Slashdot Mirror
Review of Stardock's TweakVista
mikemuch writes "The new TweakVista utility from Stardock surfaces some of Vista's more obscure settings, giving access to diagnostics and making suggestions for services that you should be running. ExtremeTech's review of TweakVista generally likes the software, and though it's called version 0.9, it is for sale — $19.95 — and feels feature-complete. More suggestions on system optimization, however, would be helpful. From the review: 'According to TweakVista, on July 1st, the "Windows Shell Services DLL service took 651ms longer to shut down than usual." That's nice. Other than this stark presentation, there's no digestible information as to why the shell services DLL took over half a second longer to shut down. And there's no hint as to what to do about it.'"
Chapter 1:
Stick with XP.
The End.
just feel like burning some karma to say that
Ctrl-Shift-Esc is an even better shortcut for taskmanager. Does that still work with Vista?
I've only briefly used Vista, but it feels exactly like any other XP skin I've ever encountered. None of the long standing problems with the Windows GUI were fixed, including my personal pet peeve: tearing and flickering 2D graphics. I just don't understand how Windows still fails to address the problem of syncing refresh rates when Mac had it sorted more than a decade ago.
A-Bomb
http://www.extremetech.com/print_article2/0,1217,a =211091,00.asp
Without the software, you'd still be wondering why your computer took a half-second longer to shut down, not why a particular process took longer. With the software, you can focus on the process, paying less attention to the computer as a whole.
The software doesn't fix your computer, it's a diagnostic aid.
tasks(723) drafts(105) languages(484) examples(29106)
The "took longer to shut down" messages are from Windows itself. They're exactly what you get from the Performance Center. It's actually very useful when you're trying to find out which applications are making your startup or shutdown times go slow. It's something that Vista has done right, actually.
*Insert joke about vista being released at 0.9 too*
Please be quiet, Mr. Ballmer.
I have to say I like Vista.
Once you untweak the UI (Windows Classic Baby!) it actually runs faster than my XP box... Ive used Mac OS from version 2 to the latest Jaguar (I'm a certified apple developer), DOS from when it was really called CPM, Win16->Win64 (ok lying about the 64 part) and dont get me started about *nix/BSD. ... Thunderbird --> Outlook Was a BITCH. ( You need to run a converter program called ImapSize ) Because outlook express was missing on my machine ( now called windows mail.. )
/'s
I've been toeing the line about dont upgrade to vista.. vista bad.. bla bla. It works and I'm shocked.
I did have a few gotchas
I have a few different keyboard locals, and one of my apps wanted to add accent characters instead of
Other than that... I've been enjoying it. Especially this one: Shift-RightClick on a folder and you can open a CMD shell at that location!! Fucking A! no more reg hacking.
Ok time to get back to work.
PS: Nice Work Bill G et al. Sadly the best OS you guys have made to date, and you fucked the one thing you guys do well, MARKETING!!
There's also no hint on whether it matters. If Windows Shell Services DLL service took 651ms longer to shut down than usual, does anyone care? Or even notice?
Optimization is all well and good, but this is a piss poor example.
http://www.extremetech.com/print_article2/0,1217,a =211091,00.asp?hidPrint=true
Anybody?
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
It is amazing what developers can sell in the Windows world. $20 for a pretty interface to features that are already in the OS? WTF? Have I just been spoiled by using Linux for 11 years, or what?
Not that things are much better on the Mac (which I use mostly now on the desktop). I downloaded this program, RDC Menu, to launch multiple instance of Windows Remote Desktop Client. There's the standard "trial" and "paid" versions. The author wanted money just to enable the "bookmarks" feature so you could save your connection profiles and select them from a list in the statusbar. I said screw that and I just wrote my own damn program to do it. Took me all of a few hours to get it working the way I wanted. Only functional difference between the two programs is that RDC Menu is more polished (graphics, icons, language translations, etc).
Don't get me wrong, I think programmers should get paid for their work if they want and they're certainly free to charge whatever they want, but how much are we paying of "polish?" Doesn't it seem strange that a simple GUI front end for standard OS features is like 1/5th the cost of the entire OS itself (depending on the version you buy) which probably has 1,000 times the man-hours behind it?
I dunno, when you look at the trivial utilities that people pay $20 or more for, it makes Microsoft products seem pretty damn cheap! That is, if you compare lines of code...
