“The complaints about sluggish performance in Windows Vista keep growing. While it’s unfair to point to beta software apps—or whatever Microsoft wants to call them—the warning flags are already evident,” David Morgenstern writes for eWeek.
“A batch of complaints reached my inbox following my recent column looking at Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard and Vista. One message, from reader Randall Asato, warned that folks thinking they can run Aero on older hardware will be out of luck,” Morgenstern writes.
Morgenstern writes, “He said he expected that most upgraders will be at the least forced to purchase a new video card with sufficient VRAM (video RAM)… There are signs that the base performance of Vista on almost any hardware configuration may disappoint. Or at least concerns that Vista will run sluggishly on the system configs that Windows buyers are accustomed to.”
“At the same time, performance may be hindered by the traditional thin configurations offered in the Windows market. Many machines ship with 512MB of RAM, and in the mindset of the market this is sufficient.
For example, the software industry still maintains the fiction that a Windows XP machine with 256MB of RAM can do all the tasks that need to be done, or that users might want to get done. Look at almost any piece of software and 256MB is listed as the base system requirement,” Morgenstern writes. “But that amount has little to do with usability. It’s a joke.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: First of all, 99% of Windows users have no idea what a video card is, much less the ability to upgrade it. Let’s face it, these people bought their personal computer at Wal-Mart. So, when Joe and Jane Sixpack are faced with the idea of having to buy a new computer to run “that there great new Winduhs they got out now,” wouldn’t it be nice if they knew there was a better way this time around? The more ads Apple runs for the Mac right now, the better. Get a Mac.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
a href=”http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/10688/”>Apple’s Boot Camp 1.1 runs Microsoft Windows Vista Pre-RC1 – August 28, 2006
Apple’s Mac OS X Leopard is 64-bit done right, unlike Microsoft’s Windows Vista kludge – August 14, 2006
Microsoft Windows Vista: If you can’t innovate… try to impersonate Apple’s Mac OS X – August 10, 2006
Analyst: Apple’s new Mac OS X Leopard sets new bar, leaves Microsoft’s Vista in the dust – August 08, 2006
Windows Vista rips-off Mac OS X at great hardware cost (and Apple gains in the end) – June 13, 2006
Computerworld: Microsoft Windows Vista a distant second-best to Apple Mac OS X – June 02, 2006
CNET reporter: Apple Mac mini is my most ‘Vista Ready’ PC – May 24, 2006
What’s the difference between Mac OS X and Vista? Microsoft employees are excited about Mac OS X – March 22, 2006
Analyst: Windows Vista may still impress many consumers because they have not seen Apple’s Mac OS X – January 05, 2006<
It is almost inevitable that Vista 1.0 will run at the same speed as the first retail version of OS X.
However, before I get flamed to death, let’s be clear on the differences…
When OS X was released, memory was more expensive, video processing power was more expensive – hell, everything was more expensive. As a result, it was more ‘difficult’ to own a system on which Cheetah (as it was known, with unintended irony) would run with ease.
To put some flesh on that argument, OS X was initially released in an era of PC100/133 SDRAM, 80GB EIDE disks and <shudders>sub-GHz G4 processors</shudders> with a truly crapulous 256KB of L2 cache. Vista will, by contrast, be released (and is probably being tested) on systems with DDR2 memory, fast SATA disks and multi-core multi-GHz processors with more L2 cache than an Apollo mission could shake a Saturn V rocket at.
That, in spite of all of these advantages, Microsoft have still managed to build a piece of OS software that can overwhelm its host hardware beggars belief and calls into question any number of elements of Microsoft’s development process and expertise including…
1) Design and programming: Einstein has a quote attributed to him which, paraphrased, says something about things being as simple as possible and no simpler. Buckminster Fuller is quoted as saying “When I’m working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong.”
I’ll give dollars to doughnuts that if you looked at a Microsoft design or the finished code as a monolith, it would be neither simple nor beautiful. Look at any number of Windows apps versus their equivalent Mac versions and you’ll see that problem in miniature: bloated by feature, bloated by size, less elegant in implementation, less consistent – need I continue.
2) Development tools: how well optimised are the tools that Microsoft are using for their OS platforms. I know we live in a high-level world where the C/C+/C++ languages are the weapon of choice, but there is a solid possibility that the tools being used by MSFT’s developers are generating code which is, at best, inefficient. Combine that with a set of APIs which are more concerned with customer lock-in than elegant development and is it a surprise that Vista might be a little sluggish.
3) Quality assurance: As I’ve mentioned on several threads before, recent betas of Vista displayed some (pretty serious) bugs related to the completely rewritten network stack.
Now these bugs have been resolved (although there are probably more available to take their place), but the question remains: if you had these problems nailed in the old Win2K/WinXP network stack – which you allegedly ‘acquired’ (nudge, nudge, wink-wink) from one of BSD environments – how in the name of almighty Zarquon did you let them re-appear in Vista.
Does MSFT not have a “Network Stacks for Dummies” manual?
And if they don’t, how many other “re-inventing the wheel” fsck-ups can the Vista customer expect.
Which brings us to the nub of the QA issue: if they can’t get the basics right through QA and testing, how on Earth are they going to deliver an OS which has any concept of performance optimisation.
As a sidenote: the last Monday of August is a public holiday here in the UK and a number of PC retailers are running “promotions” which appear to be concerned with shifting as many Celeron laptops as possible for around £350-£400 from manufacturers like Toshiba and Acer. I wouldn’t dream of selling a system with that spec without doing the whole “caveat emptor” thing about Vista, I wonder how many <strike>suckers</strike> customers are going to be disappointed when they come to load Vista on their systems in twelve months.
Looks like one of the few personal computers that can run Vista decently will be the Mac Pro Quad Zeon Workstation. Since it appears Microsoft is cutting off a huge segment of its current Windows users due to hardware requirements, MS should have just done a more drastic reduction in legacy support “by design” (instead of “by accident”).
Um…yeah. For all those thinking MDN is being snobby when referring to average users, I have a little wake up call. Redmond, Washington is a hugely snobby city. Microsoft is a snobby company and they are smug too so, In my opinion, turnabout is fair play
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”raspberry” style=”border:0;” />
Good take MDN. The point is that most people aren’t going to fiddle around with video cards. Either they think Vista warrants a new computer, or they stick with XP.
And the difference between Tiger and Vista today…
…Vista………………………….Tiger
and what will be even better will be the arrival of Leopard on the scene”
…Vista…………………………………………………………………………………………………….Leopard
Hey! What’s wrong with being trailer trash? Some of us use Macs. I spent over half of the year in a trailer of one sort or another. Mac on one side of the desk and AV software riddled Windows PC on the other side with internet access over satellite and a diesel generator for power.
I don’t know if it means much but the Windows PC is on the left hand side of the desk.
==
I’m not making excuses for Windows or PCs in general, but the platform requirements to effectively run MacOS X have also increased over the years if you want to take advantage of the full OS functionality.
==
Gee, I’m using my 4 year old iBook with Tiger just fine…
Aw, no ripple effects! How will I ever get my work done? Oh noes.
(Actually iLife 06 is the cut-off point for my Mac. Won’t install or run. I’m not counting on Leopard running on my G3 but it’d be a nice thing to do…)
Big Al,
Are you a hurricane victim (curious)?
I sure get tired of MDN always insulting Wal-Mart shoppers. For
the record, we bought our first “Mac” at Wal-Mart. At the time, we
didn’t know anything about computers, but a clerk at Wal-Mart
showed us a “Mac”, talked with us about it, and we bought it. Now
we have several “Macs” and are very glad that clerk pointed the way
to Apple. If Apple, and MDN, wants more “average” people to buy
Apple, then they need to do more in educate people, not insult them.
I get very tired of always seeing Microsoft adds on TV. How about
Apple selling”minis” on QVC. All that audience ever sees is Dell. If
people don’t know about an alternative, then they can’t buy it. Apple
needs to educate, educate, educate. The current adds don’t cut it
for me. They insult. They don’t educate or sell.
Just my two cents.
Big Al,
Thanks for showing up and setting us – uumm – straight?
Fanatic Realist,
Ok right, so the real point is that VISTA is relatively late, and Mac OS X is already way down the road. I think most us Mac fans are on the same page when you put it that way.
PC User: All my apps are running glacially slow. Got any tips?
MS helpdesk: Try adding 16GB of RAM.
Mr. Peabody >
No, the real point that someone needs to address is how come Vista appears to overwhelm hardware that is several generations on from where Apple started in spite of delivering similar functionality to Jaguar/Panther-era OS X.
Now – without being a conspiracy nutjob – here are your options…
a) Microsoft are incompetent
b) Microsoft and their hardware OEMs are involved in a conspiracy designed to promote increased sales of new computer systems
c) Microsoft have intentionally – and without the knowledge of their OEMs – developed an OS which requires the purchase of new computers
d) both a & b
e) both a & c
Before answering, ask yourself how Apple OS development team has around 300 members and MSFT’s has several thousand. And yet, Vista is late, it’s sluggish and it’s buggy.
Personally, my money is on Answer E – because once a criminal with no scruples, always a criminal with no scruples.
Not a hurricane victim. I work in the the Canadian oil patch searching for oil and gas. I earn a good 6 figure income.
No sympathy needed here.
Big Al:
Have you met my anxious little friend, Concerned? He’s a terribly worried that your 6-figure income may not last much longer than civilization, as we know it.
Considering how much Vista has turned around with the latest build (5536 Pre-RC1) and how much praise is being heeped upon even by some people previously elated to bash the pre-release versions – this article seems rather behind the times.
It definately stands out compared to all the other stories when one does a news search for “windows vista” in goole.