Random Vista Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Software' started by JK2447, Dec 2, 2009.

  1. dmarsh
    Honorary Member 500 Likes Award

    dmarsh Petabyte Poster

    4,305
    503
    259
    I have multiple copies of Vista, its fully patched, its on modern hardware, I'm sorry it still sucks. No I don't read OS blogs in general, the only reason I read anything about Vista was to try to find out ways to make it suck less !

    So yes there may be issues with blogging, but thats not the reason why Vista is hated nor is it simply poor driver support, or bugs solely existing for early adopters which were fixed in SP1, etc.

    The OS takes too long to boot to a usable state, I see a spinning blue disc too often, along with modal functionality, I see disk activity too often.

    These are unacceptable for a modern laptop OS. Too much disk I/O kills battery life. Long boots make using a laptop a pain, shutdown can also be slow. IE8 also seems to have issues, often a page will refuse to load until a new browser is opened.

    A modern multi-tasking OS should absolutly not require you to stop all actions because windows is :-

    a. Scanning a folder
    b. Scanning for control panel extensions
    c. Deleting a small file
    d. Moving a small file
    e. Insert any basic action here...

    All round performance in Vista is poor, that is the issue.

    There also seems a strange issue where a default route of 0.0.0.0 gets added to the routing table, requiring you to delete it.

    Many big features touted for Vista were also dropped like WinFS, we are still on a filesystem from 1993 !

    This has people scrabling to figure out how many services/features they can disable to try to get back some performance. Vista promised little over XP anyway, by the time you turn off all the new features, just what exactly is the point ?
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
  2. BosonMichael
    Honorary Member Highly Decorated Member Award 500 Likes Award

    BosonMichael Yottabyte Poster

    19,183
    500
    414
    I would agree with you if that happened on every computer. But it doesn't.

    And it doesn't, particularly if you have a multi-core computer. Again, if that happened on every computer, I would agree with you. But it doesn't happen on every computer.

    I'm not saying you don't have those problems on your computer... you obviously do. I'm just saying that you are quick to lay the blame at Vista's feet. Vista ain't perfect - if it were, it wouldn't have badly needed two SPs. But what you say is Microsoft's fault might not necessarily be so. Could be your hardware. Could be the apps you've installed. And it COULD be Vista. But everyone is quick to automatically assume it's Vista's fault, despite the fact that many people don't experience the problems you are having.

    Why in the world would you want to delete the route to the default gateway? :blink That's not a "strange issue"... that's what a default gateway is for!

    On this, we can agree. I haven't upgraded my XP box to Vista for this very reason.
     
    Certifications: CISSP, MCSE+I, MCSE: Security, MCSE: Messaging, MCDST, MCDBA, MCTS, OCP, CCNP, CCDP, CCNA Security, CCNA Voice, CNE, SCSA, Security+, Linux+, Server+, Network+, A+
    WIP: Just about everything!
  3. dmarsh
    Honorary Member 500 Likes Award

    dmarsh Petabyte Poster

    4,305
    503
    259
    Yes, but also based on your definition we would never be able to put anything on an OS unless it happened on every computer. I can't speak for everyone, I have two machines one Vista 32 bit one Vista 64 bit, neither is great, the installed software on both machines has changed during normal use over time.

    I have tried multiple AV's to see if that is the issue, I have created performance logs, I have run SysInternals ProcessExplorer, I have disabled certain services like Search indexing, Volume Shadow Copy, Readyboost etc.

    Both machines are Intel based chipsets and processors and multicore, both have 3 GB+ of memory, again you are making assumptions.

    Nobody can use an OS in isolation, I need drivers and a few apps, I'm sure a few issues aren't entirely MS's fault, but I'm also pretty sure many of them are.

    For a start the machines are both dual boot, Linux runs fine. The issues I described are also known Vista issues that have been widely reported.

    I can't comment for other people and I don't try to, the fact that myself and others report the same issues to me indicates that there are indeed issues. Just because you don't see an issue doesn't mean that is does not exist, also some people might find a spinning blue circle for 10+ seconds and no ability to do anything acceptable, I don't.


    After hibernation Vista networking often breaks, the only fix seems to be to delete route 0.0.0.0 and do ipconfig /release and then ipconfig /renew. I'm not a networking expert, google the issue, it exists, maybe this workaround is inelegant. In which case why does it happen and what else should I be doing ?

