Slashdot Mirror


Software Tool Strips Windows Vista To Bare Bones

Preedit writes "A free download that can cut Windows Vista's gargantuan footprint by half or more is developing a big following on the Internet. vLite is a configuration tool that lets users automatically delete a lot of unnecessary Vista components — such as Windows Media Player and MSN installer — to pare the OS down to a reasonable size. The software is catching on. An InformationWeek story notes that a forum that asks users to suggest new features has drawn nearly 50,000 page views. Meanwhile, Microsoft officials have themselves conceded that Vista is "bloated" and are developing the next version of Windows on a core called MinWin, which is smaller than Vista by an order of magnitude."

79 of 472 comments (clear)

  1. Vista XP is here! by somersault · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm failing to see any reason to upgrade to Vista at all (I don't even like Halo, so Halo 3 is a no no.. and if a lot of games start requiring Vista then I'll just have to move to console gaming).

    --
    which is totally what she said
    1. Re:Vista XP is here! by dave420 · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's much faster than XP, uses your memory and other resources far more intelligently, and the performance benefits of DX10 over DX9 (even with some DX10 trickery involved) are things you simply can't find in any other OS out there, open source or otherwise. That's just an FYI.

    2. Re:Vista XP is here! by somersault · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's funny, I used it on my uncle's 2.2Ghz Core 2 Duo (0.2 Ghz faster than my laptop, and they both have 2GB of RAM), and it was a pig compared to XP. Taking up 15GB of HD space and half my video memory for a fancy 3D interface what is essentially a file and program manager isn't what I call intelligent use of resources either.. even Microsoft seem to have noticed that, if you actually read the article..

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:Vista XP is here! by lucifig · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's much faster than XP... Wha wha what? Maybe on paper but not in the real world. I have a 2 processor 3ghz Xeon machine with 2 gb of ram. Not made for Vista admittedly but still a fairly decent machine. With a clean install of Vista it takes me around 5-10 seconds to delete a file. To delete a simple file sitting on my desktop. Again, I live in the real world things may be different in the Marketing world.

    4. Re:Vista XP is here! by Loconut1389 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      how did you determine how much video memory was in use? is there a generic tool for that?

    5. Re:Vista XP is here! by everphilski · · Score: 3, Informative

      Add a gig of RAM ($20-$30) and you will notice a market improvement in Vista performance. I bought a $300 Vista laptop computer back in August and added a gig of RAM. Dual-booted XP and Vista for awhile and wound up getting rid of the XP partition because there was no noticeable difference in performance.

      Yes, Vista loves the RAM, but the other part of the equation is the 512M of RAM you have (which is minuscule by today's standards) is also being shared by the video card. By default, at least on my machine, it would share up to 128M with the video card, that's 25% of your RAM!

    6. Re:Vista XP is here! by everphilski · · Score: 4, Informative

      Something is wrong then because I have a low-end Sempron notebook with 1.5gb RAM, vista home and deletion is almost instantaneous...

      Vista isn't perfect, but it's better than most of the (uninformed or lacking in experience) critics give it credit for.

    7. Re:Vista XP is here! by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you have a powerful enough machine ...then you could run XP that much faster than Vista.
    8. Re:Vista XP is here! by russ1337 · · Score: 2, Informative

      With a clean install of Vista it takes me around 5-10 seconds to delete a file.
      I had the same problem. My first experience with Vista was on my Presario c700 with 1GB RAM. After the first boot ( and once everything had settled) I started doing all the things that needed to be done like deleting the majority of the unnecessary desktop shortcuts. After hitting the delete key, I got a dialog something like "Vista is calculating the time to carry out this action"...... And it took about 15 to 20 Seconds for the entire process. I just found it DOG slow with almost everything.

      Sure others have pointed out that I could add some ram and get my performance back, but I managed to get a major boost in performance for free (and in less time) by installing Ubuntu.
    9. Re:Vista XP is here! by BrentH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The GUI is definitely part of the GUI, or were you trying to argue otherwise? The OS is in this case Microsoft Windows Vista in it's entirety, not some arbitrary pieces of it. With Aero being enabled if possible automatically by the OS, and being an order of magnitude more resource consuming than for example OSX and Compiz, the OS is indeed much more sluggish than XP or some others. And let us not talk about the performance benefits of DX10 over DX9. Review and gamesites show time and time again Vista with DX10 is slower when compared to the same game on the same machine with DX9, and the benefits are minimal. Even Microsofts own latest Flight Simulator which was to be a DX10 showcase performs better on XP, and is visually nearly the same (checkout the various FS forums for more anecdotal evidence). Yes, Vista is better than XP in some aspects, but as a whole the OS just offers less than XP for many if not most. The pros are mostly pros on paper where the cons are immeadeately obvious, even for normal users.

    10. Re:Vista XP is here! by Firehed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I certainly can't think of a better way to manage resources than to make sure there's as much free RAM as possible. It's not like it's two or more orders of magnitude faster than reading from the hard drive or anything.

      Seriously, is anyone going to ever realize that unused RAM is wasted RAM? As long as it's smart about what's being swapped in and when, then so much the better. I'd love to see apps pre-cached.

      I'll give you hard drive space, not that it really matters these days with half a terabyte at under $100. But the rest of the system's resources are not consumed the same way, and as such unused resources are being wasted. I didn't buy 4GB just so I can win a pissing contest about how much RAM my system has free. I bought 4GB so my computer can use it. I don't care how it's allocated so long as it provides me a snappier experience (and it does).

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    11. Re:Vista XP is here! by somersault · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know fine that the OS does a lot more, but the improvements (which are really good ideas, like leaving out backwards compatibility in DX10 etc to get rid of some bloat) have been totally counteracted by the GUI for one (yeah I know you don't have to use Aero), and DRM, whatever the **** is causing the 'long goodbye' and so on.. and sure prefetching is also a good thing to do in some cases (though if it's done badly then things just slow down even more with loads of stuff that you don't want being prefetched.. take the stupid Adobe 'Speedlaunch' for example..). I though that after XP Microsoft had started getting their act together, but so far it just seems like it was a fluke.. now that they've had a shock though maybe they will get their act together.. like Intel had to do to come up with the Core processors after the embarrassment that was the P4s/Ds

      --
      which is totally what she said
    12. Re:Vista XP is here! by CambodiaSam · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've tried it on a multitude of powerful machines, and Vista still can't hack it *overall*. For my recent purchase of a Dell m1730 gaming laptop, I went with XP. Yes, it CAN support Vista, and probably fine, but why would I want to trade 20% of my system resources away for what I see as no gain?

      As the unfortunate soul in my company that has to primarily deal with Microsoft, I was in the unique spot of writing our company's position document on it. In short: Vista is unsupported. There's a lot more than hardware specs that went into that decision. Compatibility, reliability, user interface, etc.

      The true test will be when Vista SP1 is put head-to-head with XP SP3. If Vista can't perform at least EQUALLY as well as XP, then I predict most people will wait the 2 years to see if Windows 7 will be worth it.

    13. Re:Vista XP is here! by crmarvin42 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      is anyone going to ever realize that unused RAM is wasted RAM?
      Of course unused RAM isn't wasted if you're not doing anything. I want my OS to use some ram, but most I want to be used by the applications I'm running on top of the OS. Most people don't do most of their work inside the OS itself. They do their work inside the applications running on top of the OS and if the OS is hogging all of the RAM then their work will take longer as RAM constraints get tight and everything slows down. No OS in this day in age should require 4GB RAM just to make the OS run "snappier"

      I'll give you hard drive space, not that it really matters these days with half a terabyte at under $100.
      This may be fine for desktops, but not for Laptops which make up > 50% of machines sold to individuals these days. The drives available for a reasonably sized laptop don't reach that much storage, and are a lot more expensive at any size. I bought my laptop less than a year ago and the most storage offered was 120GB, I don't want >10% of my drive, or more than half of my installed ram devoted just to the OS.
      --
      Bureaucracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.-Oscar Wilde
    14. Re:Vista XP is here! by Kamots · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just to help keep your viewpoint balanced... there's negative features in Vista as well (especially the 64-bit version).

      Here's the ones that I've run into as being major issues in my 4-5 months with Vista. There's others, but I either haven't personally run into them, or they're not particularly painful.

