noPCtoday Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 im gonna update my 5112 to 5219 after my 5112 is back to working. but iv been told that beta 2 has even more bug than beta1? is that true? cant belive it. :x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_I am Reptar Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 It's not beta2, it's beta1 refresh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoXY Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 beta..2...? There isn't a beta 2 mate...it's a Beta 1 refresh...Beta 2 is far off... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noPCtoday Posted September 19, 2005 Author Share Posted September 19, 2005 beta..2...? There isn't a beta 2 mate...it's a Beta 1 refresh...Beta 2 is far off... 586546221[/snapback] but see that 5219 screenshots post, on the right-bottom of screen, its says beta2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted September 19, 2005 Veteran Share Posted September 19, 2005 That's because it's from the beta 2 branch. But we're a few months from seeing the actual Beta 2 release. Its not either a refresh or beta 2. Its a build in between ... basically beta 1 with some things fixed plus a few extra features but for whatever reason its slightly buggier. I don't know why it says beta 2 but microsoft reps have emphasized over and over that its not beta 2. It is considered a Beta 1 Refresh. It says beta 2 because it's the part of the build tree that will become Beta 2 when it's done (and probably soon before that, it will be forked again). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjeeeboy Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 but see that 5219 screenshots post, on the right-bottom of screen, its says beta2 586546231[/snapback] Its not either a refresh or beta 2. Its a build in between ... basically beta 1 with some things fixed plus a few extra features but for whatever reason its slightly buggier. I don't know why it says beta 2 but microsoft reps have emphasized over and over that its not beta 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoXY Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 haha...no no...that's not beta 2...but for whatever reason it says that on the tag...that's the PDC05 Build which IS the Beta 1 refresh. If Beta 2 still worked and looked like build 5219, I'd be worried..:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P!P Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Yes it's a build between Beta 1 and Beta 2 but part of the early Beta 2 builds. This is in no way the final Beta 2 build. Besides, even if it was. It's still a beta. People seem to want everything Vista build to work perfectly. Don't expect a lot of the bugs to be fixed until the RCs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y_notm Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 The short of it is, 5219 is still very buggy, on par or worse with Beta 1 in terms of number of bugs (i've run into more the past few days on 5219 than I did in beta 1 AFAICR) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chavo Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 That's because it's from the beta 2 branch. But we're a few months from seeing the actual Beta 2 release.It is considered a Beta 1 Refresh. It says beta 2 because it's the part of the build tree that will become Beta 2 when it's done (and probably soon before that, it will be forked again). 586546240[/snapback] I would guess from the tone of this guy's post and his overall lack of a clue, that he has no idea what you just said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kr0z Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Yes I have found far more bugs in the 5219 build than in Beta 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cropcircles Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 We'll as NR said the build is not for branding software at this point but for the developers, code guys to work on drivers and compatible integration. Its basicly a crap shoot to see what will take and what won't in regards to forcing software into it. A program that might install and work correctly for psychoticpickle or NetRyder might not do so on my rig. I would agree also with psychoticpickle as there are as many if not more bugs in 5219, however as an end user my bugs are insignificant if they are based on installation errors of software programs not intended to be installed on this pre-beta 1 refresh beta 2 model. :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeR Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 anyone have that wallpaper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NienorGT Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 I will more say that Build 5219 is a Pre-Beta2... It's not Beta2 since Beta2 will (or SHOULD be public...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ev0| Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 I found 5219 to be more stable and less bugs than beta1, which was really unstable for me. It's also a lot more fun build since it has so many more features. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nautiqueskier Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 I think the difference between Beta 1 and the Pre-Beta 2 builds are that when they forked the current Vista code, they put some effort into making Beta 1 a stable release. Sure it had bugs but most of them were insignificant. With the Beta Refresh (5219), I think less time went into working out the bugs then in Beta 1. I still haven't gotten static IP's working, half my drivers time out before installing, the start menu doesn't sort folders to the top (though you can manually do this) and IE7 uses about 90MB of ram, making it a little slow, especially with PNG's (which cease to work if the Shockwave plugin is enabled) But I find Build 5219 far more interesting and usable for 80% of the work I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lasker Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 refresh or not, I tested out Vista 5219 and is really buggy as the first beta 1, is still a lot of problems in it, my processor without to open or do anything is 100% of use, they need work a lot to fix it, I will wait until Vista became RTM version, I really di not see anything great other than new icons but is still buggy as Longhorn 4076 :sleep: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+chorpeac MVC Posted September 19, 2005 MVC Share Posted September 19, 2005 I definitely found the 5219 was slow as heck....still very buggy...and not optimized. I can't wait to see how much better beta 2 should be IMO...you are better off just saving your time and looking at pictures from pre-beta2 versions. When beta 2 comes out then install it on your system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolslacker Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 According to Bill Gates, "5219" is pre Beta 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xUnix Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 i think this pre-beta 2 is slower in my computer than beta 1.... Specially regarding the disk access... :crazy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scakesence Posted September 19, 2005 Share Posted September 19, 2005 Using the default drivers that come with the Iso ( no glass effects ) 5219 runs a lot faster and smoother than B1, plus like we all know, it has a lot more features. Now, when I use the LDDM drivers from nVidia the performance goes to hell. But that's because the LDDM alpha drivers are in simple words, crap. Hell, most of nvidia's driver have been crap the past year :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Live Veteran Posted September 19, 2005 Veteran Share Posted September 19, 2005 5219 is SUPPOSED to be less stable than Beta 1. Beta 1 was polished up over a period of weeks to make it suitable for more widespread use. 5219 is an interim build, and while it was modified for the PDC release very slightly, it wasn't tested or prepared in the way that a Beta is. At this point in Vista's development, new code and new features are being merged into the Beta 2 codebase almost every day. This means it isn't a particularly good time to be running current builds. By the time beta 2 rolls around, things should be running much smoother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ev0| Posted September 21, 2005 Share Posted September 21, 2005 Using the default drivers that come with the Iso ( no glass effects ) 5219 runs a lot faster and smoother than B1, plus like we all know, it has a lot more features. Now, when I use the LDDM drivers from nVidia the performance goes to hell. But that's because the LDDM alpha drivers are in simple words, crap.Hell, most of nvidia's driver have been crap the past year :D 586549038[/snapback] Yeah this is true unfortunately. What happened Nvidia ? :disappointed: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts