Why Is Windows XP Still So Much Faster Than Vista?

Why Is Windows XP Still So Much Faster Than Vista? - Info Week column

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

S.Lewis - 27 Mar 2008 14:52 GMT

Information Week:

http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/03/why_is_windows.html

Reply to this Message

RnR - 27 Mar 2008 18:47 GMT

>Information Week:
>
>http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/03/why_is_windows.html

I really had thought after SP1 I would change OSs but as every day
passes, it seems less likely because every week I seem to read mostly
negatives about Vista. I haven't taken any scientific polls but my
guess is 90% of the Vista stuff I've read is negative. And the 10%
that I read which is positive, I can't recall it saying it was much
better than XP but about equal or very slightly improved over XP.
I don't mind a small decrease in speed (if I have to) but I hate the
idea of incompatibilities and driver issues. That stuff can drive you
nuts in time and money and perhaps some may not get resolved so that
leaves you to wonder what next. As I said before, for me the nail in
the coffin for Vista was reading the emails between MS execs.

I wish MS was more careful before releasing new OS's but I'm dreaming
here.... not going to happen. It certainly appears to be all about
the money :( .

Reply to this Message

Clark - 27 Mar 2008 19:52 GMT

>> Information Week:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> here.... not going to happen. It certainly appears to be all about
> the money :( .

I am probably wrong here, but I get the impression Vista was more about
security than most other things. If MS felt they needed to revamp their
OS to make it safer, they may have thought the rush was worth while.
The security issue may also be what is slowing it down.

I was in the Beta program and chose not to install it until some
improvements had been made. But, as the previous poster, perhaps SP1
won't be the cure all I had expected, so I may wait a little longer also.

I think the slowest computer I ever saw was a laptop running XP with all
the bloatware. I seem to remember removing one of the products, or
disabling it helped a great deal. I think it was the one that was
continuously scanning the system for changes, and not part of WinXP.

Clark

Reply to this Message

S.Lewis - 27 Mar 2008 22:21 GMT

>>> Information Week:
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 30 lines]
>
> Clark

The OEM bloatware has always been an XP issue (and earlier OS's as well). A
typical brand new Dell will come out of the box with somewhere between 55
and 72 processes running at desktop idle on first boot.

In most cases, those can pretty easily be trimmed down to 30-40 processes
providing an immediate improvement in machine performance.

The problem with Vista is that the XP magic tricks don't help it nearly as
much, suggesting OS processes that will prevent Vista from ever being
"snappy" while running a full Aero package.

Reply to this Message

Journey - 27 Mar 2008 23:49 GMT

>Information Week:
>
>http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2008/03/why_is_windows.html

I turn off most of the Vista "features" and on my 2GB RAM laptop I
don't experience any subjective speed problems.

The author says:

"As an engineering type, I wish I could tell you I had quantitative
data confirming my statement that XP is faster than Vista.
Unfortunately, I only have my anecdotal, subjective impressions. (But
I'm right.) "

and

"The biggest Vista negative is the fact that it sucks up lots of
processing cycles, which could otherwise be applied to useful work. "

I would be interested in seeing his results if he turned off Aero
glass, and all indexing functions.

MS must be missing something because Mac OSX has great searching and
indexing and I never have any performance issues there, even when
running OSX and XP concurrently.

If I have any Vista problems that require a lot of time to resolve on
my D520 I will go back to XP. I have had problems but was able to
resolve them quickly thanks to Google.

The author of the article also says that one of his graphics apps
doesn't run on Vista, but doesn't name the app. I think the app
creators share responsibility for Vista problems because they had a
long time to get their apps working (someone may correct me on that
but the beta period seemed very long).

The reality is though that there are some incompetant companies like
Palm that have taken a long time to get Vista versions working. There
is no excuse for that (and I'll spare you my Palm soap box other than
saying Ed Colligan is one of the most incompetant CEOs and he should
have been sacked a long time ago).

Reply to this Message

Ben Myers - 28 Mar 2008 02:29 GMT

In defense of the software developers who do graphics apps of all sorts, write
drivers, and do just about any other meaningful software that runs under
Windows:

1. Windows, even the now venerable XP, is the most complex and complicated
operating system ever written. In a sane world, no company will ever try to
challenge Microsoft in that regard.
2. The Windows registry is the biggest pile of horse droppings in the history of
software. It is complicated. It is undocumented, to the masses, anyway. It
is inscrutible.
2.1. The tight integration of Internet Explorer with base Windows operating
system is an abomination and a security nightmare.
3. Windows Vista was in beta test for a long long time because it was, and still
is, BUGGY! With complex interwoven code you get something that is a hellish
mess to debug. Even before that, it is just as hellish to write stable and
reliable apps. Windows beta cycles are ALWAYS very long.
4. From release to release to release, Windows is an ever-changing operating
system platform. Why? Either Microsoft is incompetent, or they know full
well what they are doing to the rest of the world, namely jerking us all around.
5. Now put yourself in the collective shoes of any software development team
with a mission to develop a Windows application. I would not want to ever walk
in those shoes. I got enough blisters writing code for a much simpler earlier
version of Windows.

