----------



## George Wallace (29 Sep 2007)

I just purchased a backup Laptop recently with MS Vista Premium on it.  Just today I have started running into little annoying problems, such as the mouse nolonger functioning in the normal manner.  I can no longer highlight a line and right click and copy.  I won't even talk about that often used line on the Apple commercials, about "Do you Allow, or not".  

Who thinks MicroSoft once again sold us a bill of goods?  Vista, has caused me lots of grief in the little time I have had it.  It doesn't load many of my previously owned games.  It is hard to find upgrades or patches for other periferies and programs.  Will MS solve our problems or just ignore our wishes?


----------



## smitty66 (29 Sep 2007)

I used the Beta 2 version of Vista, I haven't had a chance to use the full release. It seemed to be really cool looking, but the hardware requirements seemed to be excessive to say the least. I've seen servers with less RAM. Some of the controls they've added (i.e. the Apple commercial), get annoying, but I guess it's a change from their previous method of allowing everything!  ;D 
I think the growing pains are just beginning, so I've pulled out the Vista HDD and put my XP Pro HDD back in. I'll wait a year or so and see how the dust settles.
As for Microsoft listening, I guess they know that they have a "captive audience" and seem to care little.


----------



## Proud Dad (29 Sep 2007)

I have had little trouble with my Dell laptop and Vista Prem. However I would agree with Smitty that the more ram the better, this one has 2 gig, but there was a problem in early release where Vista couldnt use more than 2gig anyways. A lot of its annoyances should disappear after Service Pack 1 which is in Beta right now. So December/January maybe?. I had a lot of those Allow/Deny popups early but I adjusted one of the settings and that problem is rare now. I am more annoyed with Norton on this machine.


----------



## George Wallace (29 Sep 2007)

Well, you are right about it being a memory hog.  If you have less than 1 Gig of Ram, you are going to run into mega problems once you start using any 'serious' applications.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (29 Sep 2007)

It's a bloated hog. A system running Linux, or even W2K, runs lightning fast. WV will only do that with nothing but the system files, on the same system. NO........NO, home computer, used for word processing and cruising the internet, should require 2 Gig of RAM. Micosoft knows how to ADD programme code, but their gazzillion dollar a year techies don't know how to condense it. MS no longer puts out a perfect OS, but launches, waits for the complaints & security breeches, and then supplies a bandaid fix. Then another, and another and another..........They are in business because of the amount of machines running their software. Not because it's good. It's crap. Personally, I refuse to buy into "We are now launching the greatest operating system ever developed" bullshit. DOS 3.1  with a GUI was good. You just had to think a bit and learn the language . My suggestion to anyone with WV is to format C: and install W2K........ if you want to stay with Bill Gates.

BTW, WV doesn't like illegal, unlicenced software or files. It will eat them, lock up, report you, etc. It searches your machine, in the background, everytime you boot. Let your trial copy expire, you won't be able to access any drive on your system. Bill Gates owns you ..........and your machine.

A tip of my Red Hat to everyone.


----------



## smitty66 (29 Sep 2007)

WRT the security "bandaids" and the other fixes yet to come, you better buy a stand alone hardrive because by the time they get them all, you'll need the storage!
I'm a fan of Linux myself (Open SuSe 10.2 right now). It's amazing how much quicker things are when the machine doesn't have to go through a couple of billion lines of code to change the time.  > 
Yeah the background processes looking over your shoulder is rather "Big Brother-ish" isn't it. Guess Bill has to make another Gazillion dollars this year.


----------



## Scott (30 Sep 2007)

I was perfectly happy with XP.

Vista can kiss my arse for all of the time I have spent trying to figure out it's bugs, played with the language feature that all of a sudden sees me typing french characters (ala TN2IC) ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ, getting re-booted because this crap system can't seem to handle more than three pages open in IE (I changed to firefox, thought I had that fixed but was sorely mistaken) and the frigging thing still won't let me play Sim City 4.

Windows Vista? Boooo.


----------



## Rocketryan (30 Sep 2007)

This topic reminds of this

http://www.brightcove.tv/title.jsp?title=741891990


----------



## Burrows (30 Sep 2007)

Windows XP is the way to go as far as I'm concerned.  While W2K is certainly robust, I'm more a fan of the XP.


----------



## joonrooj (30 Sep 2007)

WRT Linux, a lot of programs, games, etc don't run on Linux (I am probably mistaken) and no one really knows there options, personally I'd make the switch from XP to Linux if I knew all my files would make the transfer, Battlefield 2 would still run, and I'd be able to use MSword or equivalent.


----------



## garb811 (30 Sep 2007)

Joonrooj said:
			
		

> WRT Linux, a lot of programs, games, etc don't run on Linux (I am probably mistaken) and no one really knows there options, personally I'd make the switch from XP to Linux if I knew...





> ...all my files would make the transfer...


Why wouldn't they?  Of course, you're going to want to back up anything you want to keep but I've never lost anything off a hard drive making the switch, it just means you need to do a bit of prep work.



> ...Battlefield 2 would still run...


