Vista Slowness

I was helping someone with an issue on his Vista computer earlier. The main problem was to do with being unable to log in. We sorted that out, but then there is another major problem.

The system is extremely slow. Most of the RAM is used up (nearly 800MB was in use at boot up, out of (I think) 1GB). The hard drive is constantly working which suggests that it is swapping all the time. Things take minutes rather than seconds and the machine is very sluggish.

I didn't have time to stay and fiddle with it much, but I stopped loads of junk from loading on startup (there was far too much). This made a tiny improvement. But even with few things running, it was still using heaps of memory and was very sluggish.

Just wondering, how normal is this for Vista? I can't imagine it was doing anything else other than swapping memory.

I wouldn't recommend running Vista with less than 2GB. Its main flaws compared to windows 7 is memory resource use.

Another issue for a copy of Vista that's been installed and in use for some time is a load of temp files in the Windows directory. Every windows update adds every version of every file included in the updates, so over time this can get huge. When I was using Vista these files ended up being GBs

Try running the windows cleanup utility and clean as much as possible. Also it can be worth removing old restore points, and also check the drives Windows is watching for restore points as you only need the main windows on like this.

Vista is Klunky poo & should be avoided at all costs. If you can't get Win7, do XP Pro over Vista any day. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harrison

I wouldn't recommend running Vista with less than 2GB. Its main flaws compared to windows 7 is memory resource use.

Another issue for a copy of Vista that's been installed and in use for some time is a load of temp files in the Windows directory. Every windows update adds every version of every file included in the updates, so over time this can get huge. When I was using Vista these files ended up being GBs

Try running the windows cleanup utility and clean as much as possible. Also it can be worth removing old restore points, and also check the drives Windows is watching for restore points as you only need the main windows on like this.

---

Thanks for the suggestions harrison.

Quote:

---

Vista is Klunky poo & should be avoided at all costs. If you can't get Win7, do XP Pro over Vista any day.

---

Hehe. I'll suggest an Upgrade to Windows 7, but I think they are a bit too paranoid to do any such drastic changes :whistle:.

Vista used to run perfectly for me, but on a system with enough resources to handle it well (quad core with 8GB ram). It was smooth, fast and very stable. However as your friend has found out, on a more limited system (not much ram) it struggles.

I wouldn't have ever taken the step back down to XP after using Vista myself as I liked the OS much more (but I can appreciate so many put off of it by the resource hog it was).

In comparision I would go as far as saying Windows 7 is the nicest OS I've ever used. It is basically still an updated Vista, but with all the beta bloat and junk removed, the bugs cleaned up, and the additional features originally intended for Vista included. I would even go as far as to say it is as stable as Windows 2000, if not more. But as with any OS, correctly installing and setting it up, then maintaining it is key to smooth running.. this is where a lot of uses come completely unstuck because they just install junk on it and trash the registry and scatter files all over the HDD.

I've hardly used either Vista or 7. Some of the computers at college over the last two years got upgraded to windows 7, while many still had XP. I tended to avoid using them though unless I needed software which I couldn't use anywhere else.

I just use Windows XP on this machine and Windows 2000 on my old machine, when I need Windows. Of course I do the vast majority of things in Linux these days, so I seldom need Windows.

Tbh, I'd feel a lot better about myself if I didn't use a Bill Gates based computer at all.

Then again, it's nice to get dirty once in a while. :sly: :lol:

Do you use non-M$ based systems at all?

BTW, I got told off on a forum the other week for referring to Microsoft as M$:ninja:.

:lol: Nothing wrong with referring to them as M$ in my view. I've been doing it for as long as I remember.

We need a similar one for Apple IMO.

Funnily enough, that was on a Macintosh forum. Apparently it is immature and belongs in the 1990s.
:lolup:

Best thing I can think of for Apple is making it a little 1337: 4pp|e.

Appl€?

Excellent Teho :thinking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stephen Coates

Do you use non-M$ based systems at all?

BTW, I got told off on a forum the other week for referring to Microsoft as M$:ninja:.

