| Main > Main Forum |
| Vista64 and driver compatibility |
| << < (4/8) > >> |
| protokatie:
Not to jump into some fight or anything, but I have vista and one gig of RAM. Here is my basic experience with it: Cons: Gets slow when I have more than a handfull of apps open (1 GIG isnt really enough for Vista Home Premium) Doesnt let unregistered programs write to the disc (Couldnt get Code::Blocks or even M$ VC++ to compile anything because the OS wasnt allowing access to the files they needed {Even when run in admin mode}) Pros: My computer has crashed ONCE since I have had this machine (A full year) and it wasnt due to the OS (all other "near crashes" were caught by the OS, and only made the program quit out.) I hooked an incomaptable monitor to the machine (something from like 1992) and it caused the display driver to crash, as soon as that happened (I have a dual monitor system) vista decided to repair the fault (it brought my main screen back up, and disabled the incompatable one). This is without it rebooting or anything, it also brought up a nifty window telling me what happened and what windows did to "fix" it. Anyways, for any OS, there are going to be people who like it and those who hate it. I got my computer around the time Vista came out and it had more than its share fare of quirks, but most of them seem to have settled down. For those of you having incompatibility issues, stick with XP, for those who dont have any problems with Vista, stick with vista. I Dont personally "Like" vista, but this is the only computer I have had that has less than 1 crash per year, so I cant say I dislike it. Food for thought anyways. |
| taz-nz:
I'm going try and reply without turning this into any more of a pissing match than it already has, so here goes. --- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on January 29, 2008, 03:45:14 pm ---No I'm quoting respected sources from respected magazines. But of course you know better and would rather rant and jump up and down like some demented dingo than to actually have a civil conversation. I'm entitled to my personal opinion of Vista and my opinion of it is that right now it stinks! and needs way more time before it's stable and viable for use in an arcade cabinet. --- End quote --- I was in a rush to get the door this morning and my post was probably unnecessarily personal in it's nature, and for that I apologise. I would have had little issue with your post if you had made it clear that it was your opionions, rather than stating them as fact. Quoting a third party source without any kind of link to the source is little more than stating one own opinion in my eyes. You have a right to your a opinions, but when you jump on someone that asked a simple question it's out of order in my book. You basically attacked the first two posters for using Vista, by asking "Why!! ....", like they were stupid or something, and then go on to attack Vista without offer any useful alternative option they might use, you first post was little more than a rant. --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 29, 2008, 02:50:43 pm ---you've been shot down by Aaron on this very forum for these kinds of statement and you still make them. --- End quote --- --- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on January 29, 2008, 03:45:14 pm ---Sorry..... No idea what you're talking about there. Perhaps you'd care to illuminate me as to when that occurred and relating to what exactly?? --- End quote --- Since you asked, in this thread: http://forum.arcadecontrols.com/index.php?topic=75090.0 --- Quote from: AaronGiles on January 04, 2008, 09:30:58 pm --- --- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on January 04, 2008, 08:59:39 pm ---[OK But there are still driver issues..... Not to mention the constant crashing and lockups of Vista itself. Until somebody writes some drivers for the Topgun and Guncon which actually work on there and Microsoft get to somewhere like second service pack on vista, it's a non starter. So I'd guess at least 12 to 24 months before it's even worth thinking about. --- End quote --- OK, let's cut the FUD. If you're going to beat up on Vista, then attack it for the things that are actually wrong with it (application compatibility issues, confusing interface changes, poor performance on low and mid-range machines), rather than for imagined "constant crashing and lockups". I don't see a lot of evidence for the latter, and it certainly is very far from my experience. In general, if you use modern hardware, the drivers are there and work fine. If you use older hardware, you may or may not have luck with compatible drivers, though most XP drivers will work fine if you are still using 32-bit Vista. Once you move to 64-bit, you absolutely should have modern hardware (within the last year or so) if you don't like to struggle with finding drivers. Given that the LCD Top Guns pre-date Vista, my suspicion is that the XP drivers work ok on 32-bit Vista, and that there are no 64-bit drivers, since many manufacturers didn't bother (and smaller ones still don't). --- End quote --- You