Tom's Overly Detailed Vista Review

prostoalex writes "The weekend is here, and several software sites have published extensive reviews of Windows Vista for your reading enjoyment. Tom's Hardware is running a 500 hour Windows Vista review that spreads out 40 pages." From the article: "This new operating system is huge: it has more than 37,800 files, taking up a total of 10 GB. Part of this size stems from the fact that the current Beta is for the so-called "Ultimate Edition", which contains all available components, including complete versions of both Tablet PC and Media Center capabilities. In addition, many applications have been compiled in debug mode, so some space savings should occur for final versions once that debug switch is turned off. For our Windows Vista preview, we used Build 5381."

Comments

Re:read it?

[melonman]

5 hours? I don't think so: that spreads out 40 pages on Tom's Hardware means about 300 words plus 5Gb of adverts and screen clutter.

The 3rd Prostoalex Submission Today

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, this is getting out of hand. He's already had 2 articles today, every one of them linking to a different site of his. Did Slashdot's contract with Roland expire or something? This guy is clearly using Slashdot to pad his various semi-scammy sites. Something smells rotten here(and it's not RMS without a shower...).

Re:I TOLD them it was a dupe!

[Sawopox]

Perhaps /. needs to implement a "DUPE" link that's accessible to subscribers. Have it function like Digg, totaling the number of DUPE clicks each article receives.

Then, allow subscribers to set a DUPE filter limit. Anything over that limit is not displayed on the page.

(Also, I've always wanted to use this in a post.)

3. ???????
4. PROFIT!!

10 gigs thats not huge anymore

[RobertLTux]

im mean really mandriva is 12gigs total debian is 12 gigs i think that just about all the big distros are that big

Re:10 gigs thats not huge anymore

[jlarocco]

Comparing full install size of Vista to a large Linux distro is apples to oranges.

Yes, some of the large Linux distros are huge, multi-CD behemoths. But they include just about every piece of free software under the sun. For your comparison convenience, here's a list of programs usually included with a mega-distro:

• Compilers (gcc, g++, gnat, fortran, perl, python, ruby, ocaml, haskell, lisp, scheme, awk, ...)
• Office suite (OpenOffice, KOffice, ...)
• Several word processors (OpenOffice, KOffice, Abiword, LaTex...)
• Spread sheet program (Gnumeric, OpenOffice, Koffice, ...)
• Databases (MySQL, PostgreSQL, OpenOffice's Access equivalent, ...)
• Dev environments (KDevelop, Anjuta, emacs, vi[m], eclipse, ...)
• Graphics (Gimp, ImageMagick, [x|g|k]pdf, ...)
• 3D graphics (POV-Ray, KPovmodeler, blender, ...)
• Debuging tools (gdb, cachegrind, ...)
• Java development tools (gcj, jdk[not in strictly free distros], eclipse, ...)
• Mathematical/scentific tools (GnuPlot, Kalzium, KmPlot, Latex, ...)
• Window managers (XFCE, KDE, Gnome, WindowMaker, IceWM, Enlightenment ...)
• Web browsers (Opera, Firefox, Mozilla, lynx, links, w3m, ...)
• Mail clients (Opera, Thunderbird, Evolution, KMail, Mozilla mail...)
• Network tools (ethereal, tcpdump, wget, ...)
• Drivers for just about everything (not everything, but a surprisingly large selection)
• Text editors (Emacs, Vim, pico, nano, gedit, jedit, ...)
• Multimedia (Xine, MPlayer, XMMS, ...)
• Tens of thousands of other apps

That's a fraction of what you get with a distro like Suse, Mandriva, or Debian.