    Great to agree for once, care to comment why you are so pro on Vista certs when you're not pro on the OS ?
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
  4. BosonMichael
    Honorary Member Highly Decorated Member Award 500 Likes Award

    BosonMichael Yottabyte Poster

    19,183
    500
    414
    Again, I'm not saying Vista isn't the issue. I'm simply saying that those issues don't happen on a large number of computers out there, including all the ones I've administered/built. Why is that? Serious question... because I don't know the answer definitively. That's why I'm hesitant to jump on the bandwagon to blame the OS... because the OS has worked just fine for me.

    It's strange... the majority of complaints I hear about Vista are from techs. Home users rarely complain about Vista.

    Actually, if you reread, I make no assumptions at all. In fact, I said, "Could be your hardware. Could be the apps you've installed. And it COULD be Vista." Seems you are the only one making assumptions - that it's Vista's fault.

    Never said you had to use an OS in isolation. Many people don't and have experienced no problems.

    That's fine... but Linux uses different drivers.

    Sure, those "issues" have been "widely reported"... but again, is it the fault of the OS? Quick to assume.

    And just because you see an issue doesn't automatically mean it's Vista's fault. :D

    You're not understanding what I'm saying, are you?

    Come on, D. Hibernation hasn't worked right since they introduced it. It didn't work in XP, and it didn't work in Vista. Any technical admin worth two bits knows to turn that crap off. :rolleyes:

    Eh? Who said I was pro on Vista certs? For the record, I generally recommend that people pursue the XP exams (70-270, 70-271, and 70-272) because that's the predominant OS out there. Do a search and see for yourself - I rarely recommend the MCTS: Vista.

    Looks like you're trying to insinuate that I have something to gain by promoting Vista certs. FAIL. :rolleyes:

    And who said I wasn't pro on the OS? I think Vista works just fine, depending on your hardware and software. The problem is that many hardware vendors and software developers weren't ready for Vista. And that can't be debated - they simply weren't ready for the kernel changes. Many are ready now with W7 because they've had a few years to get it right.

    The only reason why I don't install Vista on my personal boxen is because, as I said, I don't need any of the features that Vista adds. That doesn't make me anti-Vista any more than not having a Honda makes me anti-Honda. :rolleyes:
     
    Certifications: CISSP, MCSE+I, MCSE: Security, MCSE: Messaging, MCDST, MCDBA, MCTS, OCP, CCNP, CCDP, CCNA Security, CCNA Voice, CNE, SCSA, Security+, Linux+, Server+, Network+, A+
    WIP: Just about everything!
  5. dmarsh
    Honorary Member 500 Likes Award

    dmarsh Petabyte Poster

    4,305
    503
    259
    I can't tell you why you think your installs worked, anymore than you can tell em why mine or many others didn't. I have asked around and many people have similar complaints to me in real life as well as on the internet.

    Maybe they are just used to putting up with whatever MS sends them or assume that its normal behaviour ?

    Yes its very hard to be sure but I'd put the blame on poor OS design for services that run too agressively, a few bad drivers and bad applications.

    They may not have noticed or not reported problems, it does not necessarilly mean they don't have them.

    Yes I know that, I've coded parts of OS's, my point was that its not my hardware.

    You seem quick to clear Vista...

    Yes I am, read my post it says some issues may be non Vista related, but many were and probably still are.

    Roll your eyes all you like and blame the users, why offer a feature that does not work ? It happens most often on hibernation on my machine, it may happen in other circumstances. I had left hibernation on as booting and shutdown also takes a long time on Vista, I rarely used it, it would be a nice option on a laptop, if only it worked reliably, why shouldn't a user expect a product they paid for to work ? For the record I never choose to hibernate because I know its unreliable, but closing the lid of used to hibernate my machine, yes I've now just changed the power options to stop this. Also I've disabled IPv6 on my network stack, if all this stuff doesn't work and isn't needed by most users why install and enable it by default ?

    I mean why on earth do I need an automatic tablet PC service started on a non tablet PC ? Why can't the installer figure this out ?

    Multiple times you have recommended taking Vista certifications to those who already have XP certifications, its on this very forum, use the search.

    I have no idea why you do it, thats why I asked the question...

    Fair point, but as everyone knows, ultimately driver problems will get blamed on an OS as its VERY hard for end users to determine where the blame lies. I have also regularly updated all my drivers for Vista on both machines, some video glitches and bluescreens went after some early graphics driver updates. Otherwise the core issues of bad performance remain. The processes appearing to take up the most time and doing the disk access are windows processes, sure it could still be third party drivers runnning in that processes time slice, but the odds are getting pretty narrow...

