rolling back to xp tonight from windows7

[rifftrax]

There can be significant driver differences depending on the hardware you have - so graphics, for example, could be faster, depending on your model - however for pure cpu speed you can't beat xp at the mo, AFAIK, but win8 might fix that.

+1.

Win8 is supposed to have identical resource requirements to run as win7. It won't be a step in the direction of more needless bloat but it's not moving the direction most linux distros do either. So looks like win xp will always be king of processing efficiency.

[hibidy]

That's depressing.

[metamorphosis]

Win8 has lower ram and cpu usage than Win7, despite it's published (higher) system requirements. It's also sporting a much more stripped back UI by the looks of things (ignoring metro for the moment...).
The install size, however, is gigantic.
Yes, it is depressing that they can't focus on usability, performance and security, rather than flashiness, bling, and marketing hype.
But that's life.
Do the best with what you have, or tweak it until it's on fire.

[hibidy]

I dunno. Despite the "lower" specs for win7, I have had great success with it. But ymmv.

[Harry_HH]

How to check in the Win system if this 3 GB switch is enbaled or not? H.

Have a look at the guide in my sig, -> Additional tips -> Hardware Stuff.

quote]

I just spent 15 minutes reading your guides

Quick-fire cleanup/speedup guide for XP/Vista/Win7 users

OS and System RAM Limitations Guide

I have to say, waisted time, I didn't get the information, i.e. simple
instructions what really to do to check this XP 3 GB switch.
The trouble with these "expert" papers for those who are not computers entusiaths, is a) difficult to evaluate what the tweaking really makes to you computer because every move has both up- and downsides, b) is difficult to find out what to really do. Therefore is fustrating to read this kind of (i.e. "why don't you tweak this and that") comments and advices such as "just read this paper/book/article. We "stupid" people who really are keen on what TO DO with the computers rather than the computers itself need more simple instructions. I'm sure the purpose was good, the result not. H.

[rifftrax]

Win8 has lower ram and cpu usage than Win7, despite it's published (higher) system requirements. It's also sporting a much more stripped back UI by the looks of things (ignoring metro for the moment...).
The install size, however, is gigantic.
Yes, it is depressing that they can't focus on usability, performance and security, rather than flashiness, bling, and marketing hype.
But that's life.
Do the best with what you have, or tweak it until it's on fire.

That's actually pretty cool. I did just happen to read the thread about sonar x1 benchmarks between win8 and win7 so it appears that may truly be the case (would be awesome). Do you know what the install size is slated to be around? I'm really looking forward to doing my next build with say a 64gb OS ssd so I hope to god it's not too close to that as I don't have much money to do a much larger drive

Therefore is fustrating to read this kind of (i.e. "why don't you tweak this and that") comments and advices such as "just read this paper/book/article. We "stupid" people who really are keen on what TO DO with the computers rather than the computers itself need more simple instructions. I'm sure the purpose was good, the result not. H.

Yes, I can totally empathize here about this. Most IT admin stuff is written by gurus who have a large degree of experience but are not really the best copywriters don't have marketing experience lol.

Doing the 3gb switch is actually really easy. Look at entry 2. under "FL Studio Memory Management Options":

http://www.image-line.com/support/FLHel ... el_cpu.htm

Essentially you just need to edit the boot.ini file is all. Actually pretty straight-forward. When editing the boot.ini file you'll see something like this with info about your windows install:

Code: Select all

[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect

All you do is " /3GB" to the end of that line. So now you have something like:

Code: Select all

[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect /3GB

That's for xp. Read the directions for doing so in vista/win7 32 bit as it's different.

[Harry_HH]

Win8 has lower ram and cpu usage than Win7, despite it's published (higher) system requirements. It's also sporting a much more stripped back UI by the looks of things (ignoring metro for the moment...).
The install size, however, is gigantic.
Yes, it is depressing that they can't focus on usability, performance and security, rather than flashiness, bling, and marketing hype.
But that's life.
Do the best with what you have, or tweak it until it's on fire.

That's actually pretty cool. I did just happen to read the thread about sonar x1 benchmarks between win8 and win7 so it appears that may truly be the case (would be awesome). Do you know what the install size is slated to be around? I'm really looking forward to doing my next build with say a 64gb OS ssd so I hope to god it's not too close to that as I don't have much money to do a much larger drive

Therefore is fustrating to read this kind of (i.e. "why don't you tweak this and that") comments and advices such as "just read this paper/book/article. We "stupid" people who really are keen on what TO DO with the computers rather than the computers itself need more simple instructions. I'm sure the purpose was good, the result not. H.

Yes, I can totally empathize here about this. Most IT admin stuff is written by gurus who have a large degree of experience but are not really the best copywriters don't have marketing experience lol.