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
You do realize this is just about the same thing as the Windows XP Open Command Window Here power toy?
Here is the link to get it for XP
Yes, but can I click in an open window with a view of the directory I want and say "Open Command prompt here"? Why in god's name do I have to navigate up a level of directory so I can click on the directory name to open a command prompt in the directory I had been in?
'According to TweakVista, on July 1st, the "Windows Shell Services DLL service took 651ms longer to shut down than usual." That's nice. Other than this stark presentation, there's no digestible information as to why the shell services DLL took over half a second longer to shut down. And there's no hint as to what to do about it.'
;)
Seriously, if you're complaining about 651ms when you're using Vista... You need to get out of the house more.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
How the fuck was this even remotely newsworthy? Shall I just take every announcement on nonags and pipe it here?
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
Yes. Right click on any folder and select "Open Command Window Here"
Maybe your XP box is slow. A fresh install of Vista even with the UI tweaked down is slower than XP. You may not notice the difference with the latest dual-core processors and 4 gigs of ram, but if you're on a laptop with an on-board video card with two memory slots (and not looking forward to buying two 2GB sticks), Vista seems impractical. And slow.
"Especially this one: Shift-RightClick on a folder and you can open a CMD shell at that location!!"
Yawn. Been doing that in KDE for years. But not with those specific key stokes, though. But when Windows does it, it's revolutionary!
As one of the screenshots clearly shows, the guy's computer is infested with Norton AntiVirus and iTunes. Don't worry, I have a utility that can remove programs like those, and it only costs $19.95.
I'm running a Dual-Core AMD x64 4200+ with the onboard x1250 ATI card (all my good cards are AGP - I just haven't broke down yet and bought a decent Nvidia).
I've had good luck with Vista overall, the x1250 isn't great and only gives the machine an overall 2.8 rating. Otherwise - I'm not noticing the speed issues I did on my older machines running better graphics cards. Aero runs just fine. I'm not seeing any "2D tearing issues" and xVid, DivX, x264 encodes and DVDs run very smoothly. I use Haali Media Splitter and FFDShow to decode the x264 stuff I create with the Windows port of Handbrake.
IE7 SUCKS, end of story. I use Firefox with the IEtab if I absolutely must run an IE window - useful for getting into our company's webmail. IE7 is nothing more than a miserable hack trying to emulate Firefox and MS should be embarrassed for ever releasing this piece of crap.
Oh yeah...I ditched the Zune when I realized that high humidity was creating a cloud inside the polycarbonate screen cover that would take a week or more to escape. I never had the problem with my iPods...so I'm back to a 4Gig Nano for now. I liked the Zune except for this and one other issue: You can't see the f**kin' screen in daylight, bright or overcast. The iPod is very readable even in bright sunlight.
So, with my dandy new iPod I was finally able to check out the latest MGTEK dosisp WMP 11 plugin. It works as advertised so I was able to ditch iTunes. I was able to format and sync the Nano through WMP 11 with no issues. I haven't fired up Winamp yet in Vista so I can't speak for its iPod support.
Yes - you all can all ding me for my previous Zune comments - but what it did, it did really well. But I'm lovin' the Nano - but would have been happier with the 8G model.
Oh yeah - the MGTEK dosisp plugin is payware. I'm sure there'll be free solutions before too long. WMP 11 does such a nice job that I can't figure out why MS had to re-hack WMP10 into the "Zune Player". It really was crap.
You can do manually whatever this GUI does and for free:
http://www.speedyvista.com/
The author wanted money just to enable the "bookmarks" feature so you could save your connection profiles and select them from a list in the statusbar. I said screw that and I just wrote my own damn program to do it. Took me all of a few hours to get it working the way I wanted. Only functional difference between the two programs is that RDC Menu is more polished (graphics, icons, language translations, etc)....
I dunno, when you look at the trivial utilities that people pay $20 or more for, it makes Microsoft products seem pretty damn cheap! That is, if you compare lines of code...
Depends on your priorities in life I guess, but IMO two hours of my time is worth much more to me than $20.
Amazes me sometimes that someone will spend hours of time to save $20, or drive halfway across town to save 10 cents a gallon on gas (a couple of bucks at most for a tank). Then the same people won't take the five minutes it takes to check your tire pressure each month, which costs them way more in the long run.
People are funny.
Sucks. Thought it would be a great little app, but was worthless, most of the tweaks where diasabling services and it did not really tell me what it was doing. Will stick to manual configurations.
Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
IE7 SUCKS, end of story. I use Firefox with the IEtab if I absolutely must run an IE window - useful for getting into our company's webmail. IE7 is nothing more than a miserable hack trying to emulate Firefox and MS should be embarrassed for ever releasing this piece of crap.
Try Maxthon if you want to use IE. It's a lot faster than Firefox can ever be, that's for sure. I'm using an optimised build of Firefox and while it is a lot faster than the Mozilla release, it doesn't match up to Maxthon.
Vista is slower than XP because of the new features: indexing, diagnostics and such. If you disable indexing and other such stuff, you'll find that it runs pretty comparably to XP. Superfetch et al don't hurt, of course.)
Oh, and the AC is right, Vista doesn't suck. Sure there are a couple of bugs (like the slow file copy issue, solved for a lot by disabling Remote Differential Compression in Windows Features, and seems to be solved completely in SP1), but there's also an amazing amount of FUD and pure lies over Vista, especially over DRM. (File copy slow? OMG, DRM CHECKS! etc) Here's a nugget to chew on: if you don't play DRM'd media you will never ever see DRM.
Was shopping for a budget PC, ended up buying eMachines. There were a number of vendors in my price range, what was the single most disqualifying factor for them? Offering Vista. The PCs had either 512 MB RAM or 1024, yet all of the 512 MB machines managed to ship with Vista. At the end, eMachines won because it came with XP, had 1024 MB RAM, although smaller HD (120 GB vs 250), and crappy video card (integrated Radeon 200).
:) looking forward to my evenings over the next few days.
Next task? Wipe it completely off and reinstall from scratch
This article answers the question as to why the shutdown can take longer:
s /2007/03/VistaKernel/default.aspx
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/technetmag/issue
From the article it would seem that more defensive shutdown sequence can cause a slowdown with the extra checks on each service it performs, rather than madly slashing down services at will. Ho hum, any publicity is still just that...
Truth is realized, not told...
I would like to make an addition that wasn't included in the review. There will be a free version available, and the $20 is for the premium version with additional features. It will also be included for people with subscriptions to Object Desktop by Stardock.
I'm not sure you understand. You can click on a folder icon and open a command window there, but you cannot click on the folder background itself - after you have opened a folder - and open a command window in the folder you are current looking at.
Ewige Blumenkraft.
The folder icon for the current folder is up in the left corner, you can right-click there. It always was there, AFAIK.
True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
Try right-clicking on the control menu.
TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.
Ctrl-M Opens an explorer bar with a windows command prompt. It follows you as you move around in explorer, and it has additional icons and user configurable buttons.
I just tried it out, and you certainly can right click in the background of a folder window and get the context menu for the current folder. Shift-right click allowed "Open Command Window Here" option, and it worked fine. In addition to this, if you have the status bar showing (sorry, now called the details pane), then you can right click on the folder icon to access the current folder.
Under Windows XP, you have to right click on the system menu (the little folder graphic on the left side of the title bar). The same goes for Windows 9X.
Under Windows 3.1, you can right click anywhere on screen and get the usual lack of context menu.
> if you don't play DRM'd media you will never ever see DRM.
Not in this version, perhaps. It's exactly this kind of thinking that got you in the state you're in though. Just wait a couple more years and your computer will do exactly what Bill wants. And your constitution will be in a museum.
It 's another piece of bloatware from Stardock 's Inc.
Yeah - I get tired of the DRM comments ("Bill will infect your media with DRM") as much as I get tired of hearing how iTunes will convert all of your Mp3s to AAC without your knowledge, etc.
Uhm...explain however the slow file copy though. I'm not experiencing it on my current machine but I did on the last Intel P4 w/ hyperthreading (it was a Dell GX 620). File copying speed to my network drives was terrible - is there a setting I was missing or was this just my imagination?
Oh - I have another question that's probably better for a different thread. How come iTunes 7.2 and 7.3 couldn't play about half my music library that I originally created (that is, tagged and inventoried) under older versions of iTunes? Its one of the reasons I had to look for alternative sync software for my Nano.
WMP 11 has a great tag editor by the way, and a sweet interface. Why in the f**k they didn't utilize it for the Zune is just beyond me...
