My Impression of Vista
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 8616
- Joined: 26 Oct 2004, 13:46
- Location: Alkmaar, Holland
I did ran the Vista memory program
Yeah, I opened the case. I've changed memory-strips before in other PC's, so it's not like I dont know how it works, but in this case the videocard is in the way and not that easy to remove, so I'm better off just leaving it in and calling them to fix it.
I have 4 GB's in there, but obviously, since my Vista is 32 bits, it only uses 3,25.
Yeah, I opened the case. I've changed memory-strips before in other PC's, so it's not like I dont know how it works, but in this case the videocard is in the way and not that easy to remove, so I'm better off just leaving it in and calling them to fix it.
I have 4 GB's in there, but obviously, since my Vista is 32 bits, it only uses 3,25.
I was there, the big BNB blackout of november, 2008. We lost many that day...
- bradavon
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 24430
- Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30
Ah, understood. I just meant, don't tell them that, in case they get all funny about breaking warranty or other such bollocks.
Not tempted to upgrade to 64-bit? I have 2Gb but may upgrade to 3Gb at some point. I don't see the point going to 4Gb until I can use it (I can always get one 2Gb chip now and one later). That is presuming I cannot get things working with 64-bit. I tested recently with Windows 7 Beta and some things failed, fingers crossed for the release version.
Not tempted to upgrade to 64-bit? I have 2Gb but may upgrade to 3Gb at some point. I don't see the point going to 4Gb until I can use it (I can always get one 2Gb chip now and one later). That is presuming I cannot get things working with 64-bit. I tested recently with Windows 7 Beta and some things failed, fingers crossed for the release version.
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 8616
- Joined: 26 Oct 2004, 13:46
- Location: Alkmaar, Holland
Nah, I wouldnt tell them, but here in Holland I dont think they go nuts about it when you open up your own PC.
I believe someone here on the board had a bad experience with a disfuctional PC and very bad service (Romero?) a few years ago, where he couldnt do anything with it without breaking his warranty or something like that, but if I want to open up my PC to do whatever, that's my business, and that doesnt mean it's OK for their product to start malfunctioning. I doubt they would give me any hassle over any unlicensed software or whatever.
I AM tempted to upgrade to 64-bit, because obviously that would mean an advantage when it comes to the memory, and when I bought this PC I thought it would come with a 64 bit OS, cause they advertised the PC with 4GB of internal memory, so you'd think you could use that.... but sadly it just came with a 32 bit OS.
I did complain and they did change their policy with their newer PC's (they come installed with 32 bits Vista, but they include the 64 bit software into the package so you can install that version if you'd like...), but for my case it didnt help, so I'm stuck with 32-bit.
I doubt it's worth upgrading now. Normally, my PC runs perfect, including the heavier programs like Photoshop, and I'll buy a new PC when Windows 7 will come out, and hopefully that will just be 64 bits.
I believe someone here on the board had a bad experience with a disfuctional PC and very bad service (Romero?) a few years ago, where he couldnt do anything with it without breaking his warranty or something like that, but if I want to open up my PC to do whatever, that's my business, and that doesnt mean it's OK for their product to start malfunctioning. I doubt they would give me any hassle over any unlicensed software or whatever.
I AM tempted to upgrade to 64-bit, because obviously that would mean an advantage when it comes to the memory, and when I bought this PC I thought it would come with a 64 bit OS, cause they advertised the PC with 4GB of internal memory, so you'd think you could use that.... but sadly it just came with a 32 bit OS.
I did complain and they did change their policy with their newer PC's (they come installed with 32 bits Vista, but they include the 64 bit software into the package so you can install that version if you'd like...), but for my case it didnt help, so I'm stuck with 32-bit.
I doubt it's worth upgrading now. Normally, my PC runs perfect, including the heavier programs like Photoshop, and I'll buy a new PC when Windows 7 will come out, and hopefully that will just be 64 bits.
I was there, the big BNB blackout of november, 2008. We lost many that day...