Now, a list of what you get with a full Vista install:

• Window Manager (only 1)
• Games (Solitaire, Minesweeper, ...)
• Basic network tools (Internet connection wizard, ...)
• Basic drivers (See /. article from a week or two ago)
• Graphics (paint)
• Internet (Internet Explorer)
• Email (Outlook express)
• Word processing (Wordpad)
• Text editor (Notepad)
• Multimedia (Windows Media Player)

Notice something? Nobody uses Paint. Nobody uses Wordpad. Nobody uses Notepad. Nobody uses Outlook Express. Nobody plays Solitaire and Minesweeper. For most intents, Windows is just a 10 gig OS. If you want to do anything useful, you have to install other programs.

A full install of a large Linux distro has programs for just about anything someone might want to do on a computer, and it's actually useful software. If it didn't include AbiWord already, I'd go download it. If Windows didn't have Wordpad, I wouldn't care.

But I run Slackware. It's 2 CDs - a full install is less than 3 GB, and comes with word processors, latex, compilers, debuggers, network tools, 4 window managers, XMMS, and some other stuff. It's very useable, comes with a hell of a lot more stuff than Windows, and is less than 1/4th the size for a full install.

Re:10 gigs thats not huge anymore

[Jugalator]

Yes, some of the large Linux distros are huge, multi-CD behemoths. But they include just about every piece of free software under the sun. For your comparison convenience, here's a list of programs usually included with a mega-distro

Yes, but much of the reason the Vista install has grown is because they're including much more bundles in this one than before, so yes, Linux may include even more, but the reason both grows is the same. Vista will compared to XP also include: a search based on Windows Desktop Search, Windows Defender, Windows SideShow, Windows Calendar, Windows Photo Gallery, Windows DVD Maker, Windows Collaboration, BitLocker, new games (Chess, Mahjong, Purble Place), Services for UNIX.

So it's unfair to say that it's unfair to say that only Linux is gaining size from bundles. ;-)

Personally, I thought the idea of overly many bundles were idiotic, Windows and Linux editions/distros alike.

Instead release free/cheap "Addon Packs" to order on CD's for those who want, or via a slick OS integration for direct downloads if you have a good connection. For Linux/Windows to assume that everyone should want the bundled Movie Maker or other esoteric applications is just plain stupid IMHO.

Re:10 gigs thats not huge anymore

[Marc_Hawke]

The software our company writes uses the registry to store settings. However, the customers that buy our software like to lock down their users to where they have to 'write' access to ANYTHING, especially the registry.

The two are incompatable. It's a constant barage from Customer Support trying to tell Development to "get the heck out of the registry."

Of course, our other product writes to text files...and we are constantly having to tell people to give write access to those text files. And finally, another product writes to files that are stored in the users space. (Flavor of the day is "C:\Documents and Settings\username\Local Settings\application\" Have fun walking a non-techy user through checking that. (Especially since it's typically hidden by default.)

I guess there's no way to win...but we've definitely 'lost' the most when using the registry.

Re:I TOLD them it was a dupe!

[cosmotron]

Isn't this what the point of the tags are? They were supposed to make it so if an article is a dupe, and people tag it as that...stuff was supposed to happen.

10GB? You have got to be kidding!

[kimvette]

10GB for just the operating system is just plain ridiculous. Take practically any Linux distribution, you will have a full installation of the OS, assorted userland utilities, scores of server and desktop applications (hundreds if you count them by component), and a whole slew of games and still struggle to reach 10GB. Ditto for OS/X.

Okay, so the beta as ships is compiled in debug mode, so the final release won't be 10GB; assume an average of 30% overhead for debug hooks (that's a generous figure). That would still give you 6.6 or so of disk consumption for the OS itself. Now, let's remove the extraneous files you never need - all the readme files, the install logs, and so forth - all the junk text files Microsoft leaves in %windir% - that's maybe 50MB or so, if you're very, very generous with rounding up for each file before adding them together. It's still around 6.6GB or so. Let's be more generous and call it 6GB just to give Microsoft the benefit of the doubt.

