My Brand New Laptop With Vista is Slower than my PIII

1mghz with 512memory and running Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon!

The laptop in question is a Dell XPS M1330 (xmas gift). It's not the Dell's fault it is the crappy VISTA...

simply because I've heard so many Vista horror stories. There's just something not right about me shunning new technology...thanks Microsoft :eyes:

Fortunately my laptop is still running strong

for some time. The desktop in question the PIII was purchased in 1999.

I had a PIII IBM that dated from around 99 and it lasted me up until the fall of 06 when the backlight burnt out on me. That's when I purchased my current laptop but even now I find it a bit of a struggle sometimes when I have a few programs running at the same time

A damn good one... got a great deal too as it was the last in stock (floor model).

And the power inverter went out. I still have it and considering buying the $75 inverter, cracking my computer open, fixing it and putting it back together myself.

My new R61i Thinkpad running Vista is a bear (Norton also has something do with it and it is gone later this weekend for ZoneAlarm and Avast).

... you may want to look into a mac. I was a die-hard windows user, but the computer I'm using now is a mac. For one, I was completely sick of Microsoft treating me like a mouth-breather and knew I didn't want to get a new computer with vista. So, I priced out PC laptops, and found that for what my requirements are (processor speed, chip set, memory, etc.), the mac is actually cheaper. I run parallels, which lets me run a complete copy of my old XP machine on the my mac - it's great.... though I should be doing a better job of phasing out all of the XP stuff, which was the plan. If I ever get around to doing that, I think I might make a move to linux. I have a friend who makes his living through various computer/internets gobbledygook who swears by it.

(mainly kids) to use and throw on XP or Linux... This is the first 'new' computer I have had since 1999 (the Dell laptop that is).

Even then, crap OS or not, everyone uses a computer for the applications.

As any Mac made within a respectable period of time is based on (drum roll) Intel architecture, anyone buying a "Mac" is buying an overpriced, overhyped PC with extra disk eating garbage on it too. Case in point: "Parallels". Nobody should need two operating systems on their PC in separate partitions; the concept of virtualization more for servers or people testing applications.

That's why I tried Linux (1) (edited to remove inadvertent smilie), couldn't live with the slowness virtualization (2) provided when running Windows apps (3), so I went back to Windows.

(1) SuSE Linux 10.2, both 32- and 64-bit. 64-bit bit OS running vmware player MURDERED the performance of the guest client OS (never mind slowing down other 32-bit processes to the point it wasn't worth farting around with). My machine had 2GB at the time, higher end AMD processor at the time too.

(2) Win4Lin vs 3 and 4 (inexpensive but slow), and VMWare Workstation (faster but expensive) for Linux. I've even used Crossover Office, Cedega, and other means of manipulating WINE to get various Windows apps to work at appropriate speeds.

(3) PhotoImpact 10, Photoshop 7 - two graphics processing apps that took an obvious hit in a guest VM. Adobe Premier - forget it in virtualization. BTW: Didn't Adobe nix Mac support of Premiere a couple of years ago? MS Office ran fine under Vmware. but it doesn't use the CPU much. Server 2003? Fairly fluid. Again, for testing apps and OS configurations, or using apps with little CPU usage or run automated (e.g. e-mail servers), virtualization is a true boon. For end users with critical apps, daring to be different, forget it.

Do Macs still use one mouse button in conjunction with pressing one, two, or three keys on the keyboard?

in this thread - I didn't expect to actually read it and discover blatant bullshit.

#1 - Nobody should need two OSs on their PC in seperate partitions .... ? Well that statement alone is BS, but that's not where I have the problem. PARALLELS - wtf? So if you don't want/need it ... DON'T buy/install it!! Pretty fucking simple, no? Your "case in point" is bullshit at best, deliberate misrepresentation at worst.

Then you go on to discuss the shittiness of linux virtualization --- the very thing you just said NOBODY needs, and use that as an excuse to point out why linux sucks .... at running WINDOWS programs? (something by the way, that many people (not myself) have done successfully).