- bradavon
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 24430
- Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30
Laptops aside they don't here but it's best not to risk it I find.Yi-Long wrote:Nah, I wouldnt tell them, but here in Holland I dont think they go nuts about it when you open up your own PC.
I seriously doubt it too. Hopefully you won't need to "send" it back. Up until I bought my first laptop I only ever built my own PCs. So never found out.Yi-Long wrote:I doubt they would give me any hassle over any unlicensed software or whatever.
What! You're not using nearly 25% of the RAM you paid for.Yi-Long wrote:I AM tempted to upgrade to 64-bit, because obviously that would mean an advantage when it comes to the memory, and when I bought this PC I thought it would come with a 64 bit OS, cause they advertised the PC with 4GB of internal memory, so you'd think you could use that.... but sadly it just came with a 32 bit OS.
Toshiba pulled the same shit with me on my laptop. The hardware supports 4Gb but they don't make 64-bit drivers for my model so there's no easy way (if at all) I can actually use this. In my case it came with 2Gb and 32-Bit. I'm complaining to them right now. They say they only support "what they specifically gave me" or "put up with 3.2Gb" (I couldn't believe it when that was their initial response). I say the hardware supports 4Gb so they have a duty to provide drivers to actually make use of it. In my case I'm only two drivers short (which hopefully I can get from Intel instead), so it's even more dumb. I doubt I'll win but I've not given up giving them shit yet.
It must be surely illegal to sell a PC with 4Gb but actually give you 3.2Gb, if not it should be. It's irelevant if your PC happens to have 4Gb inside if it's impossible to actually access it. It's odd they gave you four 1Gb chips too. I'd have expected two 2Gb chips.
If you don't plan to upgrade to x64, you may as well in a way take out one of the 1Gb chips and make some cash from it (no idea how much it's worth). You won't notice the 0.2Gb drop.
I've not heard them do that before. Buying Vista using a standard disc gives you 32-Bit or 64-Bit. I've heard your code works with both but the discs are separate. Still any thing's possible with their "custom images". The trouble is computer makers would prefer x64 never existed, it causes "possible" troubles for them. It's THE reason why you can even get 3Gb PCs (historically RAM has always doubled).Yi-Long wrote:they come installed with 32 bits Vista, but they include the 64 bit software into the package so you can install that version if you'd like...
They of course have no choice, as time goes on 4Gb/6Gb will become the norm (even if in reality you don't need it). Few need 4Gb but it doesn't stop people wanting it.
Probably not now, unless you plan to reinstall anyway. Provided you can get drivers.Yi-Long wrote:I doubt it's worth upgrading now.
The same rules are likely to apply:Yi-Long wrote:and I'll buy a new PC when Windows 7 will come out, and hopefully that will just be 64 bits.
1Gb, 2Gb or 3Gb - 32-Bit
4Gb or more - 64-Bit
Less then 4Gb and there's no point at all getting 64-Bit (except to future proof yourself). Thankfully times are moved on and we shouldn't see any 512Mb Windows 7 PCs, as we did with Vista (which had to help in giving it such a bad name).
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 8616
- Joined: 26 Oct 2004, 13:46
- Location: Alkmaar, Holland
From what I understand, it's better to have 4 GB's and one of those strips only PARTLY working, instead of having 3 GB's (3 strips). Can't remember the whole argument behind it, but the current memory set-up is the best it will get for a 32 bit Vista PC.bradavon wrote:What! You're not using nearly 25% of the RAM you paid for.Yi-Long wrote:I AM tempted to upgrade to 64-bit, because obviously that would mean an advantage when it comes to the memory, and when I bought this PC I thought it would come with a 64 bit OS, cause they advertised the PC with 4GB of internal memory, so you'd think you could use that.... but sadly it just came with a 32 bit OS.