 Cedega lets you play Windows games on Linux.  Check the games list.



> ...I'd be able to use MSword or equivalent.


 Open Office for all your office needs, for free!  It'll even let you save as a Word .doc if you so desire.

If you want the best of both worlds, albeit that's said with some tounge in cheek, do a dual boot install, that way you can choose your flavour depending what you want to do...


----------



## TN2IC (30 Sep 2007)

Scott said:
			
		

> I was perfectly happy with XP.
> 
> Vista can kiss my arse for all of the time I have spent trying to figure out it's bugs, played with the language feature that all of a sudden sees me typing french characters (ala TN2IC) ÉÉÉÉÉÉÉÉ, getting re-booted because this crap system can't seem to handle more than three pages open in IE




That was a scary time for me. I prefere my Windows 3.1, thank you.  ;D


----------



## emmiee (30 Sep 2007)

When I bought my new PC system,  Vista was due out.  It came with an upgrade to Vista, I choose not to get it as I remember all the problem with other MS versions. Like TN21C I was happy with 3.1. Now I have XP Pro.

I'm considering  Linux, because I have heard so many good things about it.  I was a "self" learner on MS, and I guess I need to know more before I do the leap.  I'm not very good at fixing anything if it should go awry.  I can do some things, but basically I need an OS that can crossover to my system at work (MS) with the ability to create powerpoints, documents, excel...ect.  I do a lot of work at home, download to a jump drive and load it in there.

Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

emmie


----------



## dapaterson (30 Sep 2007)

Experiment with one of the Live CD distros (Ubuntu is popular right now) to get a feel from the interface you'll be using.

As an interim step, install Open Office on your XP  machine and get familiar with tools other than Office 2xxx - becasue once you make the Linux leap, odds are you'll be running Open Office.  Open Office has decent filters to import and export files into MS Office formats.


----------



## emmiee (30 Sep 2007)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Experiment with one of the Live CD distros (Ubuntu is popular right now) to get a feel from the interface you'll be using.
> 
> As an interim step, install Open Office on your XP  machine and get familiar with tools other than Office 2xxx - becasue once you make the Linux leap, odds are you'll be running Open Office.  Open Office has decent filters to import and export files into MS Office formats.



Thank you I will definately do that.  

Cheers
em


----------



## Roy Harding (30 Sep 2007)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Experiment with one of the Live CD distros (Ubuntu is popular right now) to get a feel from the interface you'll be using.
> ...



That's an excellent suggestion.  Interestingly, I had done so this morning, prior to reading your post (Feather Linux, in my case).  It boots off the CD, and I've been dicking around with it.  It's certainly a painless way to experiment with a new OS without screwing up your current system.

After I've taken the time to play with it for a while, I'll PROBABLY switch over - my only concern being Windows apps that I currently depend on, such as Quicken, Turbocad, Cutlist Plus, Cabinetmaker Plus (a CNC application) and a couple of others - I have mucho dineros invested in some of these programs - and I don't want to have to buy Linux versions, if such versions are even available.  

I understand that there are utilities available for you to run Windows apps in a "Windows Box" under Linux - Win4Lin being one such utility.  I've been to the Win4Lin site and they promise performance at "close to native" speed - are these types of utilities the answer for folks like me that have literally thousands of dollars invested in CAD / CAM and other industry specific software?


Roy


----------



## miramidown (30 Sep 2007)

A safer bet for you might be to purchase a copy of VMWare Workstation. This will let you run a full version of windows inside a virtual machine and give you full native support for all your programs. You will of course want a healthy helping of RAM, but that's something you always want.

You mentioned the Live CD being a great way to try out a different operating system, well this is an even better method in my opinion. You can install it to a virtual disk and then just open it and play with it while still running your normal operating system. No need for a reboot and you can just pause it and close it if you want to get back to whatever you were doing.

http://www.vmware.com


----------



## Roy Harding (30 Sep 2007)

miramidown said:
			
		

> A safer bet for you might be to purchase a copy of VMWare Workstation. This will let you run a full version of windows inside a virtual machine and give you full native support for all your programs. You will of course want a healthy helping of RAM, but that's something you always want.
> 
> You mentioned the Live CD being a great way to try out a different operating system, well this is an even better method in my opinion. You can install it to a virtual disk and then just open it and play with it while still running your normal operating system. No need for a reboot and you can just pause it and close it if you want to get back to whatever you were doing.
> 
> http://www.vmware.com



Thank you for that!

I'm going to download the trial version and give it a whirl.

I love Milnet.ca - even when it has me beating my head against the wall, I know that there are helpful and knowledgeable folks out there with the answers to all my questions.   


