Vista is released - Live Performance on Vista?

Shoma · Post by **Shoma** » Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:47 pm

nebulae wrote:From a close friend who's one of the main IT guys at Symantec:

Final verdict on Vista: I like it, but it’s certainly not worth the money. Stick with XP.
Interesting...

Sticking with XP, thats what im doing. Im back on Vista with SP1 and see if it got better

nuperspective · Post by **nuperspective** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 3:16 am

yep definiately wait for the first service release. no question.

nebulae · Post by **nebulae** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 3:22 am

Lee, I'd wait a li'l longer than that, my friend. Here's my theory...suppose DOS was absolutely and totally stable and offered the best in sound quality and fidelity. And even suppose that it was 32 bit, and had every benefit we now enjoy in OSX or XP. Do you realize how freaking fast DOS runs on modern computers? So at some point, the "operating" part of an OS gives you pretty much everything you need. Beyond that, how about letting the speed in CPUs actually feel like it is faster? My issue with Vista is that it will require a ton of hardware upgrades only to feel just as fast as XP feels now. That's not an advancement in my book, it's just fancier. So I'd have to be seriously convinced to go to Vista, because XP has been a fabulous OS for years, and I see no reason to upgrade.

nuperspective · Post by **nuperspective** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 4:20 am

i agree - i dont really feel the need to.

hence the original question being does it just look nice or does it improve on xp? at this time i dont think it does. if anybody was to upgrade i would still say wait for the first service release.

im going to get a new laptop so it will be able to run vista, but ive still requested xp on it. so far no one can really say what a 64bit operating system is going to do for me. if anybody knows please tell me.

tencentcat · Post by **tencentcat** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:30 am

Shoma wrote:
nebulae wrote:From a close friend who's one of the main IT guys at Symantec:

Final verdict on Vista: I like it, but it’s certainly not worth the money. Stick with XP.
Interesting...
Sticking with XP, thats what im doing. Im back on Vista with SP1 and see if it got better

I've had Vista on my PC for about a week now and I completely agree. It has some nice features borrowed from OSX and a few original ideas and a nice new skin which are nice additions. The performance of Vista on my machine at this beta stage is pretty sluggish compared to XP, not to mention the expected drivers no longer working with no hope of a solution.

If you're adventurous and need to buy a new PC, go for the Vista option. Otherwise wait until SP1 or 2. If you already have XP, it's most definitely not worth the money at this point.

rbmonosylabik · Post by **rbmonosylabik** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:41 am

I've been running Vista for almost 2 years now

[/shitstir]

veggieryan · Post by **veggieryan** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:54 am

hmmm...
i have been running vista since before rc1. In my experience it is far better than XP or OSX for low latency audio performance. I see a 5-10% less cpu usage than XP or OSX. For example, I score lower than many 2.0ghz core2duo macbooks with my 1.66 core duo toshiba tablet in the live 5 performance test. I get 18% at 512 samples with delay compensation on and 14% at max latency. 16,384 samples, with delay compensation on.
The performance is stellar.
Also, sleep and hibernate work much faster and more reliable than XP. the tablet integration is so sick and there is now a hack to get tablet control working in ableton in the bugs forum.. totally amazing.
beyond that, the look is nice, overall performance is smoother, the backup feature is handy and its solid.
I couldnt imagine going back to xp. I cant stand the way the start menu hiccups when you are first starting up or under a load. sometimes the cursor pauses under a load in xp. hate that. spinning beach balls in osx under a load. hate it.
vista definately performs much better than xp or osx when you are maxing out your ram and the page file is full. it is also better under a heavy cpu load.
there is a definate difference when under a load at low latency. vista has many features that improve media performance.
this is just the beggining. next, live will be written specifically to take advantage of these features, like the media thread priority and waveRT driver model... the performance will be even better. Sonar has already done this and the difference is incredible.
see here: http://createdigitalmusic.com/2007/01/1 ... #more-1801
the future is bright for audio on vista.
any new pc will come with it installed so you wont have to worry about shelling out big bucks for it. trust me, you will be glad. xp was due for an upgrade.

Muzz · Post by **Muzz** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:30 am

I would agree that it is better than xp.... but I would not say that it is better than any thing else.

Have been working with it for a couple of weeks now. haven't done any audio but do run a number of disk/cpu/memory apps on it as work.

Unfortunately it does still lock up. Still just the same microsoft crap file/memory/thread,cpu problems. Better than xp true, much prettier...

As has been said before, if you get a new pc consider it. But don't pay for it.

Just my 2 cents.

zappen · Post by **zappen** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:19 pm

Vista is cool, but osx looks better, anyway i'll wait till sp4..

yourmom · Post by **yourmom** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:26 pm

rbmonosylabik wrote:I've been running Vista for almost 2 years now

[img]MAC%20OSX[/img]

[/shitstir]

*hi5*

shaneblyth · Post by **shaneblyth** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:29 pm

I have a few friends running it and they actually turned the aero interface off after a while. They said it goes alot better with it turned off and it still looks alot better than XP. They said aero started to drive their eyes a little crazy after a while. There is too many see through windows and fancy graphics which started to distract and made it harder for them work.
I have it in a virtual Machine under OSX on my Macintel (parallels doesnt support aero yet) and it looks fine with aero off again better than XP but I certainly noticed it's alot more sluggish than XP under parallels. I have not been brave enought to load it native on it's own partition yet. I just wanted to see what it would look and run like. Parallels is support to be getter full graphics support for Vista within the nexr 6 months but in the mean time if I need anything form Windows i'll just stick with XP..

Herne · Post by **Herne** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 6:36 pm

To Muzz, and others:

I'm testing Vista on all my machines at the moment. As a reseller, I have to support my machines, after the new 90-day MS support is up. Of all the machines that were unstable new BIOS and VGA drivers sorted the problems, Vista is as stable as XP, but only on sorted hardware.

glu · Post by **glu** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:11 pm

so do you guys think the final release of bootcamp will support USB devices like midi controllers?

Tarekith · Post by **Tarekith** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:10 pm

I thought the current release of Bootcamp did as well?

shaneblyth · Post by **shaneblyth** » Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:14 pm

glu wrote:so do you guys think the final release of bootcamp will support USB devices like midi controllers?

bootcamp is installing windows on a PC.. not virtualisation (by PC I mean a MAc which as we all know now is a PC) so there is no problems
It's exactly the same as dropping it on any other PC . as long as it has the right drivers available and it does USB is a standard device on any PC these days.