Toshiba pulled the same shit with me on my laptop. The hardware supports 4Gb but they don't make 64-bit drivers for my model so there's no easy way (if at all) I can actually use this. In my case it came with 2Gb and 32-Bit. I'm complaining to them right now. They say they only support "what they specifically gave me" or "put up with 3.2Gb" (I couldn't believe it when that was their initial response). I say the hardware supports 4Gb so they have a duty to provide drivers to actually make use of it. In my case I'm only two drivers short (which hopefully I can get from Intel instead), so it's even more dumb. I doubt I'll win but I've not given up giving them shit yet.
It must be surely illegal to sell a PC with 4Gb but actually give you 3.2Gb, if not it should be. It's irelevant if your PC happens to have 4Gb inside if it's impossible to actually access it. It's odd they gave you four 1Gb chips too. I'd have expected two 2Gb chips.
If you don't plan to upgrade to x64, you may as well in a way take out one of the 1Gb chips and make some cash from it (no idea how much it's worth). You won't notice the 0.2Gb drop.
I did have the same argument with the supplier as you had, that you shouldnt market a PC as having 4GBs while it will only use 3,25 of them... but sadly, it didnt work. Ah well, apart from that, their service has been very good and speedy when there was a problem, and the PC usually works just great, so I'm still pretty satisfied with the computer.
I'm pretty satisfied with Vista, apart from all the different versions, and almost daily 'updates'. Also, it seems a bit bloated ofcourse, and I would rather have bare-bones software for most of the programs.I've not heard them do that before. Buying Vista using a standard disc gives you 32-Bit or 64-Bit. I've heard your code works with both but the discs are separate. Still any thing's possible with their "custom images". The trouble is computer makers would prefer x64 never existed, it causes "possible" troubles for them. It's THE reason why you can even get 3Gb PCs (historically RAM has always doubled).Yi-Long wrote:they come installed with 32 bits Vista, but they include the 64 bit software into the package so you can install that version if you'd like...
They of course have no choice, as time goes on 4Gb/6Gb will become the norm (even if in reality you don't need it). Few need 4Gb but it doesn't stop people wanting it.
Probably not now, unless you plan to reinstall anyway. Provided you can get drivers.Yi-Long wrote:I doubt it's worth upgrading now.
The same rules are likely to apply:Yi-Long wrote:and I'll buy a new PC when Windows 7 will come out, and hopefully that will just be 64 bits.
1Gb, 2Gb or 3Gb - 32-Bit
4Gb or more - 64-Bit
Less then 4Gb and there's no point at all getting 64-Bit (except to future proof yourself). Thankfully times are moved on and we shouldn't see any 512Mb Windows 7 PCs, as we did with Vista (which had to help in giving it such a bad name).
We should make a huge list here with all the best free software and alternatives etc. Like the Windows Live Messenger without all the bloat, and the Nero without all the bloat, and the mediaplayers without all the bloat, etc etc.
A kinda 'must-have' list of programs that offer full functionality without all the bullshit, and that dont take up all your resources when using them.
I was there, the big BNB blackout of november, 2008. We lost many that day...
- bradavon
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 24430
- Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30
Possibly. I never really pay much attention that much in detail.From what I understand, it's better to have 4 GB's and one of those strips only PARTLY working, instead of having 3 GB's (3 strips). Can't remember the whole argument behind it, but the current memory set-up is the best it will get for a 32 bit Vista PC.
For example technically you're supposed to always work in evens but I sure a hell wouldn't get two 512Mb chips (taking up both slots) instead of one 1Gb chip, giving me a free one for future. As an example.
I can well believe this is common business practise .I did have the same argument with the supplier as you had, that you shouldnt market a PC as having 4GBs while it will only use 3,25 of them... but sadly, it didnt work.
Do you need a new PC when W7 comes? It cannot be that old and W7 is faster than Vista, so it will work just fine. Personally I'd source x64 drivers (if possible) and give x64 W7 ago.
It really only boils down to three versions:apart from all the different versions
Home Basic - Thankfully not being offered as standard with W7
Home Premium
Business
No one needs Ultimate.
