Just read this, about Vista - is it REALLY true?

[Mazza558]

Every 30 milliseconds Vista polls all the components in your computer with a huge 128-key encrypted code to determine that they have not been compromised by pirated content. The amount of CPU power that utilizes would run your entire PC a few years ago. Therefore even though you are forced to buy the latest and fastest type of CPU to run Vista, a significant slice of that computing ability is shaved off the top for Vista's 33-times-a-second paranoid polling. This resource overuse extends into devices as well. Graphics cards have to dedicate one or more rendering pipelines that were designed for delivering high quality video just to code and decode the constant 128-key poll. Vista users have found that between 10% and 50% of their total computing system power is used up by the Operating System alone, even without running a single application.

I didn't get a source, someone from another forum posted it. I simply can't imagine that this is true - surely no company would be this stupid.... either way, I've never heard it before.

EDIT: Aha, found the source http://hubpages.com/hub/All_The_Reasons_To_Not_Install_Vista

[LaRoza]

I think that is overblown, especially without a source.

Vista does monitor hardware for validation, but it doesn't constantly do it.

Although WGA is fragile, it isn't that paranoid I think.

[Lster]

I need a source before I can take this too seriously. ;) As LaRoza says:

Although WGA is fragile, it isn't that paranoid I think.

[Joeb454]

Running around 4 or 5 different app's on Vista right now, and I have ~ 8% CPU usage, and ~ 40-45% RAM usage.

So it's false basically ;)

[Mazza558]

Aha, found the source http://hubpages.com/hub/All_The_Reasons_To_Not_Install_Vista

[FranMichaels]

Original source, with proper citations

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

[ShodanjoDM]

googled for the keyword: Every "30 milliseconds" Vista polls

Beside the link above, I found this also:

http://www.grc.com/sn/SN-074.htm

Peter Gutmann on Vista DRM (interview)

Steve: Right. I was just going to say that the spec does require that software drivers at every 30 milliseconds, which is essentially 30 times per second, are going out and polling the hardware in order to maintain an intimate relationship with the hardware in order to try to catch anybody playing any games. So even when your system is not actively doing something, you’ve got drivers that are busy making sure that nothing continues to happen.

PETER: Right.

[popch]

Running around 4 or 5 different app's on Vista right now, and I have ~ 8% CPU usage, and ~ 40-45% RAM usage.

So it's false basically

.. unless those percentages are meant to say '% of the CPU's capacity left after doing those checks thirty times a second'.

[Mazza558]

googled for the keyword: Every "30 milliseconds" Vista polls

Beside the link above, I found this also:

http://www.grc.com/sn/SN-074.htm

Peter Gutmann on Vista DRM (interview)

Ouch.

I like how he tried to justify this. If they really want security, they need to start again and rebuild the OS. This is obviously impossible and would cause chaos for businesses worldwide, especially using older versions of software. This is the biggest drawback of software monopoly.

[FranMichaels]

Ouch.

I like how he tried to justify this. If they really want security, they need to start again and rebuild the OS. This is obviously impossible and would cause chaos for businesses worldwide, especially using older versions of software. This is the biggest drawback of software monopoly.

Also with it's proprietary nature, Windows is a blackbox. What does it really do?

It's been an additional impetus to switching to Linux for many people I think.

Why would someone want an OS that to keep functioning needs approval from Microsoft servers? Especially in cases where security matters.

:popcorn:

[HotShotDJ]

First of all... I despise Microsoft for its business practices and poor software quality. Secondly, I prefer F/OSS not only for philosophical reasons (although the F/OSS philosophy IS important to me) but also for the high quality of the software produced by it (again, not ALL F/OSS software is high quality, but much of it IS). Thirdly, it is abundantly clear that Vista was designed for the purpose of controlling how end-users use their computers -- what software they run, what hardware they buy, and what content they access -- and to maximize profits not only for Microsoft, but for their corporate buddies in the entertainment business. Where the interests of end-users and the the interests of "premium content" providers collide (such as "fair-use"), Vista sides with the content providers.

Now that I've said that, I can say this: I have Windows Vista Home Premium installed as a guest OS using VirtualBox (http://www.virtualbox.org) (although I have no productive reason for having it... I do it just because I can). Previously, I had Windows 2000 running the same way. Both run quite well despite being launched in a virtual machine -- a testament more to the makers of VirtualBox than the makers of Windows.

And now to the point of this post... Yes, Windows Vista is spyware. Yes, Microsoft takes unacceptable liberties with its customers' privacy and fair-use rights. In fact, I won't run MS software unless it is safely sandboxed in a VM where it cannot do any harm to the rest of my system. However, if the OP's claims are true, it is unlikely that Vista would run as well as it does (a relative term, I assure you) in the limited environment that I gave it -- a VM with 1 Gig RAM and 128 Meg Video RAM.