      1) Vista removed support for horizontal or vertical span modes with a multi-monitor setup. (well, more of they changed things up so that it's impossible for drivers supporting that to be written) If you're not aware of these modes, horizontal span mode for example allowed your software to treat your collection of displays as one really wide display... so a full-screen racing or flight sim would span all your displays not just one. XP supported this. Vista doesn't. Meaning that if I want to have a decent racing sim setup I've got to go back to XP. This is an issue with both 32 and 64 bit versions. There's a lot of speculation that it's related to the integrated DRM stuff Vista includes.

      2) The 64-bit version of Vista removes backwards compatability for 16-bit applications. I dunno about you, but sometimes I get nostalgic for the games I grew up with... and some of those games are good enough that horrible dated graphics don't matter.

      3) The 64-bit version of Vista requires you to specify EVERY TIME YOU BOOT that you want to use unsigned drivers. (You used to be able to specify in the mbr to always use them, but MS released at least 2 critical updates that disabled that) Perhaps this isn't an issue for the average Joe, but there's a decent number of aps out there that I use that utilize an unsigned driver. Then there's beta releases of video card drivers and the like.

      Long story short, I'm currently awaiting a new harddrive that's going to be a XP drive so that I can continue to use the functionality I should have. Vista may have improvements, but to me it's offset by the functionality they removed.

      As to why I'm not moving back to XP entirely? 64-bit Vista is actually a usable 64-bit OS. (64-bit XP never was really supported by hardware manufacturers) And there's DX10 which will, sometime, maybe, be a reason.

    15. Re:Vista XP is here! by s_p_oneil · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As someone who has tried Vista on 3 different systems (64-bit desktop, 32-bit desktop, and 32-bit laptop), I can honestly say the complaints about it are not FUD. It was completely unusable on the laptop and noticeably slower than XP on both desktops.

      I may try it again when SP1 comes out. As for the DX10 features, they can be given to XP and Linux users via OpenGL, which always gets new graphics card features before DirectX. Back when hardware T&L was introduced, it was available on OpenGL as soon as the video cards shipped, but it required a new major version of DirectX. The same is true with features like geometry/streaming shaders. It will be years before any game developer using DX can drop support for DX9. As a game developer myself, this problem will ensure that I continue using OpenGL for a long time.

    16. Re:Vista XP is here! by Anakron · · Score: 5, Funny

      The GUI is definitely part of the GUI Truer words have never been spoken!
      --
      There are 11 types of people. Those who understand binary, those who don't and those who are sick of this lame joke.
    17. Re:Vista XP is here! by tzanger · · Score: 3, Interesting

      2) The 64-bit version of Vista removes backwards compatability for 16-bit applications. I dunno about you, but sometimes I get nostalgic for the games I grew up with... and some of those games are good enough that horrible dated graphics don't matter.

      I understand the other points, but honestly... If you want to play the old 16-bit applications, run an emulator. There is absolutely no reason to keep the old cruft in the OS just to support the odd nostalgia trip. (I get them too, but I have no problem firing up qemu or xen or vmware)

    18. Re:Vista XP is here! by kmike · · Score: 3, Informative

      Rivatuner can plot a nice graph of local and non-local video memory in use, among a zillion of other cool things.

    19. Re:Vista XP is here! by cHiphead · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Try using an off the shelf name brand computer with Vista, without any customization and cleanup, and you'll see the 5-10 secs to delete a file. Out of the box speed is a must for a consumer OS, in that realm, Vista is epic fail. Core2Duo 2.4ghz, 4GB ram (of which only 3 is being used, apparently. !!!WTF!!!) I'm glad its so terrible, though, its great job security. (What, you thought that pos was anywhere near my own machines?)

      Cheers.

      --

      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    20. Re:Vista XP is here! by everphilski · · Score: 2, Informative

      FYI: Many people still use Telnet, and many other features removed. It isn't just hated because of a large footprint on the memory, but because useful/used tools have been removed. And not always because they are deemed "obsolete" (Video Analog support removed due to digital rights).

      Bullshit. It isn't installed by default, but can easily be activated:

      Use software explorer or Click Start, Control Panel, Programs, and then Turn Windows Features on or off. In the list, scroll down and select Telnet Client. Click OK to start the installation.