Roy


----------



## smitty66 (30 Sep 2007)

WRT Live CDs I've seen pretty much any linux distro in Live CD format. If you don't like what you see with one, try another. It's great to see the different ideas/frontends that the Linux community offers.  A lot of the distros are available for FREE, and there is a great variety of software out there to do pretty much whatever you want.
VM Ware is a great way to experience the different Operating Systems (not just Linux) out there. The trial is free and the setup is painless. As stated above , you better have lots of RAM! 
There is so much out there to experience that does not carry the Microsoft name. 
Cheers
Smitty


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (1 Oct 2007)

I got rid of the Microsoft hell two years ago and switched to Linux. Best move I've ever made. I use Mandrake and it blows MS all to hell, easy to use (there is a bit more of a learning curve) but it's well worth the extra effort. My desktop is completely modular, meaning I can change it to how I want it to look and function (Love open source!). And the best part is some places it's free to download, other places such as Mandrake, it can acquired for a small licence fee. 

Don't be fooled by the people who tell you there are no applications for Linux, there are hundreds of software programs from word processors, to MP3' players, financial, utilities, Anti-virus, the list is long, long, long. 

No more crashing ( in the middle of doing something important and losing all your work)
No Virus's (There are some but very few)
Fort Knox security (I can change my own security settings within the OS itself)
System runs just as well from 512Mb or 4GB mem. (unlike the Vista and XP memory pigs, slooooooooooooooow)
Completely modular ( meaning with a few key strokes I can change how my OS functions and looks, don't do this if you don't know the code)
System always runs blazingly fast. (Linux kernel opposed to the windows junk) 

I used to be Bill Gates biggest fan, until I seen the other side. I'm a convert and will never go back.

As to your question about Vista, well it's chocked full of bugs and other useless junk, all this does is choke up your PC and stops it dead in its tracks. You could spend a few thousand $$$ on a powerfull PC, load Vista and it becomes a very expensive doorstop. Don't believe me, well seeing is believing, try it.


----------



## LCIS-Tech (1 Oct 2007)

Truth be told, I can see where MS was wanting to go with Vista. While there are a large number of irritating (they call them "features") quirks to the OS, almost every single one of them can be turned off or if nothing else, tweaked to a point where they are no longer such a pain in the butt. All a user needs to do is to do a search for any of a number of Vista tweak sites, and you will see a number of excellent "fine-tuning" techniques that will result in Vista running "nearly" as fast as XP. I say nearly, because as a matter of history, each successive release of Windows from 95 through to Vista has had progressively higher system requirements. When you really think about it, it makes sense to do it this way too. As newer, faster systems become the state-of-the-art, it is only logical that programs and Operating Systems would evolve to make the most use of it. One of the biggest changes to Windows was the upgrade to the NT Kernel with XP and Win2K. I know a number of users that still swear by Win2K and prefer it far above XP


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Oct 2007)

Vista, ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!

I have it on my new machine, getting all the hardware to work has been a pain, seems there not many drivers out there yet. Many of the older games or programs will not work with it. The security blocks are devious to figure out, you think you have shared something, but you really haven't. If you can wait a year, wait. I only got it because Vista is the only one that can run my processor.


----------



## Greymatters (1 Oct 2007)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Vista, ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGHHHHH!!!!
> 
> I have it on my new machine, getting all the hardware to work has been a pain, seems there not many drivers out there yet. Many of the older games or programs will not work with it. The security blocks are devious to figure out, you think you have shared something, but you really haven't. If you can wait a year, wait. I only got it because Vista is the only one that can run my processor.



Thanks for the visual image.  I can see that happening to me when I upgrade to Vista next year...


----------



## PMedMoe (1 Oct 2007)

I received the free upgrade when I bought my new laptop last year but have not yet (thankfully) installed it!


----------



## Pinto (2 Oct 2007)

You can have my Mac when you pry the mouse from my cold, dead fingers...

I use Winduhs every day at work... I used to be in charge of the Base computer techs and system admins. I've built a Windblows computer, switched out hard drives, replaced processors and RAM... I have quite a bit of experience with computers in general.

I will NEVER pay money for a Micro$loth "Operating" system, no matter what the version.

Macintosh is just simply better. In each and every way, without any caveats or limitations. I would highly recommend it to anyone disappointed with Vista, especially now because you can run Winduhs applications on the Mac... and people have concluded that the new Macs run Windows better than Windows computers can.

That's my opinion, but it's an informed one, based on years of experience. Nothing anyone can say will ever sway that, so don't bother.

YMMV, of course.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Oct 2007)

Unless of course you want to play games, in which case you get approx. 25% of the selection out there.


----------



## mysteriousmind (2 Oct 2007)

i don't like Vista, to demanding on the system for an OS. 

and I have read (can't remember were) the first service pack will be of 1Gyg

for those reason, and others, I hate VISTA


----------



## Pinto (2 Oct 2007)

Ah, the games myth…

First: There are plenty of good games available for the Mac OS. I suspect your “approx. 25%” statement is one of those myriad statistics that are just pulled out of… the air… rather than being the result of scientific analysis and calculation.

For example: Battlefield 2142, Command & Conquer 3, Call of Duty 2, Age of Empires III, Civilization IV, WarCraft III, World of Warcraft, Unreal Tournament, Black and White, Doom III, Sim City 4, the Sims 2, Tiger Woods PGA Tour 08… etc etc. Even StarCraft II (not released yet, but announced for Mac as well as that other OS).