I just noticed that the OP has sourced his/her original comment. I'll have to go take a look.

[Midwest-Linux]

I did a lot of research into this. Vista is the reason I use Linux Mint 4.0, Freespire and XP. Its one thing to be bloated and buggy. But to monitor what I do 30 times a second, and being able to revoke drivers and even hardware. I had to draw the line somewhere and XP is the last MSFT OS I will use.

However

Without being pro or con and taking a purely independent approach. Both Linux and Apple have gotten more popular since Vista has been released. Sure both Linux and Apple are good OS' , but it would seem that Vista has been a deciding factor in those willing to look elsewhere. Since Vista has been released, there have been more and more government entities moving to open source. There have been more manufacturers and retailers selling Linux Computers since Vista was released. There might be a coincidence factor in there somewhere.

[LaRoza]

The article (the first one, I didn't read the others) says somethings about drivers which is a little odd.

Each device does need its own driver, by definition.

It sounds like FUD, although Vista has its issues, I don't think the article is anywhere useful.

[MONODA]

Running around 4 or 5 different app's on Vista right now, and I have ~ 8% CPU usage, and ~ 40-45% RAM usage.
Wow... that's really weird, when I was running vista premium, I had all effects disabled and the sidebar disabled and remember that even if I had just booted up, ram usage was no less that 800 megs and cpu was about 20% while not running anything.

[FranMichaels]

The article (the first one, I didn't read the others) says somethings about drivers which is a little odd.

Each device does need its own driver, by definition.

It sounds like FUD, although Vista has its issues, I don't think the article is anywhere useful.

Read the real article

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

The other article is just fluff honestly, partially rephrasing a chunk of the above.

if you find something wrong, let the author know or post it here. It is an analysis with proper citation (some even straight for MS.)

Dismissing it all as FUD, would actually be FUD. ;)

[reubeni]

Read the whole article and it looks like in the future you will purchase a pc and every single device onboard will have a locking code; locked to the os so you will not be able to use any other os on the pc a real closed system.
Cell phone companies are using the same security tactics to keep you on their networks by time time the hacking codes come out the phone is outdate, so its back to the old days where the rich can have and the poor have not!:confused:

[IsawSp4rks]

A long time ago, when DEP (NX Bit support) was being launched by MS as part of Service Pack 2 I had a conversation with some people on a forum regarding it's true purpose. Many fired back with standard MS Army feedback that it was built solely to block virus code from executing at root level. Around the same time I'd been reading about the TCPA and how the TCP (trusted computing platform) would be implemented - DEP was mentioned as part of this. When I discussed this and especially what I saw as future OS release from MS supported by the TCPA that would seek to control how people used their machines, I was essentially shouted down.

I wonder how those shouters feel now?

[Iam138]

The windows sub-forum here is ridiculous. It just ends up being a giant troll fest. To the Admin and mods: If you can't get over yourselves then get rid of the sub-forum.

[Lord Illidan]

I haven't used Vista on this laptop (I removed it as soon as I could), however, I have seen what it does to other friends' computers, and I am not impressed.

Shiny graphics? Compiz leaves them in the dust. Whenever somebody comes up with the old "Linux is CLI only", or "Vista has these cool effects, Linux hasn't", I fire up Compiz, and let him have it.

Speed? My computer is slower by some 500 Mhz (1.66 GHZ core 2 duo), and has half the RAM of these vista laptops (1 GB RAM). However, it runs faster with Linux. Also, Vista seems to take up about 600-700 MB at the start, without the user doing anything remotely productive.

I have already converted some people to Linux at university, and will continue to do so. Vista is a failure, period. XP didn't have the cool effects, wasn't as secure, but it was a better OS.

[Iam138]

Wow... that's really weird, when I was running vista premium, I had all effects disabled and the sidebar disabled and remember that even if I had just booted up, ram usage was no less that 800 megs and cpu was about 20% while not running anything.

LOL! what was it a PIII? I really don't understand how you Linux 1337 expect anyone with any knowledge to buy such crap... I love Gusty and use it for most my daily work but I'm not delusional or deceitful enough to claim what you fan boys do.