    You agreed that the product was largely pointless, if the products pointless then surely so is the certification ?
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
  6. BosonMichael
    Honorary Member Highly Decorated Member Award 500 Likes Award

    BosonMichael Yottabyte Poster

    19,183
    500
    414
    My point is... how can you unquestionably assume that it's Vista's fault?

    Perhaps. My point is... they're still buying Vista, and they're not complaining like the tech bloggers are.

    Drivers aren't the responsibility of the OS vendor, bro. Nor are applications (other than the apps that come native with Vista).

    If you don't like the services, the solution is simple! Turn them off! :biggrin

    Your complaints are about performance, aren't they? If they haven't noticed anything wrong, then performance is not a problem, is it? :biggrin If this were a "lack of security" problem, then I'd agree with you.

    Then if you know that, then why would installing Linux on the same computer be proof that the problems are Vista's fault? Different drivers means it could be the fault of a bad Windows driver. And, like I said, drivers are not the responsibility of the OS vendor.

    Not clearing Vista at all. Again, I'm not assuming it is Vista's fault as you do. I'm saying it COULD be other things. And it COULD be Vista. You're saying it's definitely Vista.

    You fail at logical discussion, by the way.

    Where did I blame the users? :blink Dude, you have a bad habit of putting words in people's mouths! :biggrin

    Why offer a feature that does not work? Good question! Microsoft has dropped the ball on hibernation for years. Still, that's not a problem unique to Vista; it didn't work before Vista. I'd be surprised to see it work in W7. I'm not betting on it.

    So... just because I recommend Vista certifications once for every 10+ times I recommend XP certifications, that makes me "so pro on Vista certs"?

    To those who already have XP certifications, it makes logical sense to pursue Vista afterwards, does it not? Businesses use Vista, though to a far lesser degree than XP. But I'd recommend the Vista certs only for those who have XP; otherwise, I wouldn't recommend pursuing Vista certifications.

    So, please, don't make me out to be something I'm not. And I *really* don't need the search to know what I've said each and every day on this forum. :p Thanks, though! :rolleyes:

    Thus, the FAIL... which is quickly turning into an EPIC FAIL. Keep digging, D.

    YES!!! Finally! That's been my whole point all along, D!!! The reason people whine and moan and complain about Vista is likely because of bad driver problems! You know... the ones I mentioned repeatedly in this thread...

    That said, it didn't take W7 for Microsoft to realize that. They realized that before they released Vista:

    Microsoft: Hey, hardware manufacturers and app devs. We're going to change the way that Windows allows access to the kernel when we release Vista. Get ready for it.
    Devs: Ahahahha! That's a good one! How can we make our stuff work correctly if we can't have
    Microsoft: Just warning you, guys. You might want to be ready.
    Devs: Pffft. This is just another one of those empty warnings like the ones you gave us when you said you were cutting off 16-bit app compatibility and 32-bit app compatibility!
    Microsoft: Ooookay... but don't say we didn't tell you.
    Users: Waaaaaah! Vista sucks! It's all Microsoft's fault!
    Microsoft: Ah, crap. Thanks a lot, devs... :dry

    Aaaaand... there you go again. I never said that Vista was pointless. I said I had no desire to install it because *I* don't need any of Vista's new features on my home computers. I don't need Aero, Media Center, Windows Mail, the Sidebar, Sync Center, Network and Sharing Center, Reliability and Performance Monitor, Meeting Space, CardSpace, Easy Transfer, BitLocker, Defender, UAC, or multiple local GPOs (MLGPOs). But other people find them useful. Just because *I* don't need a product doesn't mean the product is pointless.

    If you believe that, then you don't understand the point of certification. Certification isn't something you get when there's something you like using... certification is something you get to let an employer know what you have experience supporting. And since some businesses DID decide to buy Vista PCs, businesses need people who know how to support it. Thus, the certification is useful. Not as useful as the XP certifications, but useful nonetheless.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
    Certifications: CISSP, MCSE+I, MCSE: Security, MCSE: Messaging, MCDST, MCDBA, MCTS, OCP, CCNP, CCDP, CCNA Security, CCNA Voice, CNE, SCSA, Security+, Linux+, Server+, Network+, A+
    WIP: Just about everything!
  7. dmarsh
    Honorary Member 500 Likes Award

    dmarsh Petabyte Poster

    4,305
    503
    259
    Read my post, I never said that, I said that the odds are in favour of it being Vista processes.