Second: Like I said, you can run windows on a Mac. Products such as VM Ware Fusion and Parallels desktop allow you to run windows and Mac applications at the same time, side by side, and cut and paste between them. True, they are emulators, so processor and graphics intensive applications may be slow, but in that case, you simply use Apple’s own BootCamp software to reboot your Mac into Windows (I recommend sticking with XP). At that point, you are no longer emulating but running “real” windows, so all your windows games will run just fine. Of course, you are subject to all those Windows viruses, adware, spyware and all that, so your Windows partition is just as vulnerable as any other windows computer… but your Mac itself is immune to all that.

Third: If games are the biggest reason you have a computer, you should think about getting a Play Station 3 or a Wii… (I wouldn’t bother with an XBox; they’re built by the same folks who brought you MicroSoft Bob, Clippy the Office assistant and Vista… and I can’t pick which of those three is the worst piece of crap…) You’ll pay less for the hardware and have better games.

My opinion, of course… YMMV.

Cheers!


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Oct 2007)

Thanks, I will admit that my knowledge of Mac's is dated, never been a fan of a dedicated system, plus I can't stand those silly hand held things they call a controller.  ;D


----------



## SIG MITCH (2 Oct 2007)

I kind of like Suse myself...


----------



## Pikache (2 Oct 2007)

Just bought a new HP laptop and already thinking of downgrading back to XP pro.

Only apprehensive due to the fact that i dunno what problems I'll run into reinstalling XP pro


----------



## George Wallace (20 Jul 2008)

For those sending me PM's  -  Please STOP.   I have fallen victim of Microsoft VISTA upgrade/update to SERVICE PACK 1.  It has frozen my computer and I may be logged on, but I can't do anything.........This update has taken two hours so far and is now 33% through the first of three "stages" and one reboot........it will take longer than I have at this location to finish......    Another reason to switch to LINIX or APPLE.


----------



## MedTechStudent (21 Jul 2008)

[Insert Random Name] said:
			
		

> I got Vista in March 07. It ran well for two months, then self destructed. Restarted randomly, froze up, started BSODing. Would last two weeks per reinstall.
> 
> Now, around this time, my laptop broke down and I got a Macbook. 6-7 months later, it's all that I use, and I'm thinking about getting an Imac now.



Exactly the same for me.  Mac and all.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Jul 2008)

Microsoft has stopped fully testing their crap before marketing a long time ago. Now they launch and wait til you report the problem. If enough people complain, about a certain bug, they'll design a patch. Everything they sell now is a Beta, with you being the tester. They charge YOU $400.00 for the chance to test THEIR program. Along with their hidden search and destroy for pirated software, report to home about your system function and composition and puriant monitoring of all your computer functions.

If you have VISTA, Bill Gates has you.


----------



## tabernac (21 Jul 2008)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Along with their hidden search and destroy for pirated software, report to home about your system function and composition and puriant monitoring of all your computer functions.



Source? I find that kinda wonky, what with all the "Do you allow" boxes. I have yet to have a serious problem with Vista.


----------



## tankie (21 Jul 2008)

All i gotta say is ...http://badvista.fsf.org/  My Pops worked for a PC Shop, and one of the things he told me about vista was, if you delete Vista and install another OS, then decide to re-install Vista, you got to pay for it again, a once only serial/unlock number.  To this day i am convinced that BG is a runner for Satan.  The day that they stop updates for XP, then its off to the SJ camp and a lovely apple.


----------



## Snafu-Bar (21 Jul 2008)

Well vista was and may still be a flop to many who had misfortunes with it so far. I bought an Acer aspire with Amd athlon 64x2 4200+ with 2 gigs of ram, purchased an Ati x1650 pro 512 vid card and slapped my SB audigy card in it. My first time booting it up the screen immediately promted me to put in a blank a dvd in the tray, which then popped open on it's own. I put in a blank dvd in closed the tray and waited....The system then made a recovery disk that i use to reset the system back to factory settings. That allowed me to try a dual boot, which to my horror killed the vista intsall every time. I then wiped vista and just used Xp till it became corrupted and needed a refresh(about 4 1/2 months of daily misuse ) I then used my Vista again and got it updated and it ran alot better so i kept using it but some of my games still didn't have vista comp patches yet so once again i tried a dual boot with no success and wiped for another tour of xp that lasted till SP1 for vista came out. I spent the better part of a day researching the service pack and what kind of bugs or hiccups to expect and to my horror i found that more people we're getting stalled or having a system meltdown than anything, so i waited for a critical re-build. Once that sp1 re-release came out i hisitantly installed it and haven't looked back..been better part of 6 months and all my programs *minus DOS installed stuff * run fine and all my games are upto par and run like butter. I found open office and it's free and compatible with MS crap so i use it.

 The rumour about having to rebuy a new key is only true if your system didn't make a restore disk or it didn't come with any when you bought it. And if you change the motherboard,cpu ram in the system it may require a new key.


 The BEST news is that in 09 MS will be releasing windows 8 and thankfully bill gates has retired from his monopoly upon which he done good but mostly bad at the end of his reign.