      And if analog video support is removed then why does the S-Video port (analog) on my nVidia card still work? /boggle

      Half of the items on the list you gave were BS anyways. Gopher support? Please. (and no, I'm not a raving MS fan ... running Slackware on my desktop ... I just don't see the point in dissing Microsoft for something that isn't real)

    21. Re:Vista XP is here! by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      My video card has it's own RAM, so no problem with that. I'm also running Mandriva Linux 99.9% of the time, and haven't noticed it slowing down at all. I know RAM is cheap lately, but I just haven't gotten around to buying RAM, because the amount of RAM seems to work fine for all my needs.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    22. Re:Vista XP is here! by PitaBred · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So... you're saying that Vista runs great if you throw top-of-the-line hardware at it? Hell, I have a laptop that was near top of the line a little over a year ago, and it doesn't even have 4GB of RAM, or any SD cards for ReadyBoost. Try that machine with XP... it'll FLY. Or Linux even. Just because Vista is fast on new hardware does NOT mean that it's an efficiently designed OS. When you're running as many cycles through there as you are, you don't notice the tons that are wasted.

      If you're gonna recommend Vista, at least throw in the caution that you have to have a machine that you paid over $1500US for in the last year.

    23. Re:Vista XP is here! by Hatta · · Score: 3, Funny
      Are you high?

      by dave420 (699308) on Monday January 28, @10:29AM (#22208342)
      Oh, I guess so.
      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    24. Re:Vista XP is here! by AvitarX · · Score: 2, Informative

      Doesn't the AMD 64 spec drop 16 bit support when running in 64 bit mode?

      Also, most games I have tried to run that were 16 bit had trouble running in Win95, and more so in 98, and then even more in XP. I am suprised that there are 16 but games that will run on vists32 but not in DOSbox.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    25. Re:Vista XP is here! by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "And if analog video support is removed then why does the S-Video port (analog) on my nVidia card still work?"

      He means VGA when he says analog. And it's supported, but "crippled" so that with many forms of media, performs only somewhat better (540p) than that S-Video port, or is completely disabled.

      Your S-Video port isn't crippled below its full capabilities because in the MAFIAA's eyes, it's already sufficiently crippled to begin with. (Limited to 480i output.)

      --
      retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    26. Re:Vista XP is here! by coolGuyZak · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's not entirely true. There's a great deal of activity that occurs in virtual memory that is not bound discreetly to "actual memory". Particularly:

      • application code & libraries
      • memory mapped IO (files & devices)
      • kernel space
      • Inter-process communication
      • caching

      When an application loads, the lower segment of the address space is allocated to the kernel (which is shared between all programs). Next, space for application code is allocated, and then libraries are allocated. When instruction segments are needed, they get fetched from disk. Many libraries only load the resources in use at the time, making the physical footprint small. The virtual memory system must allocate virtual address space for the full library, regardless of the space space actually committed.

      Thus, an application's virtual footprint may increase when the kernel, application, or library sizes increases. Changes to IPC, MMIO, and kernel buffers can further increase the size of the application. Furthermore, as an application consumes & releases resources, memory fragmentation increases the space still further.

      Concerning Vista particularly, the introduction of Aero will artificially inflate the virtual footprint of any application. Why? Because applications use graphic card memory like a "virtual" frame buffer. This means that the MMIO or DMA channels used to talk to the graphics card allocate virtual address space. Thus, a 256 or 512 MB card will be reflected in the virtual memory usage but not in the "commit charge".

      Finally, portions of virtual memory are "empty". Reasons for this range from gaps inserted between virtual memory pages, "memory holes", or dedicated (but unallocated) memory gaps. Virtual memory looks at the total range of address space, without considering how those gaps affect the overall footprint. The voids are effectively pointers that end up nowhere.

    27. Re:Vista XP is here! by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2, Informative

      Dosbox is an x86 emulator that's specifically designed to run old games properly; clocks them down, provides a virtual soundblaster card (amoung others) and so on. Works great.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    28. Re:Vista XP is here! by s_p_oneil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And you can say this because you're a graphics/games developer? My web site is http://sponeil.net/, and I know for a fact you're wrong. I've even written an article in a book published by nVidia. How do you think nVidia demos their new features when a new version of their video card comes out? Do you think they shipped the GeForce 8800 and said "Sorry folks, but you'll have to wait a year before you can even see it run a demo showing off any of the new features"?