---

Yeah, I use AmigaDos, dabble in a bit of Unix from time to time & re-install Winblows quite regulary cos it fux up all the time. :ninja:

Can't turn on file & printer sharing atm. Well, I can but even for applying the changes, it is always disabled when you go back into the advanced settings. This is probably why I can't map any network drives so hey ho, another re-install. :dry:

& I'm the same as Harrison, it's also been M$ for me, also Mircoshaft, but mainly M$. I've had plenty of free replacement mice & keyboards from them over the years. F'narr! :sly:

I never reinstall Windows if I can help it. I would much rather track down and fix a problem so I know what caused it in case it ever happens again, or I encounter it on another system. With systems I receive to repair that is another matter because I never know the history of the user's usage of the OS, so I normally just dump the contents of the HDD for a full backup then format and clean install, then copy the user files back so they don't lose anything. It is much easier that trying to fix most user's existing installs because in all honesty most people don't actually seem to use their computers far beyond the default setup... and that raises a big point I've considered for many years..

Most people get a new computer with an OS pre-installed. They don't change it for another OS, and then don't really install much on it other than maybe Office and a couple of games. And all of their personal files normally fit easily onto a 60GB pen drive. This has therefore always raised the question in my mind that for most people a full blown PC with a current spec CPU and loads of ram is complete overkill for most. I know people that when buying a new PC they have to spec the top end CPU, the most ram etc... but then I ask them what they are actually going to be doing on it and they describe email, office, web browsing, some Facebook games and sometimes (but not that often) install a couple of games. Why do these people need a PC with a quad core CPU and 8GB of ram and a full brown GPU? They don't. I have saved quite a few such people a lot of money in the last couple of years... building them a more modest i3 (using its built in GPU) and 4GB ram, with a 60GB SSD. They have been extremely happy with this and it has easily exceeded their needs.

If I worked for PC World I don't think they would be making much money from my sales! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harrison

<snip>

Why do these people need a PC with a quad core CPU and 8GB of ram and a full brown GPU? They don't.

<snip>

---

Yes they do, because bloatware WindoZe needs it to give a better score in da WindoZe Experience & actually function half decently. :lol:

Seroiusly though, an i3 rig is not going to perform as well as an i7 or i5 based rig. CPU Cache plays a huge part on things, especially when Gaming. ;)

When it comes to re-installing, 99% of the time, it's quicker than actually finding a solution to the problem. I've been trawling the web for the last week since putting a NAS drive on my network. Never needed to map jack before I attached my 12GB Network Store. So no more wasting time for me.

I often wonder how so many people end up with so much crap on their computers. In many years of having Windows based systems, I've never had one be particularly slow.

Of course, this does beg the question, why do so many people have computers in the first place?:whistle:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stephen Coates

Do you use non-M$ based systems at all?

BTW, I got told off on a forum the other week for referring to Microsoft as M$:ninja:.

---

If your question was in general, yes I use only AmigaOS at home. I have my A1200 with AmigaOS 3.1 and my X1000 with AmigaOS 4.1 which is my daily computer. Thanks god that I'll never have windoze at home, never!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phantom

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stephen Coates

Do you use non-M$ based systems at all?

BTW, I got told off on a forum the other week for referring to Microsoft as M$:ninja:.

---

If your question was in general, yes I use only AmigaOS at home. I have my A1200 with AmigaOS 3.1 and my X1000 with AmigaOS 4.1 which is my daily computer. Thanks god that I'll never have windoze at home, never!!!

---

Lucky man. :shades:

Excellent. Always cool to see people who use modern versions of AmigaOS. I've briefly used OS4 a few years ago and it seemed nice, but I don't have any hardware to run it.

Same with me. I've never had hardware to run OS4. If I did then I would probably use it as part of my daily computing use, but in all honesty even that is badly dated now. And I have to use Windows as it's the only platform that can run all the software I need and use.

@Kin. As shocking as it might be, most people don't play any games in their PCs. They literally use them for word processing, email, surfing the internet, and some candy crush saga. For this even a Core2duo is fine, let alone an i3.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harrison

<snip>

@Kin. As shocking as it might be, most people don't play any games in their PCs. They literally use them for word processing, email, surfing the internet, and some candy crush saga. For this even a Core2duo is fine, let alone an i3.