----------



## Teeps74 (21 Jul 2008)

Vista is garbage.

I recently bought my new toy... AMD Phenom box, with an ASUS Crossfire mobo, and twin ATI 3870 x2s.

After I put everything togeather, things appear to be working great. Then, BSoD. And again. And again. See, I was trying to run 2 monitors off of it. The errror message I got involved a file called ATIKMDAG.SYS.

This is an ongoing issue which has existed since 2006. I never heard about it until I got the error message above. ATI says it is a Vista problem, and MS says it is an ATI problem. (Note, running 2 monitors in XP is exceptionally stabile).


----------



## aussiechangover (21 Jul 2008)

HighlandFusilier said:
			
		

> Just bought a new HP laptop and already thinking of downgrading back to XP pro.
> 
> Only apprehensive due to the fact that i dunno what problems I'll run into reinstalling XP pro



you'll probably have some issues with soundcards as i did and perhaps the vid card as well but they can all be sorted out by surfing the net and downloading the non vista alternative. i personally have a HP laptop and found out that vista will make it hard to downgrade. and you have to disable SATA that took a while to work out otherwise XP won't load at all (that took a while to search for that)


----------



## rytel (21 Jul 2008)

I've been running vista for over a year now without a single problem - I've actually grown to like it alot.


----------



## Teeps74 (21 Jul 2008)

On single display, it works great. I only have issues with dual display. There is the refusal on the part of AMD/ATI and MS to work togeather to solve the known for two years issue with dual monitor systems.

Here's an exampl of just one of many threads I have found.

http://www.vistax64.com/vista-hardware-devices/3707-atikmdag-sys.html

Compared to XP, Vista is garbage.


----------



## Snafu-Bar (21 Jul 2008)

I know it isn't perfect, nor will anything microshaft puts out in the future. Remember they want to push the hardware to make you buy more components. Been that way since win95 and isn't likely to change in upcoming releases.

 The only thing us PC lovers can hope is that MAC releases a nicely ported version of OSX and all can be happy...except for microshaft.

 As for using Dual monitors that woudn't be the fault of the OS as much as the hardware(vid card) and the drivers attempting to run it. Ati has some of the most horrid drivers around(besides creative and logitech) but i'm sure someone out on the net has a tweaked set that functions. I used to have an gf4 4600 ti and strictly ran OMEGA drivers with it as they we're damn near bulletproof. They however haven't begun tweaking vista sets as far as i'm aware.

 Hope you can get the dual screen running...it sounds like a decent rig.


----------



## Burrows (22 Jul 2008)

My last laptop BSOD'ed and made a sounds similar to dropping glass shards on concrete.  My motherboard was fried and it was not worth paying for a repair.  This in mind,  I decided to go out and replace my old, formerly running windows XP laptop with a new one.

I forgot about Vista.

So far I've had no issues after disabling a bunch of features that must be in there to help old people feel safer.  

One thing I didn't like was that I had to disable a setting so as to allow my admin account to actually function as an admin account and install a program I use.

On the plus side, for you nerdy folks who will understand this -  I found a program that allows you to mount disk image files as if they were in an actual disk drive.  Woo!


----------



## rlee_1001 (22 Jul 2008)

Kyle has this one pretty much figured. I used to be a Vista hater as well but when I got a new rig I decided getting used to it was easier than trying to dig up a "legitimate" version of XP. If you are a gamer you will want Vista as it supports Direct X 10... All you have to do to make Vista bearable is to simply shut off ALL of the security options and user account controls, also be sure to get yourself a decent firewall. As for the dual monitors you will most likely have to go out and buy yourself a decent video card and an upgraded power source as well, I'm running an 8800 GTX and it is still pretty good. As for all of your compatibility just make sure you make the .exe files "Windows XP compatible" BEFORE you install the programs, and after. Anyway you might as well get used to Vista, or you could go check out Ubuntu if you want something free, haha. As for mounting/virtual drive software I find PowerISO and Daemon tools to be the best and easiest to use.

Hope that helps.


----------



## hauger (22 Jul 2008)

rytel said:
			
		

> I've been running vista for over a year now without a single problem - I've actually grown to like it alot.



I love "I hate Vista" threads....let me tell you my story:

I'm a long time XP/Linux (Mandrake and Ubuntu) user.  I bought an HP laptop that came with Vista Home Premium on it.  I brought it home and turned it on.  What a mistake....Vista promptly drank all my liquor, made my wife cry, stole my wallet, left a floater in the toilet, and set my couch on fire.  It then made all kinds of long distance "1-900" calls and ordered a pizza without offering to pay for it.  Then, after spending an entire night yelling obscenities at the neighbours kids, Vista finally died in a spectacular display of BSOD's, taking with it every digital memento I've ever cared about.

Sound familiar.

Actually, I really am a long time XP/Linux user, and my new laptop did come with Vista.  It's worked flawlessly over the last 13 months, with decent performance.  I had some issues with compatibility, but that's to be expected running old programs on new Operating System architecture.  The security functions don't bother me that much, I'm used to typing my root password to do stuff in Linux (although the UAC is a bit overbearing).  I think Vista gets a bad rap, that people were expecting XP with more eye candy but instead got a somewhat more secure and different OS.


