The new build is now on Connect and in about 6 hours I should have it installed. I look foward to seeing the sidebar.
Old Build Remove by GSM

yes!!! can't wait to try it

Yea! Wating for it to be uploaded on Msdn...

Does MSDN seem slow today?

Hmm, Msdn seems fine as always to me!

Here is a image made from the Print Screen Key during the install
Old Build Remove by GSM

Windows Explorer And WMP version
Old Build Remove by GSM

god that looks sweet, i like the way the space settings show for each drive

Vista Activation Confirmed
Old Build Remove by GSM

Here is the Performance Rating And Tools Control Panel Open
Old Build Remove by GSM

IE7 and Multitab
Old Build Remove by GSM

Please post here when it is posted on MSDN.

I do not when it will posted there as I am in the beta, and I do not have a subscription to MSDN.

Ok, i'll look frequently.

The sidebar for Vista 5308
Old Build Remove by GSM

The font of yout start menu is different from the font in your task bar and it SUCKS. Is this a custom setting of you or was it like that by default?

(Is this beta alot better than the 5270 build? Didn't have the chance yet to install that one...)

I havnt change any text settings so it the default. Build runs alot smoother then 5270 I had a lot of problems using that build.

I hate that **** sidebar. >.<'
It's associated with explorer and the #1 cause of memory leaks that forced 400MB+ memory usage when it first appeared. O_o

Please tell me the sidebar process isn't default or at least that sidebar.exe is really a result of them dividing Explorer priorities. >.<'

I won't be getting this build but it actually appears to be.....Solid. o_O How well does it perform?

What? Thats the default text? If so that sucks bad.

It runs better then the previous builds.
The sidebar you have to enable it, it is off by defualt.
I even manage to play Sniper Elite, on previous builds it would just cause a blue screen.

I see you have no glass, what kind of gfx card do you have?

build 5270 used 800 MB with glass enabled, how much does this build use?

Click to view attachment


shots from vista on a tablet PC

Click to view attachment

Another one

As a screenshot from earlier showed, he is using a gfx card in the Radeon 9200 SE family.

Vista 5308 released on Msdn!

x64 Edition only thoug 3.6 gb wow.

that was my question, when i checked around 4:30 cst, it was showing both 64 bit and 32 bit. just got home from work, logged in and now its only showing 64bit. luckily i dont need the 32bit, but im still curious.

It has 32bit and 64bit on Msdn.

I do not know, since my ATI 9200 is not a supportted video card for all the effetcs.

I have been using this build and find it a big improvement over 5270 at least on my computer.

I've not seen that version use that much. 5308 uses 350MB after boot up with glass enabled. It is still too much though.

@gunsmokingman in that picture Vista has 39 processes running and is using 682MB of ram

Everyone would do well to remeber that this is still beta, there has been no optimization and adjustment made to make the OS run cleaner. this is the first feature complete version to be released. Optimization will come next, and i think those who have 5308 install on machine will agree with me that it runs pretty **** fast even with using all that ram. i have 512 installed on a box with a 2.26 P4 and it runs just smoothly very little hold up and anypoint and that is with aero turned on

I would agree that it does run fairly well overall. Though, other than some new eye candy and even more security (which I find more annoying than useful), I'm not seeing much in features that make it a worthwhile upgrade from XP. It is still fairly early to say this for sure, but compared to when I made the upgrade from 98 to 2000 (less compatibility, but much much more stable) and then from 2000 to XP (better compatibility and just as stable), I don't see the hype. At least not in the way M$ is trying to sell.

i agree why all the hype?aero glass woohoo better security wee that it?

On the 7th screenshot, Iexplore.exe is the one using the most RAM. Sidebar.exe isn't nearly at 400 MB.
Sidebar.exe appears to be fine there.

Beware of some large images.
Got raid working somehow in this build on an nVIDIA based controller, too. This might be my main OS for a bit (maintaining a WinXP install on a separate drive as well).

Edit: Decided it was easier to just make a webpage out of it.

http://server.counter-strike.net/files/vista.html

Couldnt get a successful install of the 64 bit edition on my ASUS-SLI board with an AMD X2 chip.

Jim

Haven't tried x64 yet. I'm running x86, as I was looking for maximum compatibility for now (installed x86 on a 4600 X2 without problems, however).

impressive screenshots. 44 Processes and 995mb of ram!

please take a screenshot of services.msc vista looks like a beast.

In order to fit them all on one screen, I went to List, rather than Details. Every service up to Workstation (highlighted in the screenshot) is in a Started state.

Here is taskmanger service list and perfomance mmc
This is a big image as I did it with dual screen enable.
Large Image

You weren't around at the Longhorn PDC were you?
It was an alpha stage at the time. The build number was 4051 and it was one of the better builds and the shell was probably one of the worst. The sidebar was integrated into explorer at the time. It took upwards of 2 minutes for me to fully load Explorer. The desktop loaded instantly but the sidebar was taking forever(along with the start bar). I looked in the taskmanager at one point to find it eating between 200-400MB during load. Disabling the sidebar feature fixed that but on a new installation, the sidebar was on by default. I like to focus on extracting PE from these builds to see what I can do. Fully loading explorer just wasn't an option. =/

I could probably get it done with the Vista 5xxx releases.

running the x64 version here with multiple issues. seems to be a step back imo.

win explorer will lag the computer out for 10-15 seconds, then once the window pops up it takes another 20-30 seconds to populate.

it activated just fine last nite, but now its telling me its not activated? whats up with that? plus it errors out anytime i try to reactivate it.\
*edit* like an id*** i was killing services on sat, and killed the "software licensing service", re-enabled that and all was good

granted i understand its the 1st full content beta, but stuff that worked fine before (just using it to browse my computer or the web) is now pretty much fubar'd. heres hoping the next ctp is a giant leap....

edit any one get sound working with an x-fi? mine wont work, even w/ the beta creative drivers?

nice screenshots. thats alot of services! I hope we can nlite this thing.

I find it does use a lot of services but I find it manages the memory resources better then other versions.

I wouldn't be suprised if alot of the services we see running are just there to for error handling and debugging.

You may be right, but MS on connect site have released both a Check and Debug version of Vista.
I use the check version and the amount of services have been about the same, I usually get it down
to about 34 sevices running.

yeah, i would think any new services or program features they have added have some type of monitoring or checking feature runninng constantly to give them feedback about how it is being used and how they can optimize it. I mean that is what a beta is for

time will come Vista will be stripped down like what we're doing to XP...

God is it just me or does Vista look incredibly tasty? I cant wiat to get a copy of it....though I would most likely wait till at least SP1 is out or something. And that would prob give the nLite community for Vista enough time to develop and have a shrunk down version ready to play!