It's no different to XP, at least not in my experience.and almost daily 'updates'
Agreed. W7 is much better in this regard.Also, it seems a bit bloated ofcourse, and I would rather have bare-bones software for most of the programs.
Good idea.We should make a huge list here with all the best free software and alternatives etc. Like the Windows Live Messenger without all the bloat, and the Nero without all the bloat, and the mediaplayers without all the bloat, etc etc.
Nero Lite and Micro get my vote, as does Media Player Classic. WLM has got really bloated with v2009.
I have no real problems with Vista either. People have got so used to XP they forget it's hardly perfect itself and definitely feels dated next to Vista (and especially next to W7).
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 9101
- Joined: 08 Feb 2005, 14:39
- Location: Wellywood, Kiwiland
- Contact:
For Live Messenger, apply A-patch.
The version of WLM v9.0 (2008) is far more powerful than the latest version for WLM 2009, because there were a lot of changes between v2008 and v2009 under the hood.
Media Players:-
AUDIO
Windows Media Player is absolute fucking garbage. If you value audio quality, you'd use Foobar2000 or Winamp with a Kernel streaming plugin. Be sure to do a custom installation of Winamp if you choose that.
Don't try to argue Brad, you'd be dead wrong.
VIDEO
Media Player Classic Homecinema + CCCP codec pack. Configure it to use EVR.
Vanilla MPC hasn't been updated in several years.
The version of WLM v9.0 (2008) is far more powerful than the latest version for WLM 2009, because there were a lot of changes between v2008 and v2009 under the hood.
Media Players:-
AUDIO
Windows Media Player is absolute fucking garbage. If you value audio quality, you'd use Foobar2000 or Winamp with a Kernel streaming plugin. Be sure to do a custom installation of Winamp if you choose that.
Don't try to argue Brad, you'd be dead wrong.
VIDEO
Media Player Classic Homecinema + CCCP codec pack. Configure it to use EVR.
Vanilla MPC hasn't been updated in several years.
- bradavon
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 24430
- Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30
I tried that awhile ago and didn't see much point in it. I just ignore what I don't need.EvaUnit02 wrote:For Live Messenger, apply A-patch.
All of Windows Live Essentials has. It's significantly different under the hood. WLM has quite a lot better but WLPG hasn't changed much, it's also slower to load.EvaUnit02 wrote:The version of WLM v9.0 (2008) is far more powerful than the latest version for WLM 2009, because there were a lot of changes between v2008 and v2009 under the hood.
I wouldn't bother, each to their own. I disliked the Winamp interface and WMP sounds perfectly fine for me. I use a laptop sound card and 128Kbps MP3s remember.EvaUnit02 wrote:If you value audio quality, you'd use Foobar2000 or Winamp with a Kernel streaming plugin. Don't try to argue Brad, you'd be dead wrong.
MPC is definitely the way to go. I've always though that or WMP6.4 before it. WMP7+ is shit for video.EvaUnit02 wrote:VIDEO
Media Player Classic Homecinema + CCCP codec pack. Configure it to use EVR.
I use K-lite is CCCP much better? I'm thinking I may uninstall it and just use FFDShow though (along with Gspot, VobSub and MPC). It can decode all the formats I ever need and also encode Xvid (only format I ever encode with).
For me:
Music: WMP11 or 12 (W7)
Video: MPC + Explorer to browse
Photos: WLPG2008 or 2009 (W7, crashes for me on Vista) - Great software
Incidentally is there much need for QuickTime Alternative? FFDShow and MPC can read most QT MOV files, except maybe the pointless browser plugin.
What EVR? I did look.EvaUnit02 wrote:Media Player Classic Homecinema + CCCP codec pack. Configure it to use EVR.