----------



## Teeps74 (22 Jul 2008)

I have decent video cards. Times 2. ATI 3870 x2's with a total of 4 GPUs and 2GB dedicated video ram. I am also running a 1000w PSU. How much more decent do I have to be to get a dual monitor rig to work? All of my equipment is top of the line, and less then 3 months old. I have extensive expereince building my own rigs, have been for years. 

The error I am getting has been a known issue for two years. Neither MS or AMD/ATI could be botherd to fix the error, and needless to say, I have bought my last AMD/ATI product and if I can find a way to get out of MS I will (likely going Mac next time).

For there to be a known issue for two years, and see both companies ignore the issue, that is disheartening. I feel like I have been deliberatly ripped off.

(Next issue, is getting my supposed DX 10.1 compliant card to actually work in DX 10.1 on Crysis... Yes, I do know how to install drivers. Catalyst is simply a craptastic driver system... Used to be the best on the market IMHO)


----------



## Snafu-Bar (22 Jul 2008)

Teeps74 said:
			
		

> I have decent video cards. Times 2. ATI 3870 x2's with a total of 4 GPUs and 2GB dedicated video ram. I am also running a 1000w PSU. How much more decent do I have to be to get a dual monitor rig to work? All of my equipment is top of the line, and less then 3 months old. I have extensive expereince building my own rigs, have been for years.
> 
> The error I am getting has been a known issue for two years. Neither MS or AMD/ATI could be botherd to fix the error, and needless to say, I have bought my last AMD/ATI product and if I can find a way to get out of MS I will (likely going Mac next time).
> 
> ...




 Heya, yeah that's a nice system, but once again the OS is not the target of your grief as much as the Crapalyst drivers. Not all sets are the same from ATI and one set to the nextr could fix 1 thing and break 4 others. It tooke me 7 release candidates to get a stable set to run my x1650 pro 512 on one monitor with one card...

 Anyways here's a link to some fresh stuff just in case you haven't been lucky enough to bounce into them yet. Unfortunately they are still in the making of the vista32 driver set and it's got a coming soon tag on it :/ and i cannot hunt down the 64 bit version...

http://www.omegadrivers.net/ati.php

Here's another usefull link that might be of use..

http://www.guru3d.com/

 Good luck...


----------



## Teeps74 (22 Jul 2008)

Snafu-Bar said:
			
		

> Heya, yeah that's a nice system, but once again the OS is not the target of your grief as much as the Crapalyst drivers. Not all sets are the same from ATI and one set to the nextr could fix 1 thing and break 4 others. It tooke me 7 release candidates to get a stable set to run my x1650 pro 512 on one monitor with one card...
> 
> Anyways here's a link to some fresh stuff just in case you haven't been lucky enough to bounce into them yet. Unfortunately they are still in the making of the vista32 driver set and it's got a coming soon tag on it :/ and i cannot hunt down the 64 bit version...
> 
> ...



Thanks... I really do appreciate the assistance. I've tried those, I guess I have to wait on the omegadrivers.net ver as the guru3d.com one I got was simply a Catalyst beta, which does not address the probelm (and infact reduced my frame rates significantly....).

I am going to stick to the one monitor for now, and hope they at least fix the issues with DX 10.1. (I actually use my home rig to make PPTs for work... So much easier to see all my pics at once, while working on a slide). The gaming is my geeky little extra side bonus.

Vista does have other issues I am not fond of...


----------



## Snafu-Bar (22 Jul 2008)

Teeps74 said:
			
		

> Thanks... I really do appreciate the assistance. I've tried those, I guess I have to wait on the omegadrivers.net ver as the guru3d.com one I got was simply a Catalyst beta, which does not address the probelm (and infact reduced my frame rates significantly....).
> 
> I am going to stick to the one monitor for now, and hope they at least fix the issues with DX 10.1. (I actually use my home rig to make PPTs for work... So much easier to see all my pics at once, while working on a slide). The gaming is my geeky little extra side bonus.
> 
> Vista does have other issues I am not fond of...




 Yes Vista does have it's ugly side, but so did XP and 98 and 95 blah blah...  . Thankfully my rig still complies when i want to frag out with DayOfDefeat:Source, BattleField2,America's Army or CallOfDuty4 

Try this link if it can help ya or not i don't know.
http://ati.amd.com/products/hydravision/faq.html

Cheers.


----------



## rlee_1001 (22 Jul 2008)

Teeps have you updated Vista to SP1 or are you still using the old version?

They made a ton of useful changes in that service pack and if you don't already have it downloaded I would recommend doing that. I think it has something to do with your catalyst system because I run dual 20.1 inch monitors off my 8800 GTX and I've never had a problem.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Jul 2008)

With vista SP 1 I finally can get google Earth to work. The major issue with vista is that few companies made updated drivers for it, I read that apparently MS wanted a whole whack of money to access the information so companies could update, most declined to spend that money on legacy stuff. Hence the problem of so much software and hardware being useless with Vista.