#2 Considering that Adobe Premier has Premier Pro for OS X (CS3)- with downloadable updates ... I'd say no, they didn't nix support for Macs a couple of years ago. It would also not make a lot of sense to do so since the best graphic work in the world is done on Macs. Macs ARE the standard for graphics.

#4 Macs have supported more than "single click" for a looooong time. Guess what? You can even go buy a mouse off the shelf, plug it in, and it WORKS. Shocking, I know. :eyes:


Know something else? Vista may not support everyones old windows programs EITHER - requiring them to be re-purchased.

Your anti-mac (INTEL! INTEL! SERIES!!!111! OMG!) tirade is tired. And inaccurate.

BTW - it's also my understanding that Macs run Windows better than many (most?) machines designed to run it.

I set up my brother at college on a new Macbook last fall, he is having no problems whatsoever with BootCamp running XP Home and OS X interacting with each other. There is some bug though in the Bootcamp drivers which refuse to run any game with the Intel 950 video chipset. Other 2D programs work fine but a hint of 3D and poof, down we go.

He clearly has a superior machine and while ThinkPads are the best Windows laptops out there hardware wise, MacBooks and MacBook Pros are superior.

FWIW - I have a 17" MBP, a 17" Toshiba laptop I still haven't "upgraded" to Vista, 2 desktops (that I have hooked up and use) one with Windows MCE and another with Vista Ultimate, and I work with/use FreeBSD and Linux every day.

I like them all. :D

For a 2 gig intel processor, 2 gigs of memory and a good hard drive, the macbook was considerably cheaper than a comparably spec'd asus laptop. There's also only one warranty to worry about if something breaks down, which is important to me, as I bought a laptop over a desk top because I travel regularly and need my computer close at hand.

A lot of the programs I have on XP wouldn't work on vista, and since I'll eventually have to replace them, I'd rather do it on a mac, since the mac is a cheaper machine. There are things I don't like about mac OS, but I don't hate it like I do vista. Mac definitely never tells me that the OS I've got installed on my machine was stolen and then tries to shut down my computer, for instance.

I would love to move to linux, but there just isn't support for the sort of programs I need on it.

I run either Mac OS X or Linux on my various computers. I've got Vista on a couple of others, and the poor things creak along like old P2s. Startup, shutdown, program load times, screen refreshes: everything is glacial.

My MacBook takes about 40 seconds to boot. My Vaio 650P takes 45 seconds to boot Ubuntu Linux. My ThinkPad T61 takes 2.5 minutes to boot Vista. Even then, it loads various services for about another minute.

The situation is repeated across the board.

I know Vista has tons of legacy support built in, but I really can't see the point of running all of it all the time.

It's pitiful

That'll speed it up AND make it work ever so much better.

I do it on a regular basis. I haven't failed yet... :shrug:

http://www.driver-soft.com/

AOL, MSM, Real Player, WMP, etc.

:(

but more than the speed are all the little Vista irritations...

:wow:


Try disabling the Aero interface... that might help things a bit.

upgrade the memory when I bought it. He said that Vista itself uses up all of the 512 memory, so trying to run any other programs would be real slow. I stubbornly refused to upgrade, thinking that a brand new machine should run accordingly. That lasted about two weeks, and I couldn't take it anymore. I upgraded to 1 gig and the difference was incredible. It runs a lot faster, still not as fast as my Acer XP, but much faster than before. My daughter can run her music and paint programs, AIM, and etc. without too much complaining!

Both HP.
The laptop was for my daughter and it was brutal on start up at first. I uninstalled and deleted all the garbage HP had put on it including Norton's, sample progrmas that we weren't ever going to use. Same with the desktop, also an HP Machine.
The laptop has 1gig of ram and the desktop 2.
Once I did that, I clenaed unnecessary files, defragged severeal times during the process and now both run fast and furious.

THen it gets faster. Vista plays video a fuckload faster than XP. I was watching the HD trailer for Batman 2 the other day, for the first time in HD, XP simply couldn't handle it, and it's the same computer.