That's just ridiculous. It's clear from other, better-written reviews that Vista is much more than a simple update to Windows XP, but does the increase in functionality actually justify occuping over 6GB of disk space? Is the 6GB the result of extremely inefficient, sloppy code (which would explain Vista's minimum requirements compared to Linux+XGL or OS X's much more modest minimum requirements for similar eye candy capability), or is the entire thing written in VBscript and run through an interpreter at runtime? 6GB just seems to be a bit much, and if 10GB is closer to reality for the release mode build, it's even more absurd. They bundled in Media Center functionality - so? ATI's media center application and *nix's MythTV are far smaller than MythTV, and in the case of MythTV, does far more, without the DRM emcumberment - and highly extensible due to the source availability, if you are so inclined. They included tablet functionality? Well, I have that capability (pretty much screen rotation and handwriting recognition) with my PocketPC, in only 32MB of ROM, so that does not explain the tremendous size of the OS. Networking? OS X and Linux and BSD all include far more network stacks, drivers (Well, OS X does not include many drivers due to the limited hardware support matrix), etc. right out of the box and still takes far less space than Windows Vista.

Just what exactly is adding the bloat?

Regarding the review: Tom's "review" is not a review, but a glorified screenshot gallery - I didn't get past page 13 because I want a review and not just a bunch of screenshots spaced out over 40 pages for the purpose of generating billable ad impressions. If you want me to view the ads, give me worthwhile content.

Re:10GB? You have got to be kidding!

[MSFanBoi2]

Last I checked a full load of SUSE with all the fixings to give me a comparible level of software capabilities was just a tad over 8 GB...

Glass houses folks...

Re:10GB? You have got to be kidding!

[DimGeo]

Okay, so the beta as ships is compiled in debug mode, so the final release won't be 10GB; assume an average of 30% overhead for debug hooks (that's a generous figure). That would still give you 6.6 or so of disk consumption for the OS itself.

Have you ever compiled anything with MSVC? The "Debug" build produces an executable that is usually 6 *times* bigger than the "Release" version. One example: A pet MFC application of mine compiles into a 480 kb file (statically linked) with the "Release" config, and to a whopping 3 mb file with the "Debug" config.

I predict that when Vista is ready to ship, it will take no more than 3 GB hard disk space. And that's a worst-case prediction.

NOT a dupe

[iced_773]

This one is the revised version - no unnecessary pull for Ubuntu 6.06 :)

HDD Space

[Konster]

Really, a 10GB install isn't that bad, considering that I can get a weenie 250GB drive for $80, and it doesn't even make a dent in the new 750GB drive.

Laptop users may have a valid whine, with low-end drives at 40GB, mid-range at 80GB or so, but I'd expect that a notebook install wouldn't take that much on a low-end product.

I'm not fond of the Microsoft Vista Ultimate Extreme De Luxe Ultra version that's a complete system-resources orgy that wants a few GB or so of RAM or a UI that makes my Geforce run at a good % of max for a good slice of time et cetera.

On the plus side, MS Vista will be shipping (eventually) with a copy of Duke Nukem Forever.

Oh, give me a break.

[vought]

Tom's Hardware is running a 500 hour Windows Vista review that spreads out 40 pages

Another Tom's Hard-On review with two paragraphs per page that stretches out to 40 pages is supposed to be thorough because it is long?

You think MAYBE it has something to do with the thick coating of ads all over TH's pages? I mean, they could have put it all on two pages or even one if they'd wanted.

Is somebody at Tom's paying you guys to post these dupes about hard-to-read articles that add little insight to the pool of knowledge about Vista?

Re:One good thing...

[binary paladin]

You might want to look at foXposé. Pretty much the same thing for Firefox. I've never actually used it, but if you like that feature and you use Firefox, you might like it.

Very unbiased review...

[Warlock7]

...it outshine its Linux and Mac OS competitors.

This isn't because of the fact that it steals most of it's features from those competing products? Then again, with beautiful non-buggy windows that look like this, who could argue?

...we're still dealing with a relatively early beta version.