Doing the 3gb switch is actually really easy. Look at entry 2. under "FL Studio Memory Management Options":

http://www.image-line.com/support/FLHel ... el_cpu.htm

Essentially you just need to edit the boot.ini file is all. Actually pretty straight-forward. When editing the boot.ini file you'll see something like this with info about your windows install:

Code: Select all

[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect

All you do is " /3GB" to the end of that line. So now you have something like:

Code: Select all

[operating systems]
multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\WINDOWS="Microsoft Windows XP Professional" /fastdetect /3GB

That's for xp. Read the directions for doing so in vista/win7 32 bit as it's different.

Thank you for the info. Before I start edit book.ini files etc. just a couple very simple basic questions: 1) where can I find book.ini and what does it; what are the risk that by editing OS system files you make a misstake which ruins your computer to the condition a non-expert cant't fix, 2)if you can in the simple way make your computer run better why is OS constructed "in the factory" in the way it is, i.e. there must be also downside with this kind of tweaking. Sounds like trimming your motorbike, makes it go quicker but because the motor is not ment to be that quick, it breiks very soon. Or is this total wrong kind of analogy? Harry

[metalifuxx]

I had a Dell desktop 677mhz (256mb RAM) computer from about the year 2000, and my friend needed a computer. It originally of course was meant to run Win 98. It crashed etc, but I brought it back to life and he wanted me to put XP on it. I was weary about XP performing well on it, because the system was way below spec for XP's minimum requirements. For just doing basic internet browsing, cd burning, multimedia playback, and basic audio/wav recording, it runs smooth and very stable. And it also runs smoother than Win 7 on my current (6 year old) computer. One of my friends has a laptop that is even older than the Dell 677mhz desktop, it has XP on it, and it runs smooth and stable. It just infuriates me that concurrent versions of Windows are always taking a step back, another step back, and then a step forward. But I would much rather have Windows than MAC, which seems like every little point number update breaks compatibility with certain programs and plugins, which that alone always makes me chuckle.

[metalifuxx]

Windows 7 also doesn't remember my graphics contrast/brightness/color settings with the graphic properties app that is used with the integrated video card driver. Everytime my screen goes to standby I have to readjust settings when I use the computer again

[hibidy]

Windows 7 also doesn't remember my graphics contrast/brightness/color settings with the graphic properties app that is used with the integrated video card driver. Everytime my screen goes to standby I have to readjust settings when I use the computer again

Hmmmm, I've never had that.

[DuX]

It feels nice and relaxing *not* to have a need to post anything really helpful. It seems like the number of people who understand Windows and Microsoft "ways" has grown lately. Nobody more glad than myself...

However, given my big mouth, I would like to add a bit of "me" into this thread... since no "OS vs OS" can go without me.

XP is also great because of nLite and slipstreaming, so you can customise it to *your* needs. Simply install the basic things that you need. Everything else that's just idly consuming space - just FO [Windows "tour" LOL]. People talk about gigabytes of installation for the OS only, and my XP is still under 1GB... well under 1GB. I do backups every now and then, so if something happens it's easy to get it back. In just a few minutes! That's the best antivirus and anti-malware protection EVER. So you don't have to worry about the updates to the system either. Having a mamouth OS like 7 or 8 that's not really possible unless you're doing backups to Bluray and have all the time in the world to wait for making backups of multi-GB OS. The direction where Windows are heading is "to the dark side" if you ask me... OS should be as tiny as possible. Easy to backup, and fast, efficient. Forget about the "bling" factor, it has to be fast and functional. I'm only counting mouse clicks... how many mouse clicks does it take to do this or that? In XP it's mostly a matter of one or two. In Win 7... OMG! simply copying a file from here to there takes some nice amount of clicks. Not to mention stupid UAC... only Microsoft or Apple can invent such BS. I don't want the OS to tell me *anything*. I need things to be *done* this instance, when I tell it to!

The best argument about using Win7 is "no bluescreens"? And how many times does your app crash, so you have to restart it, and your data is lost anyway? In my experience, Win7 crashes more, but all you get is OS informing you of a crash. Does that make it any different from an XP crash? You still lose all your data you've been working on at the moment of crash. I'm not having any bluescreens nor application crashes on XP and if I ever needed more memory to use, I will surely go the XP64 route. It doesn't matter how old is the OS. All it matters is its performance, stability, and efficiency for me. Isn't that what it's all about? Old? HG a F I say. What matters is how things work, not how old they are. The sad thing is - most people today have become "upgrade maniacs" or "advertisement zombies". Meaning, they have a need, like drug addicts, to update "things", no matter if the update is worth it, no matter if the upgrade really works better, they just have to *have it*. Just like a drug addict. They don't listen to reason, nor logic. All that matters is to get an UPDATE. To all those: have you ever asked yourself *why*? Have you ever browsed around and read about it? Have you ever seen some performance tests? Some claims in this thread are so unreasonable that they made me laugh... fortunately not so many of them...