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 9101
- Joined: 08 Feb 2005, 14:39
- Location: Wellywood, Kiwiland
- Contact:
Oh God, K-lite... where to begin? It's major bloatware, 20MB might not seem like it, but for a codec pack the filesize is way too big.bradavon wrote:I use K-lite is CCCP much better? I'm thinking I may uninstall it and just use FFDShow though. It can decode all the formats I ever need and also encode Xvid (only format I ever encode with).
Okay, let's go back to this post for a minute.
Okay, as soon as I would finish watching a video of any format, my audio driver would need to be reinstalled. Take a guess as to what was murdering the driver?EvaUnit02 wrote:So I finally installed Vista (Business x64) yesterday
...
The experience thus far has been fine, other than my sound driver committing suicide and having to reinstall it; but this would happen periodically with XP too. Creative Labs drivers are such rubbish.
It was the K-Lite Mega Codec Pack. I had installed it since I had read on a forum that it fixes FMV playback issues under Vista in a few older games that I own.
I've used CCCP for several years under XP and hadn't had a single problem, since dumping K-lite and running CCCP, I haven't had any audio-related dilemmas with Vista.
CCCP was assembled by experienced underground video encoders to be a lightweight one-stop-shop codec for playback of soft-subtitled videos, of any and every potential format/codec combination used by the scene. IIRC, it's made up of ffdshow, Haali's Splitter and VobSub.
CCCP would be very useful for Yi, since he's a big fan of fansubbed Asian screen productions.
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 9101
- Joined: 08 Feb 2005, 14:39
- Location: Wellywood, Kiwiland
- Contact:
The newest video mixing output format by Microsoft, it was introduced in Vista. Most notably it supports native GPU-accelerated playback (via Vista's improved newer of DXVA).bradavon wrote:What EVR? I did look.
It was a huge improvement in video quality over DMR7 and 9, comparable to the Overlay mixer. (Overlay mixer = pretty old, but the newer DMR7/9 couldn't hold a candle to its quality).
- bradavon
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 24430
- Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30
They do provide 3 versions:EvaUnit02 wrote:Oh God, K-lite... where to begin? It's major bloatware, 20MB might not seem like it, but for a codec pack the filesize is way too big.bradavon wrote:I use K-lite is CCCP much better? I'm thinking I may uninstall it and just use FFDShow though. It can decode all the formats I ever need and also encode Xvid (only format I ever encode with).
3.5Mb - Light
6.7Mb - Standard
14Mb - Full
So CCCP isn't a Codec Pack? Oh right, thanks. Thanks for the EVR info. I presume it's easy to enable?
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 9101
- Joined: 08 Feb 2005, 14:39
- Location: Wellywood, Kiwiland
- Contact:
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 8616
- Joined: 26 Oct 2004, 13:46
- Location: Alkmaar, Holland
I back-upped all my crap on my old PC, then tried re-installing Vista like the helpdesk told me to, and it just completely crashed out on me and now I can't do anything on it anymore, so it will be picked up for repairs on tuesday.
Is it just me, or do they just keep making all these kinda things more difficult to do!?
When you want to re-install the PC with Windows, I just need an option to format the PC and then re-install Vista. That's all.
Will be looking for maybe a start-up CD for ubuntu or whatever, so I can maybe still have access on my old pc to some files.
Is it just me, or do they just keep making all these kinda things more difficult to do!?
When you want to re-install the PC with Windows, I just need an option to format the PC and then re-install Vista. That's all.
Will be looking for maybe a start-up CD for ubuntu or whatever, so I can maybe still have access on my old pc to some files.
I was there, the big BNB blackout of november, 2008. We lost many that day...
- bradavon
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 24430
- Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30
No offence but I did say it's unwise to re-install Windows with dodgy memory, it was a given it wouldn't work. It sounds like Support don't have a clue.
I presume they gave you a Recovery Disc? If so they usually are as simple as that. Put in, reboot, format, reinstall Windows, done. Personally I cannot stand them as all you can do is format and reinstall, all the troubleshooting options are removed (which are significantly beefed up from XP).
