Vista SP1 will be stability and reliability, not performance

The problem is one of the major issues with Vista is performance...

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes: Will Vista SP1 and how this won't bring any relief to those who find Vista a bit slow or sluggish? Not really, but then again service packs aren't about performance increases; they're about reliability and stability.

I've seen a lot of service packs in my time. Windows 95 and ME both got one service pack, NT 4.0 saw six, Windows 2000 had four and XP has so far seen two. But what I don't remember regarding any of these service packs is installing it onto a system and then seeing any significant boost in performance. Service packs don't really work that way. Sure, you'll feel specific improvements as a result of some of the tweaks and fixes contained in the service pack, and you might feel the benefit of having your operating system refreshed by loading the service pack onto it, but a service pack should not be looked upon as a performance upgrade. If your system can't run an OS, what it needs is upgrading or replacing, not the application of a service pack.

View: Full Article @ ZDNet Blogs

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Idiot crooks snared by Facebook accounts

Next Story

Hackers will feed on Vista in 2008, says McAfee

16 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I agree that the memory use in Vista is necessary as well. I have a system maxed out at 4 GB on Vista Premium 32-bit and it's very smooth and responsive. When I run the same concurrent apps on my Vista boot as compared to my XP boot, the response feels about the same.

SP1 wasn't supposed to increase performance. They are just taking anything they can find and making it the negative side of things, as usual.

If people would stop running it on antique hardware, or buying systems with 512MB or 1GB of ram with Vista pre-loaded this would be fine.

You guys DO realize, 2 GB of ram is like $50 nowadays.

And that means the difference in most of these systems from, slow hard-drive thrashing POS to fast and responsive.

And don't start with the crap about "Vista uses a lot of ram for no reason".

Using RAM is a good thing. Why would you want a Ferrari and just disable 8 of the 12 cylinders. That makes no sense.

Let the OS allocate and prefetch data into the ram so it isn't being wasted, and then everything responds quicker.

Seriously man! I hear all these idiots saying "It's a memory hog" and such and it makes me want to slap them in the face, cause they obviously have no clue what the hell they're talking about. What the heck about you going to do with all that spare RAM? Stare at it? And don't even say the spare is for applications because the applications RAM uses less when the system uses more.

If you want stability and reliability switch to Ubuntu and you get to keep your equipment and get the same features of Vista without the many, many, many problems in Vista......

Foub said,
If you want stability and reliability switch to Ubuntu and you get to keep your equipment and get the same features of Vista without the many, many, many problems in Vista......

Problems like applications and device drivers. Noone needs those..

hahahaha.... you funny!

I'd rather use Windows 95 than Ubuntu.... I'd say they rate the same in terms of stuff missing from XP or Vista.

Ubuntu is dreadful.

Foub said,
If you want stability and reliability switch to Ubuntu and you get to keep your equipment and get the same features of Vista without the many, many, many problems in Vista......

Also I dont like using the command line all the time. Ubuntu insisted I use the command line to install things like the nvidia video drivers.

Foub said,
If you want stability and reliability switch to Ubuntu and you get to keep your equipment and get the same features of Vista without the many, many, many problems in Vista......

Yeah, switch to Ubuntu so I can play games? Yeah, that'll happen!

If your system can’t run an OS, what it needs is upgrading or replacing, not the application of a service pack.

Oh really? So explain "Designed for Windows Vista" systems running like cr*p then...

hentaiboy said,

Oh really? So explain "Designed for Windows Vista" systems running like cr*p then...


Simple: Microsoft lies a lot about the system requirements for their OS. I've only known that since Windows 95 came out. Were have you been?