Do not ever blame 3rd party software developers for being late with their
product for a given release of Windows. Place the blame exactly where it
belongs: at the doorstep or moat of Bill Gates. Or Steve Ballmer.

Why I can almost even defend the incompetent software developers who write the
drivers and supporting software for HP printers, scanners, and all-in-one
devices. Their software is notoriously awful, but, hey, they have to live in
the world of Windows. And maybe it's HP's marketing types that make their
programmers do stupid things... Ben Myers

>>Information Week:
>>
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>saying Ed Colligan is one of the most incompetant CEOs and he should
>have been sacked a long time ago).

Reply to this Message

Zack - 28 Mar 2008 19:15 GMT

On Mar 27, 6:29 pm, Ben Myers <ben_myers_spam_me_...@charter.net>
wrote:

> In defense of the software developers who do graphics apps of all sorts, write
> drivers, and do just about any other meaningful software that runs under
[quoted text clipped - 71 lines]
> >saying Ed Colligan is one of the most incompetant CEOs and he should
> >have been sacked a long time ago).

A bunch of very good points! Windows is extremely complex
(not in a flattering sense), and it even has the GUI integrated
with the OS. (Which is a nasty curse for having a fully stable
system to start with.) It is really hard to develop complicated
apps for it, what anyone who's done it will readily confirm I
think. (The point #4: i'd say it's just so tough that it is above
their heads, too; it's a moving target for them too.)

On the other hand - this is my opinion, and the one I do not
hold very tightly - I would say that the industry is to blame a
little; they may have been a little ... lazy, or 'comfy,' with XP.
There are expenses, and big inconveniences, in adjusting
to a new system, and much of the industry may simply have
been reluctant to roll up their sleeves. Again, it comes back
to what Ben says: Windows systems and environments are
complex, and only getting more so, so it *is* hard.

(My opinion, right? PS. I haven't read the quoted article.)

I must say the other thing: for me Vista is NOT slower.
I don't have a very complex set up, but I've run it loaded,
and with CPU intense stuff too, and it is not slower. (I am
not saying it's snappy and lively, I can see clearly that it
is a bigger system. But it is not slow. For me.)

Reply to this Message

Journey - 28 Mar 2008 20:50 GMT

>In defense of the software developers who do graphics apps of all sorts, write
>drivers, and do just about any other meaningful software that runs under
>Windows:

Good information and persepctive Ben, as usual. I don't cut companies
like Palm Computing any slack. Occasionally there is a CEO that
oversees a company's demise or slipping into irrelevance, or that
rests on its laurels while the world moves on.

That CEO in Palm's Case is Ed Colligan. Development on the Palm line
stopped (as they waited for their OS direction to magically solve
itself), they bought the Treo line from Handspring, and that stagnated
too.

Palm had plenty of time to make sure its products would work under
Vista. The amount of time explaining and developing workarounds is
probably a lot less than the time they have spent dealing with their
incompatible software.

Even when they have a solution, it stays in beta forever. There's
nothing like not following through.

What's true is that the marketplace will decide. Unfortunately the
marketplace sometimes has to go backwards in some ways before it goes
forwards. There is a market for PDAs. There are legions of Palm
users out there that would like a new handheld, the same is true of
former Axim users and iPaq users.

All of these will most likely end up as Apple iPhone/PDA users, but
many of the advantages of the Palm software might not hit the iPhone
for years.

And Palm, the way it is currently going, may never have a non-beta
release for Vista.

Incompetance -- they should have had that at Vista's launch. It's
mission-critical, and it deserves mission-critical priorities and
resources.

Mediocrity, or incompetance, is often at the top. Ed Colligan
certainly fits that description, as well as the board that hasn't
canned his a.s a long time ago and that hasn't demanded excellence
from that company.

Reply to this Message

Journey - 28 Mar 2008 21:00 GMT

>All of these will most likely end up as Apple iPhone/PDA users, but
>many of the advantages of the Palm software might not hit the iPhone
>for years.

I think I am going to use my laptop as my PDA from now on. I had
started to do that with my Lenovo X61 which was stolen but now it's
between my MacBooka and my ThinkPad T60.

I think I'll use my MacBook -- if it breaks it will give me a good
reason to get a PowerBook! It also resumes from sleep quickly, is
more stable, and runs both Windows and Mac programs.

Reply to this Message