[NilsHG]

LOL! what was it a PIII? I really don't understand how you Linux 1337 expect anyone with any knowledge to buy such crap... I love Gusty and use it for most my daily work but I'm not delusional or deceitful enough to claim what you fan boys do.

from his signature:
hp dv6395 ea 2gb ram core 2 duo 2.00 Ghz Gutsy Gibbon User

being able to read is an advantage, clearly.:guitar:

[Lord Illidan]

LOL! what was it a PIII? I really don't understand how you Linux 1337 expect anyone with any knowledge to buy such crap... I love Gusty and use it for most my daily work but I'm not delusional or deceitful enough to claim what you fan boys do.

I've seen that type of memory usage (>700MB with no productivity apps running) on quite a recent laptop, >2 Ghz Core 2 Duo, with 2 GB of RAM. Granted, this wasn't my laptop, so I couldn't take a screenshot. Also, I can't really say whether it was Vista or antivirus applications. Also, I've seen people quite happy with Vista, especially those who just use their laptops for games, IM-ing, and browsing. However, these people were not too IT-literate, and they also acknowledged some problems with Vista, like being rather slow, for instance.

[IsawSp4rks]

The RAM usage sounds normal for a Vista install, it precaches application space as part of Superfetch. 20% CPU usage could be explained by WGA services failing to authenticate and retrying.

Knowledge is power, blind ignorance of reality is self deceit.

[Iam138]

from his signature:
hp dv6395 ea 2gb ram core 2 duo 2.00 Ghz Gutsy Gibbon User

being able to read is an advantage, clearly.:guitar:

LOL! Knowledge of CPU architecture is even better. Core = rehashed PIII add a crippled HP rig to that and get crap performance across the board. Pick your fights more carefully kiddo.

[IsawSp4rks]

Core 2 Duo is a fine arch and doesn't relate much at all to the PIII, both in terms of register space or instruction set. It's more closely related to the Pentium M (which did indeed share a little microcode with PIII), but even then is wholly disparate in many ways.

That said PIII was never really "crappy" and had AMD's competitor on the run even when AMD's TBred breached 1GHz. My Dual PIII Celeron 700 (OC'd to 933 on each CPU) VIA Apollo machine was kickarse for its time and no dual cpu AMD gave as much bang for buck.

[Iam138]

Core 2 Duo is a fine arch and doesn't relate much at all to the PIII, both in terms of register space or instruction set. It's more closely related to the Pentium M (which did indeed share a little microcode with PIII), but even then is wholly disparate in many ways.

That said PIII was never really "crappy" and had AMD's competitor on the run even when AMD's TBred breached 1GHz. My Dual PIII Celeron 700 (OC'd to 933 on each CPU) VIA Apollo machine was kickarse for its time and no dual cpu AMD gave as much bang for buck.

Agreed PIII was a fine arch. Never said otherwise. Although K7 put it too shame and you know it. You can't tell me that K8 did not completely pwn Netburst either, honestly now...

Anyway I want to apologize to anyone I offended here with my admittedly inflammatory comments. There is no excuse for my rudeness.

I simply wish that sometimes the Linux community would stick to the advantages of the OS without making questionable statements about "other" operating systems. I know this is a Ubuntu forum and will be biased as such. Quite simply this is a plea for rational and honesty.

[NilsHG]

Anyway I want to apologize to anyone I offended here with my admittedly inflammatory comments. There is no excuse for my rudeness.
.

it is ok dude, fanboys do tend to get carried away:lolflag:

[IsawSp4rks]

You can't tell me that K8 did not completely pwn Netburst either, honestly now...

Depends on the CPU. My Prescott 2.4ghz OC'd all the way to 3.2Ghz and it's still running strong (I sold the machine complete with a 6600GT AGP and Gigabyte mobo to a friend over two years ago). At the time I OC'd it, some 18months from initial purchase, it still was faster in MP3 conversion and DVD Ripping than most of my friends AMD K7 and K8 machines (including one who bought an expensive DFI Lanparty board complete with A64 single core).

But we're going way off topic now.

[FranMichaels]

*snip*
I simply wish that sometimes the Linux community would stick to the advantages of the OS without making questionable statements about "other" operating systems. I know this is a Ubuntu forum and will be biased as such. Quite simply this is a plea for rational and honesty.

I would tend to agree. However, Vista is a special case. If hardware is made specifically with support for its DRM "features". The result is hardware that consumes more electricty, may be larger in size, and may never work fully/properly on an open operating system. I wouldn't want that to be popular enough to be on OEM'd boxes either, good luck switching OS's in that case...

What I think is honestly worse, is the initial article linked, it basically borrowed from an excellent one Peter Gutmann (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html) and just gave bits and pieces that made it less credible.

