Vista compatability

Bluefoam

I'm plannig to get a new Windows laptop. Should I wait to get one when Vista is launched (when is that?) or should I plough ahead and get one now. Some laptops come Vista compatible but there are different levels of compatability. Some are not compatable with 'Vista Premium', is this something I need?

Please help...

PogMoThoin

Bluefoam wrote:

I'm plannig to get a new Windows laptop. Should I wait to get one when Vista is launched (when is that?) or should I plough ahead and get one now. Some laptops come Vista compatible but there are different levels of compatability. Some are not compatable with 'Vista Premium', is this something I need?

Please help...

Its only a sticker ie. go faster stripe.
To be vista compatible all you need is enough ram ie. 1Gb+ and maybe good graphics 2 run the aero features in Vista

ressem

The release date for vista is meant to be January 07 for home users.

Vista Premium means a minimum of 128 MB of graphic memory available, for the fancier graphics effects.

Should you wait? Depends on whether you need it now. Reputedly in December they may be providing Vista vouchers with new laptops to allow you to upgrade earlier. Vista might not matter to you or might be a hindrance if you use old software that won't be certified or patched.

optiplexgx270

speaking of vista compatibility - what do you guys currently use for AV on vista RC1?

greglo23

unfortunately there is such a thing as vista compatibility. i cant install vista on my desktop and i've got 2 gigs of ram, 7900gt graphics and a 10,000 rpm WD raptor!! its an Asrock dual dual sata 939 with X2 4600 dual core chip but when i tried to install 3 different versions of vista; 64 bit and rc 1 and 2 of 32 bit it would'nt work at all. i ended up running it in virtual pc and its as slow as a wet week. i've got mac os x 10.4.7 OSX 86 running on another drive in my desktop and it was easier to install. i literally tried everything but could'nt get vista to work :mad:

PogMoThoin

greglo23 wrote:

unfortunately there is such a thing as vista compatibility. i cant install vista on my desktop and i've got 2 gigs of ram, 7900gt graphics and a 10,000 rpm WD raptor!! its an Asrock dual dual sata 939 with X2 4600 dual core chip but when i tried to install 3 different versions of vista; 64 bit and rc 1 and 2 of 32 bit it would'nt work at all. i ended up running it in virtual pc and its as slow as a wet week. i've got mac os x 10.4.7 OSX 86 running on another drive in my desktop and it was easier to install. i literally tried everything but could'nt get vista to work :mad:

:rolleyes: You have to remember that Vista is only a beta. Of course there are gonna be probs with some drivers.

Laguna

I'm personally waiting for Vista tocome out before I even consider buying a new laptop/desktop, there's going to be a major hardware requirements/standards leap within a short time after Vista's release, so in my opinion any money spent on hardware now is dead money.

greglo23

its not just the drivers. it wouldnt recognise the chipset in the board so it could see my hard -drives but said it could`nt find an suitable drive to install on. took hours to download the 3 iso`s and no joy at the end of it all:( its well worth the op`s while checking out whether his purchase is future proof before laying out his hard earned cash. all it cost me was a few hours of downloading and some frustration :rolleyes:

PogMoThoin

Ya, but when the full version is available, these probs will be covered. Don't just dismss Vista just cos you couldn't get the betas running. Did you run the vista advisor? This will tell you what drivers etc aren't compatible & will need updates. Here: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/upgradeadvisor/default.mspx
I tried myself 2 dl it but it was after the june deadline for signing up.

8T8

Asrock are 'considered' a bottom of the barrel brand so it may be your motherboard wasn't exactly on the high priority list of hardware to test with or more likely Asrock have something going on in the bios that is conflicting with the Vista installer.

greglo23 did you try updating your bios ?

Anyway an RC2 is due Friday or sometime next week which may be a better snapshot to judge against.

As for the OP what the others said 1GB of RAM, avoid laptops with the Intel GMA950 integrated graphics if at all possible and to make the best use of the ready-boost feature get a USB memory stick equal to the amount of RAM in the system, that should cover it. Laptops coming out at the very end of the year will have hybrid hard drives which have a flash cache, Vista natively supports these the tech is branded as Ready-Drive and adds a nice little bump in performance to the system especially laptops where HD performance is always a bottleneck.

greglo23

i ran the vista advisor and it told me it would run with a few provisos. more room on the hard-drive so i stuck in a maxtor 80 gig and it still could`nt find a compatible drive :rolleyes: it also told me nero would need updating and my Cmedia sound card would need new drivers which could be downloaded from windows update. maybe the full release will be sorted but i wont be holding my breath.