Wow, after, what is it now, seven years? It's an EARLY beta version?!?!?! Daniel Schuhmann needs to get his head out in the light more often because something is affecting his brain up in that dark damp place he's got it now.

It's amazing that a "hardware" company like Apple can roll out a new OS nearly every year while it takes a "software" company like Microsoft seven to steal all of Apple's ideas... :P

my mini review of vista beta 2

[signore pablo]

My experience with Vista started with build 5308, then tried 5365 and now 5384. Typically in Windows, I run firefox, thunderbird, battlefield 2 and starcraft as my main apps. Then there are the various media players, winamp with the clearone beta theme, itunes, and windows media player. My Windows XP experience has been relatively flawless. Sometimes I yearn for Mac OS's zen like simplicity and features like expose, but otherwise XP runs great on MY computer, meaning my computer doesn't run anything else with all the hardware supported very easily. Now, Vista Beta 2 is definitely an improvement over 5308, but it's still pretty damn raw. In 5308 I couldn't run BF2, but now I can. All it requires is that you run it in administrator mode. Performance at first was pretty bad, but after checking how much RAM was being used, I saw that Windows with nothing else running was up to 850 megs. I don't remember all the services I turned off, but it had a lot of unneccessary services running, stuff like tabletpc functionality and remote assistance (which ill never use). After turning off UAC and all the unneccesary services, I got it down to 400 megs, aero turned on, but usually DWM service and svchost.exe start climbing up as you basically just move your mouse around. So, it climbed back up to 500. BF2 then ran pretty well but it still wasn't as good as in XP. Ok, no problem, it runs, its playable, Vista performance hopefully will get better. NEXT, the game I absolutely can't live without, I fire it up when I'm stressed or generally feel like escaping: Starcraft. My god, this game runs great on a 166 mhz pentium 1 running Windows 95. Shit, well... under Vista if you don't select any compatability settings, the colors are all inverted upon first boot up. SO, enable 256 color mode and 640x480 and it boots up ok with colors all correct. BUT the game runs at a crawl when you actually get into any games. Starcraft in Vista at its current form is basically unplayable. And I wonder what other games are unplayable under Vista.
Next, WINDOWS VISTA WIRELESS NETWORKING SUCKS. 5308, 5365, 5384... all of them had the most horrible wireless networking i've ever experienced. I got a signal, connected fine. But my connection would only stay active randomly. Sometimes after 5 minutes it would be dead and I would have to disconnect and reconnect, which in 5384 usually fixed the problem (it didnt previously) But after reconnecting sometimes it would die within 30 seconds again. horrible, i hope they fix this.
Next, the UI is PRETTY PRETTY PRETTY. nice effects and hopefully they will allow modders and skinners to make some awesome add ons that could be quite nice. BUT the UI design scheme, having like 50 control panel items in classic mode (i know its not what they recommend but it's the advanced mode isn't it? it's too many seperate items in one folder) Welcome center is good, personalize menu sucks. This is one place where they should have copied OS X exactly, just put everything in one menu and like their laptop configuration menu, make it transition to the other control app in one window to other items. Not new windows for every control panel.
well those are my assessments, I have others, such as Firefox not being able to be made default browser no matter what i have tried with default apps configuration (same with thunderbird) and i dont know why they changed this, but it seems to be making it harder to use apps other than those that were configured to be used as default (Iexplorer, Outlook...) so thats lame. Also, firefox can't play imbedded media player anymore, the plugin wouldnt work and i couldnt figure it out. Long story made short, Vista needs A LOT of work. More than i thought previously. I'll be surprised if it is ready for Jan. 2007. I won't be surprised if it's released, but I wouldn't expect it to be anywhere near polished until 2008/9.

Re:Subscribers can be trolls too

[Knetzar]

Instead of restricting reporting dupes to subscribers, they could restrict it to those with good Karma. That way only the people that seem to add something to /. can report problems.