I'd:
A: Get the memory changed
B: Put the Recovery Disc back in, reformat and reinstall Vista again. It's likely to go without a hitch (with working memory).
What files do you still need access to? You've backed them up.
I presume they gave you a Recovery Disc? If so they usually are as simple as that. Put in, reboot, format, reinstall Windows, done. Personally I cannot stand them as all you can do is format and reinstall, all the troubleshooting options are removed (which are significantly beefed up from XP).
I'd:
A: Get the memory changed
B: Put the Recovery Disc back in, reformat and reinstall Vista again. It's likely to go without a hitch (with working memory).
What files do you still need access to? You've backed them up.
Last edited by bradavon on 28 Feb 2009, 00:04, edited 1 time in total.
- IronMonkey
- Royal Tramp
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: 08 Dec 2004, 16:49
Thats pretty much all you have to do with Vista. I don't see it being any more complicated than XP, 98, etc. In fact, I would say Vista & Windows 7 are probably easier to install than any of the others have been.Yi-Long wrote:Is it just me, or do they just keep making all these kinda things more difficult to do!?
When you want to re-install the PC with Windows, I just need an option to format the PC and then re-install Vista. That's all.
TH-42PX80 | DMP-BD50 (MR BD & DVD) | SA-XR55 | SB-TP20 | XBox 360 Slim 250GB | XBox (XBMC, 160GB) | Zotac XBMC HTPC | Gaming PC | 8TB Media Server
- bradavon
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 24430
- Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30
Definitely. The Vista/W7 installation programs are much, much simpler. I suspect Yi has one of those awful Recovery Discs though, that couldn't be simpler. Of course this all assumes you have working memory, Yi doesn't so it's going to crash miserably.IronMonkey wrote:Thats pretty much all you have to do with Vista. I don't see it being any more complicated than XP, 98, etc. In fact, I would say Vista & Windows 7 are probably easier to install than any of the others have been.
There are so many things better about Vista, most people don't know about (over 2 years on from release). They'll finally discover this when Windows 7 goes RTM.
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 8616
- Joined: 26 Oct 2004, 13:46
- Location: Alkmaar, Holland
Ow, I didnt say it was wise of Support to advise me to try and bring the whole PC back to normal. I felt it would be a lot of trouble, would possibly cause the problems because of the memory-errors, and when it failed it didnt really surprise me.
What I meant was that it seems more complicated because they have taken 2 500GB HDD's, pulled them together to make 1 big 1 TB HDD, and then they broke that up in to partitions, with 900 GB for c: and about 30 GB for something else (back-up files or something), and I couldnt format that part cause it wasnt NTFS or whatever.
On my old PC's, I could just go into DOS, format C:, everything would be completely wiped clean, insert the XP/WIn98/Win95 DVD/CD/disk/whatever, and within a few hours my PC would be 'brand new' again.
With all these partitions going on, it just seems a bit unclear and overwhelming.
Maybe I should buy a bunch of computerparts and just puzzle my way into being able to make my own systems.
Anyway, when booting up with the Vista DVD in the PC it still won't do much. It says boot.whatever is missing, and only option is pretty much to restart the PC.
What I meant was that it seems more complicated because they have taken 2 500GB HDD's, pulled them together to make 1 big 1 TB HDD, and then they broke that up in to partitions, with 900 GB for c: and about 30 GB for something else (back-up files or something), and I couldnt format that part cause it wasnt NTFS or whatever.
On my old PC's, I could just go into DOS, format C:, everything would be completely wiped clean, insert the XP/WIn98/Win95 DVD/CD/disk/whatever, and within a few hours my PC would be 'brand new' again.
With all these partitions going on, it just seems a bit unclear and overwhelming.
Maybe I should buy a bunch of computerparts and just puzzle my way into being able to make my own systems.
Anyway, when booting up with the Vista DVD in the PC it still won't do much. It says boot.whatever is missing, and only option is pretty much to restart the PC.
I was there, the big BNB blackout of november, 2008. We lost many that day...
