December 22, 2008 at 6:56 pm #160204The GenieMember
I have 2 machines at home running XP Home Edition SP3 ( my Sammy and a desktop machine) and a Toshiba Core 2 Duo laptop 1.6GHz CPU, with 2GB RAM running Vista SP1.
I am very happy with XP having used it for a few years, etc but have yet to be “converted”
I find my Vista laptop takes over 2 minutes to fully boot-up and when you download
Windoze updates and restart the machine it seems to take forever to process these updates.
Is this experience isolated to myself?
Would I be correct in assuming that compared with XP that Vista is far more RESOUCE GRABBING
Please respond if I am not alone!!!
MikeDecember 22, 2008 at 7:52 pm #177058PanManMember
My Tuppence worth.
Dual booting Sammy is my first real day to day experience of Vista.
Gut feeling ? On the same hardware (now with 2Gb RAM)with the same apps installed and visual effects at the max rather than tuning for performance then Vista generally seems snappier than XP similarly configured.
Yes it takes marginally longer to boot from cold( mind you if you want to see a long er time to a GUI from cold then try a Linux distro) and yes the update process is different, I suspect Vista runs updates in a different way to XP which seems to do it’s updates whilst you’re still logged in.
On the other hand going in and out of sleep from Vista is far quicker than going into/out of hibernate on XP and as I tend to just shut the lid then that suits me fine.
Am I sounding like a Vista convert ? For now yes although I’m keeping XP on here as an insurance policy 🙂December 30, 2008 at 8:50 pm #177060BlueboyMember
PanMan I find it surprising that you have found Vista to go in and out of hibernation quicker than XP. I have Vista Ultimate SP1 on a Dell Latitude D620 (2.16Hz Core 2 Duo with 3GB RAM) and under normal use it is very snappy – no complaints. Yet bringing it up out of hibernation takes about 90 seconds. My NC10 (with 2GBs of RAM) with XP Home comes out of hibernation in about 20 seconds.December 30, 2008 at 10:29 pm #177059PanManMember
Blueboy, I use the Sleep function in Vista rather than the Hibernate function.
What is the difference between Vista’s sleep and hibernate? Sleep awakens quicker than hibernate. In the event of complete power loss, sleep stores the information in RAM, thus loss of power means loss of unsaved data. Hibernate on the other hand, saves the contents of memory to a file called hiberfil.sys, thus you would not lose unsaved data.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.