I would rather the information, good or bad, is 100% honest and accurate. You will never hear me make a performance claim on Vista, because I've never used it. :)

I believe people should get the chance to read and see some of the "features", that Microsoft hopes you don't notice (they want the DRM not to interfere with regular use.) Unfortunately some have run into it (http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=10576). Things like that may be the kick in *** needed to at least try another OS.

Worked for me!

I'd basically recommend any OS besides Vista. For the fans out there, FreeDOS, Amiga OS, BSD, ReactOS, Haiku, ummm... Whatever else! :KS

[Iam138]

I would tend to agree. However, Vista is a special case. If hardware is made specifically with support for its DRM "features". The result is hardware that consumes more electricty, may be larger in size, and may never work fully/properly on an open operating system. I wouldn't want that to be popular enough to be on OEM'd boxes either, good luck switching OS's in that case...

What I think is honestly worse, is the initial article linked, it basically borrowed from an excellent one Peter Gutmann (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html) and just gave bits and pieces that made it less credible.

I would rather the information, good or bad, is 100% honest and accurate. You will never hear me make a performance claim on Vista, because I've never used it. :)

I believe people should get the chance to read and see some of the "features", that Microsoft hopes you don't notice (they want the DRM not to interfere with regular use.) Unfortunately some have run into it (http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/index.cfm?newsid=10576). Things like that may be the kick in *** needed to at least try another OS.

Worked for me!

I'd basically recommend any OS besides Vista. For the fans out there, FreeDOS, Amiga OS, BSD, ReactOS, Haiku, ummm... Whatever else! :KS

This thread has forced me to take a harder look at myself and where I stand on Vista. I do take issue with the DRM myself and while I never have experienced any problems I also only use custom rigs I build myself and this is where I am forced to take that harder look.

1. I forget that not everyone or even most people have machines capable of running any OS you throw on them. The average user bought their machine 3 years ago or bought it yesterday from Dell or Bestbuy what have you and with it came enough bloat to cripple the biggest workhorse.I can see how Vista could be a maddening experience in either situation. I make no claims that Vista does not have rather hefty hardware requirements and it's unfair for me to expect it to perform well on the average commercial box just b/c it does on mine.

2. I also tend to forget that not everyone can or even has the inclination to disable those annoyances that some OS's come with including Vista. They see UAC for example and are irritated by it but maybe also concerned that if they do disable it assuming they know how that Billy G. will swoop down and take their first born and their All-in-One as well. (that's an obvious exaggeration).

@IsawSp4rks. Now that I have posted appropriately on topic I find it hard to believe that your Prescott clock for clock can go toe to toe with a Athlon 64 in encoding or any other app.

[dca]

It's all a DRM issue: the article, the hardware polling, etc, etc. See, certain items changed in the EULA between XP and the release of Vista. One of the arguments on Steve & Bill's minds is what constitutes the brains/heart&soul of the user's computer in order to better understand the actual MS license granted to the end user. Is it the HDD or is it the CPU/mobo or is it one of the DIMMs (not both, because, well that's just crazy) or something else.

As MS perfects their idea(s) for DRM the end result is the entire workstation comprises the heart&soul of the machine/EULA, not any single components. In the future, only MS-certified techs, service centers, etc will be able to manipulate, uninstall, reinstall MS products.

[redcrayon]

After reading this document: http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
you really have to question the furture freedom of computing.
It all seems to come back to DRM and the likes.

Its all very big brother'ish

[cprofitt]

Without being pro or con and taking a purely independent approach. Both Linux and Apple have gotten more popular since Vista has been released. Sure both Linux and Apple are good OS' , but it would seem that Vista has been a deciding factor in those willing to look elsewhere. Since Vista has been released, there have been more and more government entities moving to open source. There have been more manufacturers and retailers selling Linux Computers since Vista was released. There might be a coincidence factor in there somewhere.

I consider Apple just as evil as MS -- they control your hardware choices from the outset. In some aspects Apple is worse IMHO -- iTunes / iPhone / etc

[NJXeno]

I consider Apple just as evil as MS -- they control your hardware choices from the outset. In some aspects Apple is worse IMHO -- iTunes / iPhone / etc
Macs are very overpriced too...

[DouglasAWh]

Macs are very overpriced too...

While Apple has problems, this isn't true of the PCs. They don't do low-end computing so you can't get something as cheap as Dell, but it's comparing Apple's to Orange's. In some cases, Dell is actually more expensive.

That being said, I love Dell. I bought a Dell first thing when they launched the ubuntu program. The Higher Education Rep has been very supportive of FOSS on our campus, becoming our only platinum sponsor for last year's Software Freedom Day festivities.

[rune0077]

I haven't used Vista on this laptop (I removed it as soon as I could), however, I have seen what it does to other friends' computers, and I am not impressed.