Unless you are running a high end system or playing the latest games, Vista gives you little over XP, although I have heard that XP SP3 has not been a great success either. I know lots of people abandoning Vista for XP or other OS. People vote with their feet.

At least now I know where those floaters in the toliet bowel come from!


----------



## GAP (28 Oct 2008)

Embattled Vista set to ride into the sunset
Microsoft starts to pitch its next Windows offering today - while still pushing current, less-than-loved version 
 MATT HARTLEY  From Monday's Globe and Mail October 27, 2008 at 4:28 AM EDT
Article Link

*It's the beginning of the end for Windows Vista*. 

Today, Microsoft Corp. kicks off its marathon pitch about life after Vista, and even though the next evolution of Windows won't be ready until 2010, at the earliest, the company doesn't think it's too soon to start prepping for a bug-free launch. 

Otherwise, despite the fact that Windows's toughest challengers - Linux and Apple Inc. - remain bit players in the operating system game, Microsoft risks suffering in the arena of public perception, again. 

The world's largest software company will speak publicly for the first time today about what's in store for the next evolution of Windows, dubbed Windows 7, at its Professional Developers Conference in Los Angeles. 

Related Articles
Recent

Microsoft posts profit gain  
 Now, after the incompatibility issues, the missing features and the humiliation of consumers downgrading to Windows XP, Microsoft faces the continuing task of repairing the public perception of Vista while simultaneously laying the groundwork for the next Windows instalment

"Often, packaging and perception are more important than actual technology," said Peter Misek, an analyst at Canaccord Adams in Toronto. "Part of the reason that Microsoft needs to scrap Vista, or just move on, is that it's too late for it. Never mind that people like it when they actually use it. It's over."
More on link


----------



## Mike Baker (28 Oct 2008)

And here I am on Vista (have been for over a month), and have not found any problems at all.


Beav


----------



## Greymatters (28 Oct 2008)

I think there's already a thread on this subject, detailing the many reasons why Vista is having problems, most of which are not due to any specific problem with the software... 

Mods, please merge before its starts all over again!


----------



## Blakey (28 Oct 2008)

I'm ecstatic that I had XP Home  put on my laptop instead of the default Vista.


----------



## OldSolduer (28 Oct 2008)

I use Vista and I don't have too many problems. Mind you, I'm not a computer geek.....


----------



## Sub_Guy (28 Oct 2008)

I have no issues with Vista.  I often hear quite a few complaints, but when I ask those who are complaining if they have used Vista, the answer is usually no.


----------



## c_canuk (29 Oct 2008)

the problems with vista are

1. it's a resourse hog and last years computers don't run it well
2. venders aren't writing drivers for equipment that came out before vista
3. venders are writting shoddy drivers
4. it doesn't work and look exactly the same as the last version and basic users don't like change, but will get used to it.
5. vendors insist on bloating up vista with their shoddy utilities that they install on their machines and trial 30 day licence software
6. because vista has closed alot of back doors and bugs, older software not developed for vista by vendors that ignored ms specs, may not work unless you rightclick and choose run as admin, or not at all 


basicly the same problems every os has on release.

I remember the same complaints in when win 95 came out and people everywhere were downgrading back to win3.11

I remember the same complaints with win98, ME, 2000 and XP, and we'll have the same problems when we go to Windows 7 and for the forseeable future.

MS has 95% world market share, it's not going anywhere and still has the best cost benifit analysis compared to everyother OS including the free ones(cost to purchase, train pers, and maintain infrastructure).


----------



## Scott (29 Oct 2008)

I just bought a new machine and am having no issues with Vista in its latest format. I did have an older machine (think I bought it in June 07) and had nothing but trouble but this one seems to be fine.


----------



## Snafu-Bar (29 Oct 2008)

Vista wobbled out of the gates upon initial release, but it's damn near stable(crosses fingers) now that service pack 1 is out and working. Been near 4 months since a program has locked up or had anything abnormal occur such as random re-boots or BSOD's.

 I just hope they really get out of the current windows kernel and go back to being an operating system as apposed to a complete software conundrum.

Cheers


----------



## PanaEng (29 Oct 2008)

Someone mentioned Suse a while back?
hmmm! She must have been very popular - brings back memories...

Wait! what are we talking about again?
 ;D

Kidding aside, an OS is just a tool - some more than others  
It depends what you want to do with it.
For maximum flexibility you would run Linux. For a production environment: Linux, some Unix or mac (well, maybe some tweaked down XP or Vista); for chic factor/user experience: Mac, Linux (after tweaking a few things); for reading email: anything that matches your hardware.
At work I use all of the above - XP on the corporate machine otherwise mac or linux with some XP when required. And Vista will not be making an appearance any time soon - only for testing things.
At home, since I don't want to spend money too often and I run several older machines I only use Linux. I would probably never get an OS pre-installed - I just buy the parts and put things together. I wouldn't shell out $200 bucks for Vista Ultimate when I can download any flavour of Linux for free.
And with VmWare (which is free for home users) you can run any other os on top of Linux if you need something in particular. 
But whether you are running Vista or Linux, to get the most out of your system you have to learn a bit about it and be willing to change/play with some settings - and don't forget to do backups.

just my opinions, ymmv,
cheers,
Frank


----------



## midget-boyd91 (29 Oct 2008)

Question:
Where did Microsoft learn to count?