8T8

You can safely ignore the advisor on the topics of HD space it moans at you to upgrade your HD even if you have a WD Raptor just because it's 70GB in size etc.

As for Nero, well I wouldnt be surprised if that program needs an update.

What kind of chipset does your motherboard have is it ULI based ?

greglo23

yep its a Uli/Ali m1689. it does`nt support vista and i`m running the latest bios 2.10. it`s strange that it isnt vista compatible but i can run OSX 86 10.4.7 albeit with a bit of hacking of kexts to make it run better:D

8T8

That's probably it, I read some folks having trouble even with the RC1 build of Vista with those ULI hybrid PCI-E/AGP motherboard & ULI SATA controllers in general.

Because ULI no longer exist, they were bought by NVIDIA & their chips were never that hugely popular either I'd imagine compatibility testing is on the lower end of the spectrum though by the time its final I'd expect it work as that's nothing something MS would leave unresolved.

NVIDIA did at least update the ULI driver for the pre-RC1 builds but haven't since so I'd imagine NVIDIA will probably take care of it eventually...

greglo23

thanks for the info 8T8. will keep my eye on that.

insight driver

I have an Epox EP-8RDA Pro motherboard, 2Gig of ram, 256mb GE force 6800 Ultra video and a 200gig hard disk. The boar is an Nvidia Nforce 2 board. I was able to upgrade Windows XP Pro SP2 to Vista RC1 (6500). I did have some driver issues. I then wiped my drive, partitioned two NTSF parts and one FAT32 part. I installed XP Pro first, then Vista second, opting to dual boot it. Dual boot works fine, I switch back and forth when I feel like it. I had driver issues to sort out.

It's taken me some time to get used to Vista. I still am not all that happy with it, but there are bits about it that I do like over XP.

I do have a nagging problem with some documents I made using Office XP on my XP Pro OS that cause the microprocessor to hit 100% and text flashes with the same Office XP install and fully updated on the Vista OS. I have no clue what is going on with Word 2002 on Vista. Not all documents act up, either.

kaizersoze

optiplexgx270 wrote:

speaking of vista compatibility - what do you guys currently use for AV on vista RC1?

I'm using AVG. They solved the bug that prevented it installing in Beta 2. It now installs fine but there is a new bug that prevents it loading at startup (for me anyway). Once the machine has booted up it can be started manually and runs fine.

ScumLord

Is there a trhead on Vista yet? I had it sent to me (their quick, 3 days) and it ran perfectly on my computer, almost better than XP did, I had none of the troubles that I had in XP, exept there's no sound and it won't let me install the drivers. I thought it was a really cool OS installed the 64bit version Haven't really used it to much yet not having sound is a drawback are there any drivers out for it yet (ATI wise)

8T8

The 64-bit version is lagging behind the 32-bit version which is why you encountered the lack of drivers for sound and video.

It's not worth wasting time with the 64-bit builds even after the final release and Vista is available to the public. As the only way proper 64-bit support will come about in drivers and application support is if an ecosystem is built up by forcibly installing 64-bit Vista on new PC's.

If Microsoft gives OEM's the choice or fails to encourage them to use it the 64-bit version will go nowhere like XP-64 which is a shame.

{Another big issue though one I'm not sure if it still applies or not is that Vista 64-bit requires the use of WHQL signed drivers no unsigned drivers period not even the admin can install unsigned drivers so if that is still the situation it will be a big obstacle to 64-bit driver adoption though from Microsoft's point of view they see it as a "fresh start" weeding out the bad drivers which are so often the cause of BSOD's under XP}

thebman

Aren't Ms updating the filesystem after release via a windows update?

I think I'd wait until after that.

GoneShootin

brim4brim wrote:

Aren't Ms updating the filesystem after release via a windows update?

I think I'd wait until after that.

They are creating an entirely new networking stack, and dumping the old one that's been patched to hell. I'm going to at least a year until all the holes and bugs that will be found have been patched.

8T8

Aren't Ms updating the filesystem after release via a windows update?

I think I'd wait until after that.

They bit off more than they could chew with the WinFS file system while it is up & running I guess they had too many issues pertaining to running it in a home environment which is why it was removed from Vista and instead will re-appear at a later date in the corporate/server versions of Vista as an add-on.

Eventually it will be rolled into post Vista home versions but probably not until they can make it work right but don't expect that for some time, the improvements they made to the existing NTFS file system and search systems brought most of the benefits that the end user would have seen with WinFS anyway which is probably why in part they pulled it.