      When you see a game that supports both DirectX and OpenGL, they run at the same frame rate. OpenGL might be 1FPS slower on Windows because Microsoft won't allow OpenGL to use full-screen exclusive mode. They made that choice because they were going out of their way to sink OpenGL.

      The only real reason NOT to use OpenGL is that ATI has crappy OpenGL drivers. They've been working to fix them, but I'm not sure where they are right now.

    29. Re:Vista XP is here! by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 2, Informative

      1) Vista removed support for horizontal or vertical span modes with a multi-monitor setup

      This is wrong. The Video driver subsystem in Vista is entirely different; however what you area referring to is a specific feature removed from the NVidia drivers.

      So you have a couple of choices, use the Vista Dual View mode (if you only have one card) and run your game inside a Window instead of full screen (tell the game to remove the Window Border so it looks full screen). The game will play inside the WDDM Aero interface and actually be faster than running full screen and will also allow you to stretch it across all your displays without incident, even if they are varied resolutions, which XP couldn't do.

      This is what people don't get or get stuck on, as XP didn't allow (easily) the ability to run 3D applications across multiple displays or video cards unless the application was running full screen and the applicaiton was designed to do so. The NVidia Span mode, was a semi-hack that allowed the display to act as one screen, but even it didn't have 100% support with games or a seamless desktop.

      You can also just install the XP drivers, and Vista will turn off the WDDM subsystem and use the legacy video subsystem and the features provided by the MFR in the XP drivers work again. In other words, it runs JUST LIKE XP if you use the XP driver.

      It kills me that people don't realize they can just install the XP driver in Vista, and the legacy subsystem is used, the same video subsystem that exists in XP, giving you the same EXACT performance as XP. Having the dual video subsystems and the transparent compatibility of being able to run both is a marvelous feature of Vista, as it works so well people don't realize it can do two entirely different Video subsystem and driver models. Having these legacy abilities is the reason Vista is a large install in terms of HD usage compared to XP.

      It also kills me that people will turn off Aero with Vista WDDM drivers and complain about performance (since turning off Aero loses performance in Vista with WDDM). Leave the pretty glass on, things run faster!

      PS The newest Vista WDDM drivers run about 10% faster than any XP driver in 99% of all games now, just in case anyone thinks that WDDM is a 'bad' thing. Also with WDDM, you can run multiple games in Windows with virtually no FPS loss in each game, due to the GPU scheduler and VRAM virtualization of WDDM. So if you run two copies of WoW or some other MMO at the same time, throw them in Windows inside Vista with Aero ON, and they will both running seamlessly, in fact even do the Expose' trick (3rd party utility) or Flip 3D, and watch both games play at the same time with virtually no FPS loss in either game compared to running just one copy of the game. (This is where Vista blows past the OpenGL Composer projects. Sure vista don't have a cute floating cube or wiggle windows, but when it comes to performance of 3D applications (not just video running) in the 3D composer, Vista is miles ahead, and miles ahead of OSX as well, since it doesn't do the OSX Composer's double buffering either.

      2) The 64-bit version of Vista removes backwards compatability for 16-bit applications.
      Technically the AMD64/EMT64 CPU design removes 16bit abilities when running in native 64bit mode. So from a 64bit OS, the CPU can switch to 32bit mode/hybrid, but can't drop to an emulated 16bit mode. Microsoft could have virtualized the 16bit subsystem, but why when you can run Virtual PC 2007 for free (ON ANY VERSION OF VISTA) and run even Native Win3.1 or DOS for 16bit legacy applications.

      So you can't really put the blame on Vista 64bit here.

      3) The 64-bit version of Vista requires you to specify EVERY TIME YOU BOOT that you want to use unsigned drivers

      This is only for kernel level drivers. For example, the HD Controller or other non user mode driver. User mode drivers do NOT have to be signed, and 99% of devices use user mode drivers (ie Scanners, cameras, printers, etc.)