- IronMonkey
- Royal Tramp
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: 08 Dec 2004, 16:49
That was pretty dumb on their part. I never bother with separate partitions for different uses - I just use the whole disc as a single partition then use folders to separate my files.Yi-Long wrote:What I meant was that it seems more complicated because they have taken 2 500GB HDD's, pulled them together to make 1 big 1 TB HDD, and then they broke that up in to partitions, with 900 GB for c: and about 30 GB for something else (back-up files or something), and I couldnt format that part cause it wasnt NTFS or whatever.
Surely it doesn't matter what file table the partition uses, as you can just delete the partition? If I were doing it, I'd just delete all the partitions, then create 1 new partition per drive and format each to NTFS. Problem solved.
Thats pretty much all you have to do now, except its in a GUI rather than DOS, and you've got easier to use options for partitions and file tables.Yi-Long wrote:On my old PC's, I could just go into DOS, format C:, everything would be completely wiped clean, insert the XP/WIn98/Win95 DVD/CD/disk/whatever, and within a few hours my PC would be 'brand new' again.
Like I say, just delete them all, get rid of the confusion, and start again with logical drive setup - i.e. one NTFS partition per physical drive.Yi-Long wrote:With all these partitions going on, it just seems a bit unclear and overwhelming.
Building computers really isn't that difficult, as long as you research hardware compatibilities thoroughly.Yi-Long wrote:Maybe I should buy a bunch of computerparts and just puzzle my way into being able to make my own systems.
Sounds to me like your PC is still trying to boot from the hard drive. The Vista DVD loads all its required files itself on boot up, so there's no way a file could be missing.Yi-Long wrote:Anyway, when booting up with the Vista DVD in the PC it still won't do much. It says boot.whatever is missing, and only option is pretty much to restart the PC.
TH-42PX80 | DMP-BD50 (MR BD & DVD) | SA-XR55 | SB-TP20 | XBox 360 Slim 250GB | XBox (XBMC, 160GB) | Zotac XBMC HTPC | Gaming PC | 8TB Media Server
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 8616
- Joined: 26 Oct 2004, 13:46
- Location: Alkmaar, Holland
Well, stuff like this you'll only find out about when your PC crashes, obviouslybradavon wrote:Definitely. The Vista/W7 installation programs are much, much simpler. I suspect Yi has one of those awful Recovery Discs though, that couldn't be simpler. Of course this all assumes you have working memory, Yi doesn't so it's going to crash miserably.IronMonkey wrote:Thats pretty much all you have to do with Vista. I don't see it being any more complicated than XP, 98, etc. In fact, I would say Vista & Windows 7 are probably easier to install than any of the others have been.
There are so many things better about Vista, most people don't know about (over 2 years on from release). They'll finally discover this when Windows 7 goes RTM.
As I said, Vista has been great to me. I already liked XP a lot, and Vista is even better as far as I'm concerned. It has it's share of minor negatives, ofcourse, but it is pretty much the best OS I've ever worked with.
That said, I do hope my next PC will just have a 64 bit OS on it.
BTW, I said the tests showed a memory-error, but it could also possibly mean the memory-slot(s) is/are broken, which could possibly mean a motherboard problem, which could mean it would have to be replaced, which could mean they'll instal a whole new Vista on it with a new DVD, and their newer PC's come with both 32 bits and 64 bits OS.
Fingers crossed, but not counting on it
Also I do have to say that ever since I got this PC, the quality of the hardware has been less than satisfying (discdrive stopped working, I've had a problem with the graphical card, and now this), but their support has been great. Apart from them first asking to bring it back to it's original state in order for them to be able to pick it up, the helpdesk has been very speedy, very friendly, and very helpfull.
My former PC (the one I'm using now and is shite), also had it's fair share of problems, but what made it even worse was that their helpdesk was completely useless and unreliable (huge waitingtimes on the phone, saying they'd call back and didnt, saying they'd pick it up or come by and fix it, and then not showing, etc).
I'm glad Medion's support has been a whole lot better and quicker.
I was there, the big BNB blackout of november, 2008. We lost many that day...
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 9101
- Joined: 08 Feb 2005, 14:39
- Location: Wellywood, Kiwiland
- Contact:
But you should ALWAYS created a dedicated system partition for every OS that you have installed. It solves a lot of headaches down the road. 40GB is optimum for Vista.
Last edited by EvaUnit02 on 01 Mar 2009, 15:49, edited 1 time in total.
- IronMonkey
- Royal Tramp
- Posts: 1950
- Joined: 08 Dec 2004, 16:49
I can understand that for dual / triple boot configurations, but I don't think its necessary for a single boot config.EvaUnit02 wrote:But you should ALWAYS created a dedicated system partition for every OS that you have installed. It solves a lot of headaches down. 40GB is optimum for Vista.
I have Vista x64 running on a 250GB hard drive (1 partition) which has about 100GB of games on it as well as programs & stuff. Then I have a 500GB hard drive (again, 1 partition) which I keep other files on - TV shows, music etc.
Basically anything to do with the registry, like games & applications, I put on the OS drive, because I find if you have to reinstall an OS, even if you've kept the games & apps on a separate partition / drive, they still need to be reinstalled to give the fresh registry correct keys to work with.
TH-42PX80 | DMP-BD50 (MR BD & DVD) | SA-XR55 | SB-TP20 | XBox 360 Slim 250GB | XBox (XBMC, 160GB) | Zotac XBMC HTPC | Gaming PC | 8TB Media Server
- bradavon
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 24430
- Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30
Unless they look physically broken that's very unlikely in my experiance. It's always the memory with memory errors.Yi-Long wrote:BTW, I said the tests showed a memory-error, but it could also possibly mean the memory-slot(s) is/are broken, which could possibly mean a motherboard problem, which could mean it would have to be replaced
I'm wondering why they even messed with the O/S. They should've just replaced the memory. 5 minute job. Like IM I never separate partitions, it seems messy and frankly overkill. I use folders instead too.
Agreed. In a server environment it makes sense to separate software and OS from each other but not at home. Backup regularly and it's not a big deal to restore if you have to. Multiple partitions (as opposed to drives) is messy IMO.IronMonkey wrote:I can understand that for dual / triple boot configurations, but I don't think its necessary for a single boot config.
Personally I use backup software (SyncBackSE) to backup once a week to a 2.5" hard drive (no extra power needed).
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 8616
- Joined: 26 Oct 2004, 13:46
- Location: Alkmaar, Holland
That's what I told the guy on the phone as well: "why not just send some guy over and he can fix it within 30 minutes!?" He said it doesnt work like that. Oh well.bradavon wrote:Unless they look physically broken that's very unlikely in my experiance. It's always the memory with memory errors.Yi-Long wrote:BTW, I said the tests showed a memory-error, but it could also possibly mean the memory-slot(s) is/are broken, which could possibly mean a motherboard problem, which could mean it would have to be replaced
I'm wondering why they even messed with the O/S. They should've just replaced the memory. 5 minute job. Like IM I never separate partitions, it seems messy and frankly overkill. I use folders instead too.
I was there, the big BNB blackout of november, 2008. We lost many that day...
- bradavon
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 24430
- Joined: 27 Oct 2004, 20:30
Vista SP2 next month (gone RC on the 4th):
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2 ... public.ars
Unlike prior Service Packs, this one requires SP1 to be installed first. Apparently it's to keep the size of the download down.
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2 ... public.ars
Unlike prior Service Packs, this one requires SP1 to be installed first. Apparently it's to keep the size of the download down.
-
- Bruce Lee's Fist
- Posts: 9101
- Joined: 08 Feb 2005, 14:39
- Location: Wellywood, Kiwiland
- Contact:
Having Vista installed has finally paid off for me, big time.
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/s ... p?t=832282
http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/s ... p?t=832282