never replied to his post, so it's possible you never saw it. --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 29, 2008, 02:50:43 pm ---Vista is bloated no question about it, but that doesn't make it slow, just big, and there is vLite for that now. Give Vista 2gb of ram and 20gb of HDD space and a modern CPU and it goes like the snot. --- End quote --- --- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on January 29, 2008, 03:45:14 pm ---Ermmm Sorry no logic whatsoever in that statement.... It certainly does make it slow. It chews up so much in system resources that everything else can grind to a halt sometimes. --- End quote --- Let me clarify, Vista has a huge install foot print of 15gb compare to XP Pro's 1.5gb, Vista also runs many more background tasks and services, that most of us have little use for in M.A.M.E, this can best be described as bloat, but given room to work vista is anything but slow. As most people here that would be looking to install Vista, will be doing so in a cabinet they will likely use something like vLite to reduces it's install size, and the power users can and will disable any number or services and system tasks they don't require to free up extra memory and CPU time, Vista in itself will not use up all the available system resource unless installed on a total under-spec'd computer. I've been running Vista64 ultimate in parallel with XP Pro for a little over four months at a guess and I've yet to see Vista grid to a halt any faster than XP, and in fact the only time I've managed to get either OS to come near to a complete stop is, by doing insanely complex CAD operations which Vista64 handles better. --- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on January 29, 2008, 03:45:14 pm ---Well given that you didn't bother to ask the specifications of the PC in question you make a lot of very dumb ass assumptions there, that it was running on some piece of junk. It wasn't! Packard Bell Gigabyte MB Intel Core 2 Duo Processor E4500 2.2GHz, 800MHz FSB, 2MB Cache Windows Vista (R) Home Premium 2GB Memory 360GB Hard Drive BTW I'd have trouble buying anything from WallMart.... I'm not in the wonderful US of A... --- End quote --- The WallMart PC comment was more of badly worded generalisation, than an assumption (I don't live in the USA either). I did presume since you said it came with Vista and you sent it back that it was a pre-built brand name box, and that since was unable to run vista stably that it was a cheap and rubbish one at that. A quick check of Packard Bell's UK website, and the only systems that matches those specs are two models in the imedia range. http://www.packardbell.co.uk/products/desktops/imedia/productgroup-28-46.html A quick check of the spec turns up images of very basic and heavily stripped motherboards, with either VIA & SIS chipsets, there goes your performance. Packard Bell refuses to post the specs of any of it's power supplies which leads me to believe it's the usual gutless piece of rubbish you'll find in any brand name box, and thus there goes your stability. The Hard drive also rings bells, being a model not listed on Seagates website, and be an odd ball size points to an OEM only drive which often contain half size platters (platters that are only usably on one side due to defects), this is another sign of a cost cutting by the manufacturer. A quick check of pricing on these system tells me you could easily build a similar, but better machine for the same money if not less. --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 29, 2008, 02:50:43 pm ---There is simply no better operating system to run the current versions of M.A.M.E. under than Vista 64bit, saying anything to the opposite is just putting your head in the sand and hoping that the world will stop spinning. --- End quote --- --- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on January 29, 2008, 03:45:14 pm ---So speaks the bastage son of Bill Gates...... You should apply for a job with Microsoft Publicity Department. I'm sure they need more blinkered fools who ignore all of the appalling failures, to sell the product. :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2: What you don't like is anybody daring to disagree with your opinion that Windows Vista is wonderful and a big bed of roses. --- End quote --- Now that comment this is just plan childish, I never said Vista was perfect, in fact I agreed that it was bloated and one should use vLite to slim it down. I in fact recommend must business users stick to XP Pro or to get Vista business and downgrade it to XP Pro until software & hardware manufacture sort out their Vista compatibility issues, Home users I tend to direct towards Vista Home Prem as it what they like and the media center function work a lot better than in XP MCE. I basically save recommending 64bit Vista to M.A.M.E. users and people running high end CAD and alike. There is no one perfect OS contrary to what some Apple & Linux users might think. --- Quote from: Fozzy The Bear on January 29, 2008, 03:45:14 pm ---Sorry! Don't agree with you. It has way too many problems right now. Maybee when they release Service Pack 2 or 3 for it I'll be better. But right now IMHO it's not good. I can't say that I liked XP either when it came out..... It took that to Service Pack 2 before it became really stable, service pack 3 cures a lot of other things that were wrong and speeds it up significantly. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear) --- End quote --- That's your opinion and you have your right to it, I've heavily tested M.A.M.E. and the best performance results all come from running it under 64bit Vista, I've posted results that prove this in the thread I included a link to in my original post, and I've had those results backed up by members of the Dev team and by members of this and other MAME forums. Until someone posts M.A.M.E. benchmarks for XP Pro 64bit, OSX or linux that better my result my opinion is in fact, fact! I've had no issue with lockups or crashes relating to using Vista, in fact the only time I've had Vista crash in four months is when my DVD-Writer was on it's way out, and XP crashed just as often until I replaced the Drive. Regards, Mark aka TAZ-NZ |
| Fozzy The Bear:
--- Quote from: taz-nz on January 30, 2008, 03:07:46 am ---I'm going try and reply without turning this into any more of a pissing match than it already has, so here goes. --- End quote --- I appreciate the sentiment, but it was YOU who started it!! I will refrain from personal comments or insults, because it doesn't do anybody any favours nor does it further any rational debate. --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 30, 2008, 03:07:46 am ---I was in a rush to get the door this morning and my post was probably unnecessarily personal in it's nature, and for that I apologise. I would have had little issue with your post if you had made it clear that it was your opionions, rather than stating them as fact. Quoting a third party source without any kind of link to the source is little more than stating one own opinion in my eyes.. --- End quote --- Your apology is accepted.... However I will respond to some of your points.... It's more than a bit difficult to link to printed paper sources.... but there are numerous reports in the respected press, that end up with exactly the same experiences as mine. The general consensus of opinion remains that Vista is a stop gap OS that will die the same way that Windows ME did. --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 30, 2008, 03:07:46 am ---You have a right to your a opinions, but when you jump on someone that asked a simple question it's out of order in my book. You basically attacked the first two posters for using Vista, by asking "Why!! ....", like they were stupid or something --- End quote --- I most certainly did not.... If you missinterpreted my first post, then that is hardly my fault. However if anyone believed that I was attacking them, then I apologise for that, it was certainly not the intention. Re: Aaron --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 29, 2008, 02:50:43 pm ---You never replied to his post, so it's possible you never saw it. --- End quote --- You're absolutely right that I never saw it..... I would have taken issue with a couple of points in it if I had. The LCD Topgun drivers certainly do not work well with Vista. Unusual for Aaron to be wrong about something. But then I guess we're all human. --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 29, 2008, 02:50:43 pm ---The WallMart PC comment was more of badly worded generalisation, than an assumption (I don't live in the USA either). I did presume since you said it came with Vista and you sent it back that it was a pre-built brand name box, and that since was unable to run vista stably that it was a cheap and rubbish one at that. --- End quote --- I appreciate your generalisation but don't apply generalisations to me! You used it to make assumptions that were less than accurate. I'm sure the PC manufacturer in question would be more than happy to discuss your claims that their product is rubbish. I personally don't think it was a bad spec. I do however appreciate your clarified definition of "rubbish".... Very interesting, given that that is how the majority of machines on the planet are sold. You are therefore suggesting that the majority of hardware sold in the world is defective before it even leaves the manufacturer. I'm sorry, but that is clearly not true. It would be more accurate to say that we've been dumped on by Microsoft, yet again, foisting an OS on us that doesn't work properly with the majority of hardware on the planet and has to be patched to hell just to get it to function. --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 29, 2008, 02:50:43 pm ---Now that comment this is just plan childish, I never said Vista was perfect, --- End quote --- You started the childish comments.... If you don't like it when I turn round and bite you after you attack me personally, instead of debating the actual points, then don't do it in the first place. --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 29, 2008, 02:50:43 pm ---That's your