    30. Re:Vista XP is here! by dbIII · · Score: 2, Interesting

      To put things horribly in perspective I booted a little fanless machine into win2k last night that can run many applications that Vista can. The machine has 256MB of memory that it shares with video at 1280x1024 and has a fairly slow VIA processor. WoW is of course a slideshow as far as refresh goes but the time to start MS Word 2000 from boot is faster than on a 32bit Vista machine with 2GB of memory. I hope updates make it a bit more modular so it doesn't spend so much time loading things you won't need that session in from disk to clog up memory.

    31. Re:Vista XP is here! by TheNetAvenger · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not just NVidia that supported horizontal span, ATI did as well.


      This I realize; however, I remember that ATI was working on enabling this for Vista, but not sure of the status of that project.

      NVidia has said several things 'couldn't' be done in Vista, and then ATI provides the feature and NVidia runs back to the drawing board with a me too version in their driver. This has been a large part of the driver fight NVidia and Microsoft have had, as NVidia keep not wanting to implement features, claiming technical reasons, when it is either them being stubborn or their hardware not performing well with the features enabled properly.

      ATI having worked with the XBox 360 team have a bit more experience when it comes to unified shaders and how Vista handles video, since it is a lot like the 360. Sadly ATI's hardware hasn't been up to the level they wanted yet, and also since they have adhered to the DX10 and 10.1 specifications, their cards take a bit more of a performance hit than NVidia cards do since they are skipping some of the features and not using the mandated FSAA modes for DX10 - also another reason MS added this specifically for certification for DX10.1.

      I'm not sure I can credit that it'll be faster running windowed than full screen. Everything I've ever dealt with runs slower windowed... and when I'm looking at running a racing sim at 3200x1200 performance is important. Do you have a source on this?


      http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/windows_vista_aero_glass_performance/page3.asp

      I also have our internal tech lab results, and basically on older systems with 1gb or less than 2gb of RAM and 2003-2004 Video cards the FPS gain is about 3-7FPS, on newer systems with 2005/newer video the advantage can be more dramatic with a 4-28FPS gain.

      This is running a mix of games from DOOM and Oblivion to MMOs like WoW and CoX, with only a couple of artificial benchmarks that can be forced to run Windowed. Also the systems range from a 2003 Laptop with NVidia 5600 Go to the latest Intel Quad Core with the top NVidia 8800.

      I won't claim that 100% of the time running inside a Window is going to be faster for everyone or every system or every game. However, it is most of the time suprisingly, and I don't think even Microsoft anticipated this since Aero is turned off when running a game in full screen mode. Something they will need to readdress in Windows7.

      Indeed. And there's a whole set of tools used by the enthusiast community that require such

      This is true, but RivaTuner could rewrite their driver to snake through user mode to do the same thing. It truly isn't designed well for Vista, as its tools and optimzations are still XP sighted. (For example the 2D/3D overclocking settings that are moot on Vista)

      There are also usually alternatives available to every utility, I can think of several Overclocking applicstions, including NVidia's own nTune that works fine with Vista 64.

      Most of the utilities 'needlessly' use lower level drivers, and by them being re-written for user mode, Vista 64bit becomes more stable by forcing the developers to do the right thing.

      Even during the Vista beta most utilties repackaged the drivers to work flawlessly on Vista 64bit. I ran into this with several CD/DVD Virtualization and Ripping tools and by the end of beta, DVD43 is the only one I can think of that doesn't work on Vista 64, and there are several alternatives to it.

      So MS is simply lying about the host OS requirements for Virtual PC to avoid supporting the home versions?

      Nope. MS never has said anything about the Home versions.

      Here is where people get confused. Virtual PC 2005 Server requires and uses pieces of IIS. Since Home versions don't have IIS, it can't run Virtual PC 2005. (Virtual PC 2005 is technically the server version anyway.)

      So instead there is Vitural PC 2007, that was designed

  2. Beta worked well by psychicsword · · Score: 4, Informative

    This software has been out for a while as a beta I have used it and it works well. I haven't used the newer version yet but I assume based on nLite that it can only get better from there.