P.S. you can always pick up my nLited XP at this Cockos' thread: http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=30162 Now that I think of it, I wouldn't call it "audio optimised", but rather just "optimised" and it's got most of the SATA AHCI drivers included. It's my contribution to the audio community... Cheers!

[rifftrax]

Thank you for the info. Before I start edit book.ini files etc. just a couple very simple basic questions: 1) where can I find book.ini and what does it;

The boot.ini is what windows checks when looking at available installations of windows. This gives a little more info:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314081

You can edit the boot.ini file this way:

"Edit the Boot.ini File

To view and edit the Boot.ini file:
Right-click My Computer, and then click Properties.
-or-
Click Start, click Run, type sysdm.cpl, and then click OK.
On the Advanced tab, click Settings under Startup and Recovery.
Under System Startup, click Edit."

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/289022

what are the risk that by editing OS system files you make a misstake which ruins your computer to the condition a non-expert cant't fix

Your computer won't start, which really isn't too crazy to resolve. Here is how to repair the boot.ini file if it somehow becomes corrupted or you edited something badly:

http://pcsupport.about.com/od/fixthepro ... ootini.htm

You'll need the xp install disc to do that. Very easy.

2)if you can in the simple way make your computer run better why is OS constructed "in the factory" in the way it is, i.e. there must be also downside with this kind of tweaking.

Nope, there is none. You just get the ability to access more resources. Like many xp tweaks...you really encounter zero problems when it's implemented the correct way.

Sounds like trimming your motorbike, makes it go quicker but because the motor is not ment to be that quick, it breiks very soon. Or is this total wrong kind of analogy? Harry

Wrong kind of analogy. A motor-bike would be more like an analog system. Code is a bunch of 1's and 0's. You always get the same result from a specific change in the code no matter what as long as the underlying hardware is operating correctly.

[Harry_HH]

Wrong kind of analogy. A motor-bike would be more like an analog system. Code is a bunch of 1's and 0's. You always get the same result from a specific change in the code no matter what as long as the underlying hardware is operating correctly.

OK - thank you for the comments. Maybe I'll give a try (I just wonder, if this is that straightforwared, why these fixes are not made by the MS or at least instructed by the MS - why to make the computer less powerful than the potential is - some kind of plot?). H.

[rifftrax]

OK - thank you for the comments. Maybe I'll give a try (I just wonder, if this is that straightforwared, why these fixes are not made by the MS or at least instructed by the MS - why to make the computer less powerful than the potential is - some kind of plot?). H.

The problem with Microsoft stems from them being a massive bureaucratic organization with tons of administrative overhead. Plenty of things that "make sense" to people like you or I require intense amounts of push on so many levels to institute that the people in the organization that actually have to power to manage authorizing such "forward-thinking" changes or actions usually are so burnt out on redundant projects that they don't care enough to try.

This is why most big companies are such encumbered lumbering slugs when it comes to actually allowing significant obviously brilliant changes in infrastructure or project development to occur. They are living in the industrial age paradigm of business, as opposed to utilizing what Steven R. Covey refers to as the "knowledge worker" paradigm as described in his book "The 8th Habit" (great read).

So the bullshit cycle is needlessly perpetuated and people are kept in the dark.

[DuX]

Thank you rifftrax! This is one of the best descriptions of how corporations function ["think"], I've ever read. Indeed, that's why a corporation with a bunch of greed driven CEOs cannot really produce anything really good or right. I would also like to add that the best products always come from enthusiastic individuals, small businesses, mostly driven by fame, and possibly a bit of greed, but not necessarily. Like Linux crowd, for instance. When a business, or art and craft for that matter, is completely just greed and money driven, that's never good, and it's doomed to fail at some point and start producing garbage, since the quality of product will be hurt by the wrong corporative policies, and they're always wrong, since all that matters to a corporation is profit, not to provide their customers with the best product, but the best product that creates the most profit for them! That's where the proprietary technologies come in and BS like that...

All IMHO, of course... but it also comes from personal experience, as I've seen it first hand at work when I was working for one. It's more like working for "Borg". "You are not an individual any more", "you will be assimilated", and working for the "Ferenghi" at the same time "profit is the god". They were just concerned about how to squeeze out more bucks out of the customers, not how to make a better product.

It must be an interesting book, thanks! Cheers!