opinion and you have your right to it, --- End quote --- Glad we agree on that. --- Quote from: taz-nz on January 29, 2008, 02:50:43 pm ---I've had no issue with lockups or crashes relating to using Vista, in fact the only time I've had Vista crash in four months is when my DVD-Writer was on it's way out, and XP crashed just as often until I replaced the Drive. --- End quote --- Sorry Mark but that's simply not my experience of the OS. It's also not the experience of many respected technology journalists or their lab technicians or the readers of numerous publications who write to complain either. While it's impossible to link to paper articles I don't have the time to scan and post them all either. It caused me nightmares. To be honest I think that you shoot your own argument in the foot, when you advise people to use an illegal cut down version of Vista, if they are going to install it in an arcade cabinet. Why should anyone have to use a hacked up cut down version of an OS in order just to get it to run properly. That says a great deal for both Microsoft and Vista. The vast majority of users in the world, will NOT be using hacked up cut down versions. Why should they be suffering to the deference of Microsoft's wallet. In fact even the majority of people on here will NOT be using hacked up cut down versions, because the majority of users (even on here) buy a machine that IS an OEM Branded manufacturer unit with a pre install on it. Many people therefore quite rightly expect the goods they have paid for, to work when they get it out of the box, not have to be hacked down or patched to hell, just to get it to function properly. The largest numbers of sales for Vista, even to people on here ARE branded box shifter manufacturers. While you and I are perfectly capable of building a machine from scratch and not having inferior components as a result of our own picking and choosing, the majority of users, again, even on here, do not fall into that category and I also don't have the time to build a machine from scratch every time I need one, just to get the OS to work. The majority of people in the world buy Dell, Packard Bell, Acer, Gateway etc etc etc even the majority on here. So my original answer stands. While I don't in any way dispute your benchmarking results, which I found very interesting and informative. In fact I do thank you for taking the time to do all of that, your efforts are appreciated. I do however dispute the stability of this OS on the majority of hardware based on my own experience of it. Maybee when they release Service Pack 2 or 3 for it I'll be better and more stable. But right now IMHO it's not good, it's not right and it's not as stable as you claim, when run on the majority of the hardware it's supposed to run on. Best Regards, Julian (Fozzy The Bear) |
| Hoopz:
--- Quote from: bvicarious on January 29, 2008, 10:01:39 pm --- --- Quote from: HooPZ on January 29, 2008, 09:02:20 pm ---I know Firefox has a memory leak right now that hasn't been fixed yet. Not sure if that applies to the Vista version as well as XP, but its a known problem. --- End quote --- Well it certainly doesn't help that I have about 60 tabs open :P --- End quote --- ;D Now that's pretty funny. |
| Jdurg:
I'm going to put my foot into the fire here with my opinions on this matter. Fozzy - your posts have come across with a "You're a complete ---smurfing--- moron for using Vista. I know better than you so shut the hell up and listen to me." While that may not have been your intention, that is how I've interpreted it and perhaps others have as well. (Then again, it could just be your personality and no malice was intended). Again, just my interpretation. :cheers: The pre-built systems do use cheaper quality components, but in the past OSes haven't been as demanding on hardware as they are now. As time goes by, Operating Systems get more and more complex and require better and better hardware. I think with Vista we have finally caught up with the hardware in terms of the OS requirements and now the cheaper hardware parts are showing their faults more and more. The only way to "fix" this is to make an OS that isn't as extensive, has less functionality, and therefore can handle cheaper quality components. I will state that all reviews and articles I've read (paper or online) that have complained about Vista have done so with regards to the size of the OS and instability with non-standard programs or components. The thing is, that was the same thing that happened when XP came out. Also, vLite is NOT an illegal application. It's software designed to modify the installation of Vista. In NO WAY does it bypass any of the copy protection or activation requirements of Vista. In fact, if you try to use it on an illegal copy or a pre-activated copy of Vista it simply will not work. You MUST have a valid, legal copy of Vista in order to use vLite. (all the program does is remove the installation of components that you don't need but you won't necessarily know how to remove or where to remove it from). |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |