Vista Annoyances Help Please?

[fr]

Originally posted by: EKKC
i have another issue, file copy and move seems to take forever. or a lot longer than on the same computer/specs than when it was under XP

i have a XPS700 with nForce 590 for intel. there's no new vista drivers for it yet, would that be why? copying things to 2.5" USB HDD or USB stick is crappy-slow. while full size external is so slow on "calculating tiem remaining" what the hell, stop calculating and just start copying!

I noticed the same thing. i copied music from my XP machine to a flash drive and over to my Vista machine. It took 3x longer to read on Vista than it did to write on XP.

 

[StopSign]

The Windows defragger sucks because it's slow. I don't like to leave my computer overnight because it's loud so when I defrag, I always do it manually. The Vista defragger is slow as hell just like the old 98/2000/XP defraggers.

Originally posted by: Nothinman

I think with a visual defrag, you at least have an idea of how bad it is and how long it will take to fix. I don't leave my machine over night to defrag because 1) it's too hot in my room and 2) it's too hot in my room. Plus it's hard to sleep when all you hear is disk access. I personally think the Windows version sucks because of this. True, eye candy doesn't provide any benefit other than retinal stimulation but it sure as heck couldn't hurt to leave it in.

Frankly I'd just forget about it if I were you, do you have any real proof that defragging actually helps anyway?

Yes I have proof. We all know that Office 2007 programs take relatively long to start up. After installing all my initial programs (fresh Win XP, Office, Photoshop, codecs, etc...), Word would take about 3 seconds to load up. After defragging, the start up was almost instant. Unless I'm on crack, that's a noticeable difference.

Originally posted by: stash
Why are you disabling UAC?

WOW ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

 

[Nothinman]

Yes I have proof. We all know that Office 2007 programs take relatively long to start up. After installing all my initial programs (fresh Win XP, Office, Photoshop, codecs, etc...), Word would take about 3 seconds to load up. After defragging, the start up was almost instant. Unless I'm on crack, that's a noticeable difference.

At the very least did you reboot between tests, right? Once an application is in the filesystem cache it should start near instantly no matter how fragmented it's files are. And there are a lot of other things going on that could account for those 1-3s, any other processes submitting I/O to those drives will affect the results.

 

[stash]

WOW ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

No, why are you yelling?

 

[StopSign]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Yes I have proof. We all know that Office 2007 programs take relatively long to start up. After installing all my initial programs (fresh Win XP, Office, Photoshop, codecs, etc...), Word would take about 3 seconds to load up. After defragging, the start up was almost instant. Unless I'm on crack, that's a noticeable difference.

At the very least did you reboot between tests, right? Once an application is in the filesystem cache it should start near instantly no matter how fragmented it's files are. And there are a lot of other things going on that could account for those 1-3s, any other processes submitting I/O to those drives will affect the results.

I rebooted after defragging and there was no delay there.

Originally posted by: stash

WOW ARE YOU KIDDING ME?

No, why are you yelling?

You're not bothered by UAC but you're bothered by Caps Lock? Weird...

 

[stash]

You're not bothered by UAC but you're bothered by Caps Lock? Weird...

Still haven't answered the question...

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Yes I have proof. We all know that Office 2007 programs take relatively long to start up. After installing all my initial programs (fresh Win XP, Office, Photoshop, codecs, etc...), Word would take about 3 seconds to load up. After defragging, the start up was almost instant. Unless I'm on crack, that's a noticeable difference.

At the very least did you reboot between tests, right? Once an application is in the filesystem cache it should start near instantly no matter how fragmented it's files are. And there are a lot of other things going on that could account for those 1-3s, any other processes submitting I/O to those drives will affect the results.

By defragging he most likely committed the prefetch layout, which the system would have done eventually. He just forced it to happen immediately.

 

[StopSign]

Originally posted by: stash

You're not bothered by UAC but you're bothered by Caps Lock? Weird...

Still haven't answered the question...

I don't want to answer your question, just like how you don't want to disable UAC.

 

[stash]

I don't want to answer your question, just like how you don't want to disable UAC.

Ok. When you grow up and move out your parents house, feel free to post an intelligent response.

 

[StopSign]

I'm living at home for school right now, so yeah, I'll get back to you in a couple years. Maybe by then you will have disabled UAC.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: StopSign
I'm living at home for school right now, so yeah, I'll get back to you in a couple years. Maybe by then you will have disabled UAC.

So, can I ask why you disabled UAC? After my initial machine install/config (which I can see why you might turn it off for a few days) I rarely if ever see any uac prompts on a day to day basis.

The only thing I see missing is a general 'shutup for 20 mins as I'm about to configure my world' setting.

Bill

 

[StopSign]

I turn it off because I don't need Vista warning me about what I'm doing. I know exactly what I'm doing. Even after the initial build, I might decide to install a new program (or update) or change some settings only to be greeted by UAC dimming the entire screen and asking me if I really want to do what I'm doing. It just makes a whole lot of sense knowing that you will never get another UAC prompt after you disable it.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: StopSign
I turn it off because I don't need Vista warning me about what I'm doing. I know exactly what I'm doing. Even after the initial build, I might decide to install a new program (or update) or change some settings only to be greeted by UAC dimming the entire screen and asking me if I really want to do what I'm doing. It just makes a whole lot of sense knowing that you will never get another UAC prompt after you disable it.

The whole point is not that YOU know your doing some action, it's when it fires when your NOT indicating that some malware is trying to change system settings without your knowledge.

 

[StopSign]

I don't get malware.

 

[spherrod]

Originally posted by: StopSign
I don't get malware.

But were you to get some then UAC would help you - correct?

 

[StopSign]

No, because if it's designed to attack Vista then it's probably also designed to bypass UAC since most home users won't disable it.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: StopSign
I don't get malware.

That you know of But point taken, if you think you can manage the machine and don't need a net that is your choice. I do think most people should have UAC on (albeit, I do want a snooze bar on it for when I know I'm doing a lot of config, etc but that has its own security issues).

Do you run any anti-malware tools (curious)

Bill

p.s. Please you rig links, not put your full listing in your sig. Thats why we have them.

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: StopSign
No, because if it's designed to attack Vista then it's probably also designed to bypass UAC since most home users won't disable it.

Perhaps you can explain to me how malware running as the current user (say from a drive-by download) can bypass UAC. I think you had a reasonable opinion (albeit I dont share it for most users) until you made this statement, now I honestly wonder if you know how UAC works and why what your suggesting is very difficult.

 

[EKKC]

Originally posted by: fr

Originally posted by: EKKC
i have another issue, file copy and move seems to take forever. or a lot longer than on the same computer/specs than when it was under XP

i have a XPS700 with nForce 590 for intel. there's no new vista drivers for it yet, would that be why? copying things to 2.5" USB HDD or USB stick is crappy-slow. while full size external is so slow on "calculating tiem remaining" what the hell, stop calculating and just start copying!

I noticed the same thing. i copied music from my XP machine to a flash drive and over to my Vista machine. It took 3x longer to read on Vista than it did to write on XP.

do you have a similar setup? nforce 590 intel? would it be because of the smbus drivers?

 

[Nothinman]

By defragging he most likely committed the prefetch layout, which the system would have done eventually. He just forced it to happen immediately.

Good point, I forgot about the prefetch stuff.

 

[pcgeek11]

Originally posted by: StopSign
I don't get malware.

Famous last words......

Gen. Custer said:

There are only a few hundred Indians....... --> --> -->

pcgeek11

 

[spongebobfan]

UAC really sucks. Disabling that was one of the first things I searched the internet for. After disabling UAC in control panels I found a Reg tweak that got rid of all notifications that I diabled it. Now all is nice.

I'm glad that I didn't install vista on a machine I care too much about. I'm guessing that it will be a year before all of the kinks are worked out and MS sends out a patch to get rid of UAC after all of the support calls from angry customers comes back

 

[stash]

MS sends out a patch to get rid of UAC after all of the support calls from angry customers comes back

Not gonna happen.

 

[spherrod]

Originally posted by: stash

MS sends out a patch to get rid of UAC after all of the support calls from angry customers comes back

Not gonna happen.

And there would be no reason to do it - once the initial setup is done then UAC barely bothers me. As far as I'm concerned it's a positive introduction by Microsoft.

 

[QueBert]

have they changed UAC from the beta? I ran RC2 and UAC was horrible, my Ubuntu asks me nothing, if I want to do something I do it, and the OS does what I tell it. None of this "are you sure" premission crap.