Greetings,
In XP you might want to try BackgroundCMD
http://www.roggel.com/NGNeer/BackgroundCMD/
It lets you open a console in the current
directory.
There are two file copying issues:
1. local drive, an issue for some computers. As I said, solved for a lot of people (including me) by simply disabling Remote Differential Compression.
2. network drive. Is the drive on the network not on a computer running Vista? There is an issue on some computers if files are transferred from/to a computer not running Vista. No fixes yet, but a workaround seems to be to use the command line and Robocopy.
From the SP1 news, both these problems seem to be solved in it. Another bug in ReadyBoost, where the system recreates the cache on resume from standby or hibernate, virtually stalling the computer for 3-5 minutes, will also be solved.
Before anyone jumps on me, these bugs are not critical. Vista doesn't crash every five minutes, as some like to proclaim (I'm not setting up strawmans here, I've seen these statements in several places). User space apps cannot crash Vista (or any other NT system for that matter), just like they cannot crash *nix, unless they use an exploit (and none have been found yet AFAIK). If your Vista crashes every five minutes, it is 99.99% faulty kernel space drivers.
Vista is objectively more stable than XP because sound drivers have been used to user space.
Thanks for the reply. I'll google the iTunes issue.
No - it hasn't crashed on the AMD box at all. I did see a lot of BSODs on the GX620 and I always assumed it was driver issues on a proprietary box not intended at all to run Vista. It rocks on the AMD 4200+ and I've not experienced any of the slow file copy issues.
I do have new found respect for WMP 11 though. I just wish someone would come up with a free plugin that does what dosisp does. As far as purchasing music online - I think you're out of luck as it won't play or load anything purchased from the iTunes store.
No you wont see DRM but it will be constantly running in the background.
A Cost Analysis of Windows Vista Content Protection - Article detailing the extremes that Microsoft DRM is headed towards.
It may not crash every 5 minutes, but regardless it is slower OUT OF THE BOX than XP ever was. All because of the eye candy to distract the customer from the nasty DRM surprises that hide behind the veil of ignorance.
As one understanding man once said 'The last act of any democracy is to elect a dictatorship'. We as IT and Computer professionals stand on the edge of such a choice. To choose Microsoft in the future is the figurative electing a dictatorship. One which we may very well not get a chance to change without a fight either politically, socially or revolutionary. I would love to think that one person alone can win this fight, but that is impossible. It is only when the masses rise up and say 'We wont take it anymore' is when things change. We have the opportunity to do that at this moment when a company cannot and from all appearances will not accept Vista as the failure it is. We can collectively force Microsoft not to become Hollywood's bitch (MAFIAA). The question is do we have the resolve to do such and reject Vista like the scourge it is.
09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
+2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
How can DRM "run in the background" and if such a thing were possible - What the hell would it do? Gates has already said the one thing that Jobs won't: "If you don't like DRM, buy the CD and convert the music" (paraphrase).
I wasn't aware that DRM was a process running in the background. Really.
From the story: "The new TweakVista utility from Stardock surfaces some of Vista's more obscure settings, giving access to diagnostics and making suggestions for services that you should be running."
Chapter 3: The old story. How to get a Windows operating system to work the way you want, with 3rd party tools and lots of time.
Oh well, I suppose a life working on Windows is better than playing canasta or knitting booties for your dog.
This video explains a bit about the User Account Control in Windows Vista.
"You are coming to a sad realization. Cancel or allow?"
No you wont see DRM but it will be constantly running in the background.
OK. So DRM would mean increased cycles, right? So why is it that there is ZERO extra CPU usage when I play a standard MP3 or AVI file in Vista, compared to XP? And I tested this a while ago, using five or six files in different formats. This is an older computer, where CPU usage can easily be 10% while playing an MP3. The DRM checks don't run when the user isn't playing DRM content.
Yes and it only took them 10 years(or whatever), promises never delivered in multiple interations of their OS, and a public pumping money into them regardless of any of this.
Oh, forgot to add one thing. Vista is slower out of the box because of indexing and other new features, not because of some DRM boogie man.
Obviously noone read the article I posted. I know it is long but they do utilize a nice dose of the CPU. They check every 10th of a millisecond to see if something is something 'HD' either video or audio. Stuff like tilt bits and other stuff that hackers could use to destabilize a system, etc...