    Some people put up with some very strange stuff, I've worked in companies where 2000+ desktops waste half the day because of Radia set up by administartors and nobody compains, other places had apps so badly written they took 25+ minutes to start. What some people are prepared to put up with is not a good measure of performance

    A single second added on a Vista boot could add up to billions of man hours worldwide. Steve Jobs famously realised this when he ran the Apple II team.

    On platforms that control the hardware like Apple or Sony they are, sure Microsoft can't control everything, but they do have a responsibility to inform the driver developers, or possibly be conservative on changes to the driver model. Microsoft realised all this a long time back yes, thats why all the backward compatible stuff in windows over the years, thats why the WHQL stuff and driver signing too.

    I already had turned many off, now I'm being more agressive, trouble is its not always possible in advance to know all services I may ever need and some bugs caused by disabling services can be hard to track.

    Ok so heres a service guide for Vista :-

    http://www.blackviper.com/WinVista/servicecfg.htm

    Like I said I still don't see why half these services are defaulted to on by the installer.

    You said I might have duff hardware, my point was I don't have duff hardware, I know basic windows OS design/interals and what a driver is thankyou.

    No I did not, merely that some of it was most likely Vista.

    You must be more logical then because you insult me, or because you chose to misinterpret me ? This from the man that said RNA creation was impossible too ? Your logical discussion seemed to fail then too no ?

    You said only poor admins use hibernate, my point was its not the consumers (admin/user) fault the product has a feature that does not work, or that a seemingly related bug exists. Should users disable everything that might have a bug ?

    Yes it does, you must think they are a good certification to have otherwise you would not reccomend them ?

    No I don't think so, because its quite likely that Vista will be on virtually no corporate desktops within 2 years, spending a few months of precious spare time taking that particular certification is therefore likely wasted effort.

    No I don't think that, as mentioned all my drivers have now had multiple updates, yes there could still be driver issues, but I think its unlikely that that is the issue behind the performance issues. I think its all the extra crud in Vista, sure half of that can be turned off through services, but the average user ideally shouldn't have to do that just to retain the same performance as a default XP install.

    Read my previous points, I do have a similar view of certification to you, but I don't see any businesses with Vista on their desktops, and I believe if there are any that do they will likely be on W7 by the end of 2010, this would make the certifications value very short lived.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2009
  8. BosonMichael
    Honorary Member Highly Decorated Member Award 500 Likes Award

    BosonMichael Yottabyte Poster

    19,183
    500
    414
    ...none of which relates to the discussion at hand.

    They did. Microsoft told them exactly what they were going to do.

    The reason they weren't "conservative on changes" is because you either allow kernel access or you don't. If you're going to secure the kernel, you don't allow the access. Either you're secure or you're not - there's no "partial" fix. It's like being partially pregnant... you either are or you aren't.

    At some point, they had to bite that bullet if they wanted Vista's kernel to be secure. I guess they could have not implemented that change. Then we'd have people whining about how poor security is on Vista. :rolleyes:

    Good question. But the fix is easy: those that can be disabled, disable them - simple as that.

    Didn't say you had "duff hardware". I said you might have hardware that was made by a vendor who created a duff driver. I don't know what kind of hardware you have, so I'd have no way of knowing.

    I'm just calling your logical arguments as I see them. I don't need to insult you to point out that your logical arguments are flawed. Nor do I need to misdirect into another thread that is wholly unrelated.

    I don't believe I said that RNA creation was impossible. Again, you're either putting words in my mouth, misinterpreting my words, or deliberately misreading context. But none of that discussion is relevant to this thread.

    Yep. Only admins who don't know any better use hibernate. When they finally discover it's broken, good admins disable it throughout their domain.

    Should users disable everything that HAS (not might have) a bug? Sure. Why not? Is it their responsibility to? No... but if they whine because it doesn't work, I'll agree with them that it doesn't work and tell them not to use it. In fact, I did exactly that just this week.