Shiny graphics? Compiz leaves them in the dust. Whenever somebody comes up with the old "Linux is CLI only", or "Vista has these cool effects, Linux hasn't", I fire up Compiz, and let him have it.

Speed? My computer is slower by some 500 Mhz (1.66 GHZ core 2 duo), and has half the RAM of these vista laptops (1 GB RAM). However, it runs faster with Linux. Also, Vista seems to take up about 600-700 MB at the start, without the user doing anything remotely productive.


That has to a matter of opinion and what system you use. I found that Vista looked incredible, and Compiz is just plain ragged and ugly by comparison if you ask me. Besides, the graphics in Vista seems smooth and well designed, as opposed to Compiz, which seems like something thrown together in somebody's basement. And as for speed, Vista booted much faster for me than Ubuntu (20 seconds boot for Vista, roughly 30 to 40 seconds for Gutsy depending on its mood) and once booted things ran at about the same speed (Gutsy probably a little faster, but nothing noticeable).

I did notice that Vista had a lot of "background" activity going on, but this never interfered with running any apps, since it quickly freed up the resources needed to run a new app. All in all, a really good OS, but the "under the hood" stuff is a bit worrying I suppose (yes, I also moved it into a VirtualBox and feels much safer this way).

[LaRoza]

That has to a matter of opinion and what system you use. I found that Vista looked incredible, and Compiz is just plain ragged and ugly by comparison if you ask me. Besides, the graphics in Vista seems smooth and well designed, as opposed to Compiz, which seems like something thrown together in somebody's basement. And as for speed, Vista booted much faster for me than Ubuntu (20 seconds boot for Vista, roughly 30 to 40 seconds for Gutsy depending on its mood) and once booted things ran at about the same speed (Gutsy probably a little faster, but nothing noticeable).


I have seen some clones of Vista's Aero, using Compiz, and I felt it was better, so it is just a preference, but Compiz can do Aero just as smooth. (To be honest, Ubuntu is ugly to me, but so was Vista...)

[rune0077]

I have seen some clones of Vista's Aero, using Compiz, and I felt it was better, so it is just a preference, but Compiz can do Aero just as smooth. (To be honest, Ubuntu is ugly to me, but so was Vista...)

Yeah, you could probably make Ubuntu look more or less like Vista. Dunno about the smoothness though - I think Compiz has to many minor glitches and twitches to qualify as being any kind of smooth (though it has made a world of different changing my ATI with a Nvidia card, it fixed a lot, but not everything). And you're right, eyecandy isn't all that impressive in the long run - it's cool for about 5 minutes and then you are already looking for a new theme to replace the old one (if I had spend the time used on theming actually doing something productive, I would have written the great Danish novel by now :))

[LaRoza]

Yeah, you could probably make Ubuntu look more or less like Vista. Dunno about the smoothness though - I think Compiz has to many minor glitches and twitches to qualify as being any kind of smooth (though it has made a world of different changing my ATI with a Nvidia card, it fixed a lot, but not everything). And you're right, eyecandy isn't all that impressive in the long run - it's cool for about 5 minutes and then you are already looking for a new theme to replace the old one (if I had spend the time used on theming actually doing something productive, I would have written the great Danish novel by now :))

See http://sourceforge.net/project/screenshots.php?group_id=206087&ssid=68107

(Vixta is Fedora based)

I don't use Aero or Compiz, so it doesn't really matter.

[NightwishFan]

Since I care very little for looks I try to go by the philosophy of the release which basically left me at Kubuntu.

[sayakb]

*sigh* Too much to read.
Anyway, Vista comes out in many "flavors", you might all know, Ultimate being the "Wow, it has everything" version. I used Ultimate for about 6 months. With the Ultimate extras released, I found none useful other than BitLocker. DreamScene is a big time junk, constantly eats upon system resources (I remember having constant 25% CPU on my Quad Core). Plus, with dreamscene on, the DWM uses abnormally more RAM than usual (that often went upto 260MB). I have installed/run Gutsy w/ Compiz on a 256MB laptop, and it works as smooth as my Vista on my desktop. People justify this resource hungry nature as a reason to buy new hardware, but what could you do if the OS alone consumes more than half of the available resources on your brand new high-end PC?

[NightwishFan]

Lowest I got Vista was 390mb. Thats almost half my ram.

[sayakb]

That you are talking about it the total RAM usage.. What I mentioned is just DWM.. I don't exactly remember the total RAM usage, but when my dad blessed me by upgrading my desktop to a 4GiG, I remember seeing 50-60% RAM usage on a sidebar gadget..