[shahed26]

aviv00, on Nov 2 2008, 01:59 AM, said:

ur vista is sp2 beta ?

im wondering if sp2 fix the os to max performance

No, its vista sp1, coz there is no vista sp2 64 bit yet, and i only use 64bit OS, (maybe SP2 x64 is out now, nt sure)

I think sp2 does fix those common performance issues, and adds alot reliability to vista os.
Going to wait for sp2 x64 before i do vistax64 vs win7 x64

This post has been edited by shahed26: 01 November 2008 - 08:06 PM

[aviv00]

if vista sp2 or server sp2 vs win7 have the same performance i wont be surprise

[shahed26]

aviv00, on Nov 2 2008, 02:07 AM, said:

if vista sp2 or server sp2 vs win7 have the same performance i wont be surprise

I have a strong feeling, vista sp2 and server sp2 will have very similar performance to windows7.
Vista SP2 will have the tweaks microsoft applied to windows 7 to make it more reliable and run faster (so similar performance compare to win7). But still we will have to wait for the final results when the final version of sp2 releases, and by then we will have windows 7 beta 3 (hopefully).

I think Microsoft as usual thinking bout money money , and sp2 vista will be the same as windows 7, but microsoft will charge full amount for windows7 jus for few extra features, eg touchscreen stuffs..

This post has been edited by shahed26: 01 November 2008 - 08:13 PM

[aviv00]

i dont think that win7 pre - beta to beta or rtm will have significant performance increase

just new feathers

win7 is not new whole os its based on vista

its nt 6.1 there not a lot work to do

fmo win7 prebeta is much stable then vista sp1

This post has been edited by aviv00: 02 November 2008 - 01:25 AM

[shahed26]

I agree aviv00, win7 is more like vista second edition, its just ms is calling win7, and not vista SE. (am sure u knw why ms wouldnt link vista name with win7)
Anyways, we will have to wait for beta 1 to see any performance increase over this pre-beta, if there is more speed compare to this pre-beta build, then we can expect more tweaks and more speed in beta 2. And the same performance of win7 can also be gained with vista sp2 (am pretty sure)

This post has been edited by shahed26: 01 November 2008 - 08:21 PM

[aviv00]

server 2008 is gr8 os which is the same as vista just tweaked differently

anyway u right ms must use another name for it

cos its gonna be gr8 os

Windows Vista beta 2 application performance
http://reviews.cnet...._7-6543881.html

This post has been edited by aviv00: 02 November 2008 - 01:16 AM

[cluberti]

Win7 should be a better performer than Vista, although I doubt we'll see huge performance gains (just like XP over 2000 wasn't huge, nor was 2000 over NT4). It should be much more efficient (great for those with laptops and netbooks) and should definitely run faster, but I don't know how noticeable it will be on Vista-era hardware and newer.

Also, totally off-topic, but what happened to whole words and punctuation in sentences? I think Shakespeare must be rolling in his grave anytime someone uses "TXT" or 1337-speek over, you know, actual whole words. <sigh>.

[shahed26]

After couple of hours of testing, i see still server 2008 (configured as workstation) is faster than win7.
Boot time for server 2008 = 35sec
boot time for win7 = 42-45 sec

Applications runs slightly more faster than win7, and also multitasking is much more smoother under server 2008.

Its too early to tell, but i think win7 will be more faster, and improve as time goes, just waiting for beta 1 of win7.

[aviv00]

gr8 news server rox!

now win7s vs server 2008 ;D

edit:

i think win7s is faster then server 2008

the deleting files is more fast [ deleting the old os 40k files around 8 40secs 1000 items for one sec ]

the counting and the deleting much faster

loading apps and changing windows is just gr8

This post has been edited by aviv00: 06 November 2008 - 11:43 AM

[aviv00]

http://www.dailytech.com/Report+Benchmarks...rticle13405.htm

[cluberti]

That article is so vague I don't really know what they're doing to compare performance between a pre-beta, debug-build (unoptimized) OS code versus retail-build (optimized, unchecked) code. Basically they say it's the same because the process and thread count is similar, and skype crashes? That's the article? Come on, better journalism please. I expect no less from dailytech, but it's still mostly trash.

[shahed26]

aviv00, on Nov 5 2008, 11:57 AM, said:

edit:

i think win7s is faster then server 2008

the deleting files is more fast [ deleting the old os 40k files around 8 40secs 1000 items for one sec ]

the counting and the deleting much faster

loading apps and changing windows is just gr8

Yes, win7 is faster when it comes to deleting copying files, and apps are also faster on win7. But overall experience with win7 was not great, as the explorer kept crashing, and multitasking was also for some reason not smooth compare to vista on my 4gb ram.
Am gona install win7 again, and give a try, and compare with vista

[bledd]

it's pre-beta, what do you expect?

pre-beta is just an insight of what is to come, ms don't release them publicly to the masses for a reason

this will shape out very nicely, just wait for the rtm

[FarCry3r]

bledd, on Nov 17 2008, 06:11 PM, said:

it's pre-beta, what do you expect?

pre-beta is just an insight of what is to come, ms don't release them publicly to the masses for a reason

this will shape out very nicely, just wait for the rtm

And this 6801 build is for developers only...

[weEvil]

shahed26, on Nov 4 2008, 05:24 PM, said:

After couple of hours of testing, i see still server 2008 (configured as workstation) is faster than win7.
Boot time for server 2008 = 35sec
boot time for win7 = 42-45 sec

Applications runs slightly more faster than win7, and also multitasking is much more smoother under server 2008.

Its too early to tell, but i think win7 will be more faster, and improve as time goes, just waiting for beta 1 of win7.

There's always Server 2010 to look forward to.

[infiniti25]

In windows 7 have they fixed the slow file transfers as part of these mentioned performance increases??

[weEvil]

infiniti25, on Dec 4 2008, 07:21 AM, said:

In windows 7 have they fixed the slow file transfers as part of these mentioned performance increases??

Slow file transfers have been fixed awhile ago with Vista Service Pack 1.

[shahed26]

Yes, file transfer problem was fixed in vista sp1, but in windows 7, file transfer is super fast.

This post has been edited by shahed26: 04 December 2008 - 09:31 AM

[infiniti25]

You say slow file transfers were fixed in SP1 but they aren't that much faster than pre-SP1 and certainly are not as fast as XP SP2 was.
I admit I might be slightly subjective as I haven't used XP SP2 as my main OS for a while but there was certainly a noticeable slowdown between XP and Vista SP1.

My question was more of a "Have they improved the file transfer speeds" which seems to have been subjectively answered with

Quote

but in windows 7, file transfer is super fast

so I am happy

[weEvil]

infiniti25, on Dec 4 2008, 11:32 AM, said:

You say slow file transfers were fixed in SP1 but they aren't that much faster than pre-SP1 and certainly are not as fast as XP SP2 was.

Wanna bet?

Get a stopwatch and a copy of XP & Vista.

Just because it 'feels' slower to you doesn't mean it is.