1: Windows 3.1
2: Windows 95
3: Windows 98
4: Windows ME (still my favorite)
5: Windows 2000
6: Windows XP
7: Windows Vista
*8:* Windows *7*

Midget


----------



## Snafu-Bar (29 Oct 2008)

I think you mistook Windows 7 for what it is... Windows 8 


Cheers.

P.s there is no counting in microsoft other than the billions in scammed customers who had no choice but pay the BILL.... thankfully he's retired.  :threat:


----------



## Fusaki (29 Oct 2008)

I keep telling people but no one listens!

Ubuntu does what Windows does only in a more streamlined, stable, and free way. Well, except for games. But the cost of an Xbox 360 or a PS3 with a decent sized HDTV is comparable in price with a gaming computer, not to mention most people would own a TV anyways. And with PS3 or 360 you never have to worry about drivers and compatibility issues.

Most people are turned off by Linux because they think only computer geeks can make it work. To them I point out that I've installed Linux's Ubuntu distro on my girlfriend's computer, and she's loving it. She is NOT very computer savvy to say the least, but Ubuntu is very intuitive, and it suits her needs very well: a stable platform to do schoolwork and surf the net. 

And did I mention that it's 100% free and open source?


----------



## dapaterson (29 Oct 2008)

it may be free and open source, but it's getting as bloated as MS products - last time I looked at Ubuntu it demanded more RAM - on a system I wanted to install Linux on because it wasn't bleeding edge (256Mb for a small system should be sufficient, IMHO).

Feature creep and bloat infects open source as well...


----------



## PanaEng (30 Oct 2008)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> it may be free and open source, but it's getting as bloated as MS products - last time I looked at Ubuntu it demanded more RAM - on a system I wanted to install Linux on because it wasn't bleeding edge (256Mb for a small system should be sufficient, IMHO).
> 
> Feature creep and bloat infects open source as well...


Very true. But at least when you install Ubuntu or any other Linux distro you can make choices on what components to install - it is very modular, and if you find some part of it is bogging things down you can always remove or replace without crapping the whole thing out.

cheers,
Frank


----------



## Blakey (3 Nov 2008)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXC_qd8H6Q8


----------



## FoverF (3 Nov 2008)

I've been using Vista for about a month, and I want to kill it with an axe. 

My primary complaint so far (other than the memory hog issue) is that it downloads upgrades that I didn't ask for, and since it needs to shut down and restart to install these downloads, it automatically shuts itself down without saving anything on the desktop. Not, "these upgrades will be installed the next time you restart". But rather "Hope you weren't in the middle of anything b*tch, like giving a crucial power-point presentation at med school, because your computer has decided that these upgrades can't wait another four f**king minutes, and it's going to shut down _NOW_."


----------



## slowmode (3 Nov 2008)

When I built this PC i chose to keep windows Xp, my other PC has vista, not a huge fan of it. I'm waiting for Windows 7


----------



## Jorkapp (3 Nov 2008)

FoverF said:
			
		

> I've been using Vista for about a month, and I want to kill it with an axe.
> 
> My primary complaint so far (other than the memory hog issue) is that it downloads upgrades that I didn't ask for, and since it needs to shut down and restart to install these downloads, it automatically shuts itself down without saving anything on the desktop. Not, "these upgrades will be installed the next time you restart". But rather "Hope you weren't in the middle of anything b*tch, like giving a crucial power-point presentation at med school, because your computer has decided that these upgrades can't wait another four f**king minutes, and it's going to shut down _NOW_."



You can change that.

Start->Control Panel->Windows Update->Change Settings

Anything but "Install Updates Automatically" is what you're looking for.


----------



## Michael OLeary (3 Nov 2008)

AEC Kapp said:
			
		

> You can change that.
> 
> Start->Control Panel->Windows Update->Change Settings
> 
> Anything but "Install Updates Automatically" is what you're looking for.



But the underlying problem is Microsoft's arrogance in deciding on default settings that frustrate users.

My alternative to a new PC with Vista was a re-built Pentium IV with Ubuntu.

Microsoft may not be free, but you can choose to be free of Microsoft.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (3 Nov 2008)

Had another Vista user give me his laptop this weekend to 'upgrade' it back to XP Pro. Works faster and better than ever now.


----------



## observor 69 (18 Sep 2010)

Thought I would share my little experience with Windows Vista and IE 8
I while ago I mentioned that Vista plus Windows IE 8 on my "wireless" laptop would not let me open Army.ca topics. In fact it would say I was banned, rather disturbing.
Well a while ago I stumbled on some info about Google Chrome being quick and blah blah.
So in keeping up with the times I downloaded it and low and behold it allows me to open Army.Ca topics when using IE8.


----------