    I never said it was an admin's fault or a user's fault that the bug exists. That's squarely Microsoft's fault, and I was pretty clear about that. Hey, man, you should be tickled that I'm slamming Microsoft about hibernation. That's a feature that should work that has never worked right. Really, D, it sounds like you're fighting me just for the sake of fighting me. I disagree with you and you fight me, and I agree with you that something in Vista IS broken, and you fight me then too! :rolleyes:

    They're good to have because companies have implemented Vista - not to the degree XP has, so that's why I always recommend XP first. When the XP certs retire, I will likely advocate getting certifications on whatever workstation OSes are used by companies at the time. If Vista's still being used, I'll advocate that. If W7, then I'll advocate that as well. Doesn't matter if I think the OS is good or not... it's what companies implement that matters. Shoot, if companies were still implementing NetWare, I'd recommend that, and I don't care much for NetWare.

    I disagree. I saw 98 on desktops for years after XP was implemented, and even a few Me boxes as well. Companies aren't going to ditch Vista just because W7 is out. Nor are they going to ditch XP all-of-a-sudden just because W7 is out.

    At the end of 2011, we'll see who is right. Then again, as you mention below, you can't see any companies with Vista NOW, so you're not likely to see them in 2011 either.

    If they don't want to get Vista certified, that's fine - doesn't matter to me. But someone with XP, Vista, and W7 certs will look more attractive to an employer than someone with just XP and W7 certs... and even more so if an employer has ANY Vista boxes. And that's the purpose of certification - making you look attractive to employers.

    There are plenty of sites out there that have documented benchmarks showing a decrease in speed from XP to Vista of about 5-10% (with a couple sites saying it was as high as 15%). And that's upon release; the service packs supposedly made that much better.

    Not saying your systems aren't slow. I'm just repeating what those sites benchmarked. If you don't believe me, see for yourself, and argue to them. That's not my monkey.

    Considering this discussion, I seriously doubt that. :)

    No, you wouldn't see them. You're not an admin. You're a programmer.

    On the other hand, I see plenty of businesses with Vista on their desktops, and considering I don't do as much consulting as I did in the past, you'd think I'd have to search hard to find them. But I don't have to - they're out there... in just about every company that's bought a new computer in the last 2 years.

    The overwhelming majority of businesses simply don't update desktop OSes like you seem to believe they do. They buy a PC, use it until it doesn't work any more - typically as many years as they can squeeze out of it - and replace it with a new PC with whatever is the OS du jour. The "old stuff" is still out there. I adminned my last NT box in 2006. I believe my last employer still hasn't retired the last of their 2000 workstations, and if they have, then they've been replaced with... Vista.

    Whether you or I like Vista or not, Vista's still going to be lurking around for a while. Not in large numbers, no - I'm pretty sure that W7 will overtake Vista before W7 (or something else) overtakes XP. But it'll still be out there, and companies will still need admins that know how to administer it... particularly if it's as broken as you say it is! :biggrin
     
    Certifications: CISSP, MCSE+I, MCSE: Security, MCSE: Messaging, MCDST, MCDBA, MCTS, OCP, CCNP, CCDP, CCNA Security, CCNA Voice, CNE, SCSA, Security+, Linux+, Server+, Network+, A+
    WIP: Just about everything!
  9. JK2447
    Highly Decorated Member Award 500 Likes Award

    JK2447 Petabyte Poster Administrator Premium Member

    Top Poster
    of the Month

    7,191
    945
    318
    Some interesting points have been raised. Does anyone here work for a company who have rolled out Vista? I'd be interested to hear your opinions on performance and general issues in a production environment.

    I work in a solely XP client environment but a growing number of our support staff are upgrading to Vista purely so that if we do take on a contract where the customer has rolled out Vista, they will be more familiar with it.

    I'm of the opinion that as nerds, it can float some peoples boats to have more features than they need. Aero for instance, which consumes resources, you don't 'need' it, but it looks good, and when you are sat in front of a screen all day, some admins want their OS to look a bit different to the standard image rolled out across the company (I have XP on my work laptop).
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2009
    Certifications: VCP4, 5, 6, 6.5, 6.7, 7, 8, VCAP DCV Design, VMConAWS Skill, Google Cloud Digital Leader, BSc (Hons), HND IT, HND Computing, ITIL-F, MBCS CITP, MCP (270,290,291,293,294,298,299,410,411,412) MCTS (401,620,624,652) MCSA:Security, MCSE: Security, Security+, CPTS, CCA (XenApp6.5), MCSA 2012, VSP, VTSP
    WIP: Google Cloud Certs

Share This Page

Loading...
  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.