So there is plenty of DRM in there. It dont utilize a huge amount of ram/cpu time but any time the OS is utilizing (and not a specific player) is too much. They're also trying to force hardware manufacturers to do things like change it so that people cant access the busses on the system and other things. Keeping them in the board where they cant be accessed instead of following the laws of electronics to keep things quick and efficient. Today you may not notice negative performance but a few years down the road when you need to buy 'Vista certified' equipment to run anything HD you will. Oh yeah and there wont be any Linux support because we're all pirates.
09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
+2 Troll is Slashdot's way of saying groupthink is confused
It's those darn DVD's. Ever since Apple included CSS DRM capability in their OS, I just don't trust them. Once that DRM sneaks in, it infects your whole computer!
And Windows XP? It has DRM too! It can play Windows Media files WITH DRM! I KNOW that it's h4x0ring my computer AS I TYPE!
For some reason I can't find the "dig down" button! What happened here?
Well, in the case of iPhone, "polish" is about $400. iPhones feature set is comparable to a $200 device (more or less), but peopla are paying $600 for it in droves due to the polish. "Polish" is why people pay to use photoshop rather than using GIMP for free. It's why people pay to use MS Office 2k7 rather than use OO.o for free. Etc, etc, etc...
-- "I never gave these stories much credence." - HAL 9000
Just got a Dell 390 with Vista Ultimate and after playing around with it for 30 minutes it is back to XP for me.
No. In vista, it's worse. I haven't found a way to edit folder options. I've googled for it, and nutn. ie: Sure, the "command prompt here" works, 'cause it's built into Vista now... but you cannot add anything else you might want... since that `edit folder options' thing is gone.
"If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy
There's a specific Control Panel for folder options - does that not do what you're after?
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
- and the shop knocked off $100 for a no-OS option
/. is going down the tubes)
- now i really feel:
"Feature Complete"
(this article gags me -
You bought a Dell and are complaining? Dell only has ONE thing that makes it worth looking at, good finance options for those who need a computer right now and can't afford it. Dell does NOTHING better than the competition, and any benefits are offset by negatives.
I'm not complaining about Dell, I'm bitching about Vista. Add "Company has a very good contract with Dell, and everything bought using company's money has to be bought from Dell", to the list of reasons to buy from Dell. A Precision 390 with E6600, 4GB ECC, 1908FB, Vista Ultimate, nVidia Quadro NVS 285, 250G HD, DVD, DVD R/W, Sound Blaster X-Fi, SoundBar speakers, 3 Year Warranty, for under $1300 not a bad deal considering I can install on it any MS OS without any activation headaches.
So far the 390 looks solid and quiet.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
Aren't these things like the old "memory optimiser" scamware programs that came out with Windows 95
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There's a specific Control Panel for folder options - does that not do what you're after?
No. In XP (and 2000, and all previous Windows), there's "File Types" tab in `Folder Options' dialog. That's the thing you'd use if you wanted to manually create that "Command Prompt Here" (without using the power tool). No such thing in Vista (as far as I could tell).
"If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy
Ummm.... alt -> Tools -> Folder options. Just like it was in XP.
No. In XP (and 2000, and all previous Windows), there's "File Types" tab in `Folder Options' dialog. That's the thing you'd use if you wanted to manually create that "Command Prompt Here" (without using the power tool). No such thing in Vista (as far as I could tell).
"If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy
Ah, I see. Having never done that myself, I didn't know you could do such clever things without downloading the tool. I just mentioned it because I spent a good few minutes hunting for the folder options under the usual Tools menu of Explorer before discovering they moved it there.
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.
You haven't looked very hard, then. It's right there on the Start menu, just above 'Help and Support': "Default Programs". Even if you missed that, you just open control panel and start typing "file type" and it shows you the entry. (Although, as you've already said, Open Command Prompt Here is built into Vista anyway).
Default programs don't let you specify what to do when you right click on a folder, or some file, do they? I'll have to check this out when I get home tonight, but I searched pretty hard for it a while ago.
"If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy
Apologies: on a second look, you're right. I had thought that the "associate a file type or protocol with a program" option in Default Programs would give the same functionality as the equivalent tab in Folder Options in XP, but on a closer look, it doesn't.
If it helps, a google suggests the File Type Doctor in this suite can do what you want, but it's a 45-day trial.
Apologies again for my rather brusque post above.
What's purple and commutes? An Abelian grape.