<snip>

---

As may be, but then you can't use a joypad to aim a crosshair like you can spinning around with a mouse & keyboard. Consoles are utterly useless for 3D Shooters & you know it. ;)

yes... but what is your point? Such people that don't game on their PCs don't game on consoles either! Most just play a few games on their phones and tablets... which is sadly becoming the mainstream gaming platform. Consoles are going back to hardcore gamers and not in every household.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harrison

<snip>

@Kin. As shocking as it might be, most people don't play any games in their PCs. They literally use them for word processing, email, surfing the internet, and some candy crush saga. For this even a Core2duo is fine, let alone an i3.

<snip>

---

i7 is a better platform to game on than Core2Duo, i3, i5, consoles or mobiles I guess. :rolleyes:

The guy who has this Vista computer is concerned about it since MS is soon stopping support for Vista. He was asking about Windows 10.

Will Windows 10 likely run OK on a 2007 era typical consumer desktop system? Unfortunately I can't remember the specs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stephen Coates

The guy who has this Vista computer is concerned about it since MS is soon stopping support for Vista. He was asking about Windows 10.

Will Windows 10 likely run OK on a 2007 era typical consumer desktop system? Unfortunately I can't remember the specs.

---

It might, but there will be no Driver support for a 2007 based puter. Your hardware will purely rely on M$ using it's own database of Legacy type drivers. Reading here might help you ascertain. :thumbs:

https://www.microsoft.com/en-gb/wind...specifications

He should test it with windows 7 first. It should run ok with that. Then upgrade 7 to 10. Reason being if it can't find drivers for any hardware it falls back on the existing installed win 7 ones as they will still work.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Judging by the specs on that Microsoft page, it will probably be OK. I suggested upgrading to Windows 7 a few years ago but he never followed up with that.

I think they were going to go and ask at the local computer shop. If they do, hopefully they might advise a memory upgrade.

Do you think such a machine will be less sluggish with Windows 10?

My AMD x2 system (the one I built based on Harrison's recommended parts) from around 2006 is still alive and kicking. It runs Win7 just fine. With 4gig ram and an SSD for the main OS it still feels pretty decent for the basic stuff like browsing, torrenting etc.

I did try to run the Win 10 upgrade prog to see what would happen but the computer failed the upgrade checks - I think it was the GFX card that was so old as to be unsupported, but I can't really remember as I wasn't really too bothered and didn't push any further. In short, I reckon it might be a push to get your mate onto Win 10 (it might work, perhaps) but Win 7 would be just super.

He phoned up earlier to say he was interested in trying Windows 7, so I recommended he did that.

Is it still possible to buy a license for Windows 7?

Not sure but it's very easy to find an iso download and really easy to find the patching software.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

They decided to go and look at the local computer shop who do a lot of refurbished PCs. I went with them today and we managed to get a small form factor Dell Dimension (similar to the current one), with a Pentium Dual Core, 4GB RAM, and Windows 10 for about £140.

Should be decent enough for what the bloke needs it for and should be an improvement on his current Sempron/1GB/Vista system.

I would highly recommend the ram be upgraded to 8gb though. Windows 10, and even 7 run much better with that as a minimum.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Harrison

I would highly recommend the ram be upgraded to 8gb though. Windows 10, and even 7 run much better with that as a minimum.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

---

I entirely agree H. :thumbs:

I've been fortunate to have 8GB DDR3 for a couple of years now & I can see a big difference for replacing it with 16GB.

I went to set up the new machine today. I think this 'new' machine is actually older than the 'old' one (albeit with much better specs).

On this guy's monitor, the machine booted but would only display a blank screen with a cursor. After a bit of faffing, I learnt that you have to press Win+P to change which display is the primary one. Maybe it was trying to output the desktop to the TV out or something. Sounds like that is a common problem with Windows 10. Anyway, I got most of the system set up and it seems to work fine. It browses the web OK and runs Libre Office so I think it will be fine with its current spec. I might advise an ad blocker though to help with web pages.

Seems like a reasonable upgrade for him