    1. Re:Beta worked well by russ1337 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I used nlite after needing to slipstream my RAID drivers into my windows install. (no floppy drive.) At the same time I removed all the bloat (media player, explorer, msn, explore XP intro etc, and included a bunch of updates with the tool offline-updates.

      I considered trying vlite on the recovery disks that I made with my laptop (presario c700 (1GB RAM)) right before I overwrote it with Ubuntu. But there wouldn't be much point as the Ubuntu has proven to be much more responsive and offers the encrypted install option with the 'alternate' install.

      Anyone had success with vlite or nlite on OEM 'recovery' disks?

  3. Slashdot = Clicks by ynososiduts · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well they (just got/are going to get) a WHOLE lot more..

    --
    622677120
    1. Re:Slashdot = Clicks by Slashidiot · · Score: 4, Funny

      And the 50000 page views are hard-coded on the article! That's soooo web 1.0...

      --
      Tis women makes us love, Tis Love that makes us sad, Tis sadness makes us drink, And drinking makes us mad.
  4. The next step... by Chonnawonga · · Score: 4, Funny

    Great. Now somebody turn this into a virus, and we're all set.

    1. Re:The next step... by psychicsword · · Score: 5, Informative

      This tool works by modifying the original install disk and you make your own more compact version of the installer. It does not work by modifying your currently installed OS.

  5. Software Tool Strips Windows Vista To Bare Bones.. by niceone · · Score: 4, Funny

    .. and then pushes it into a freezing lake?

  6. vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... unless and until it removes the draconian, RIAA- and MPAA-friendly DRM from the OS, and returns control of the PC back to the user who bought it.

    1. Re:vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... by dave420 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Care to enlighten us to this crippling DRM that is dragging Vista down? As I've yet to be stopped doing anything with any media I have. I rip DVDs, I take off DRM from downloaded tracks, everything I've done on XP and Linux.

    2. Re:vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think people are upset because it will preempt you from doing these things with next-generation media. DVDs are technically protected, but only the hardware enforces this. People are upset because MS moved some of the support into software, and at such a level that it actually slows things down a bit and makes the OS more complicated even for people who do nothing at all with video.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    3. Re:vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... by Experiment+626 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Care to enlighten us to this crippling DRM that is dragging Vista down? As I've yet to be stopped doing anything with any media I have. I rip DVDs, I take off DRM from downloaded tracks, everything I've done on XP and Linux.

      Okay, so suppose I wanted to install a backdoor on your system (this is more or less what DRM is, a way for hostile third parties to exercise control over a computer that trumps the owner's wishes). It'll only sap your system resources by a few percent; you probably won't even notice it's there. And in return, you'll gain the ability to do something completely useless with your system, like how DRM opens the door for you to enjoy "protected media".

      Not a very good deal, is it? Vista's DRM may not be "crippling", but it definitely should be an optional install.

    4. Re:vLite will not turn Vista into a usable OS... by Dhalka226 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can't play, however, materials that the copyright holder has chosen to restrict to a digital path

      I think many peoples' problem with DRM is the implication of that point. It's the movement to a society where nobody owns anything, and customers become renters subject to whatever whims the licensor wants to make--even if we "purchased" our product before they had those whims.

      In other words, it's the issue of license versus ownership. If I own something, for example my copy of an HD DVD, then nobody has any say in how I view it. I can view it on my computer or my PS3. I can loan it to a friend who can do the same. I can make myself a backup. I can shift the format and put it on my iPod. It's nobody's business but my own.

      The implication of "the copyright holder [choosing to] restrict to a digital path" is that I don't own what I paid for. Here I have, in my hands, an HD DVD. But I don't own that copy of the movie; I have a license, revokable at the holders' discretion, with whatever conditions they want to attach to it at the time of purchase or in the future. Hypothetically speaking, if they could find a technological answer to require me to do ten jumping jacks before the video would play, that would be doable. While that may seem a whole lot stupider than restricting what path I can watch the video on, it's really the same concept. Either the copyright holder has a right to tell me the conditions I can watch his content that I have purchased under, or he doesn't.

      Personally, I think he shouldn't and I care very little for what justification copyright holders in the guise of the RIAA/MPAA/etc use. If the MPAA tries to screw me in that manner, at least I would expect it and understand. They have their own interests and they obviously feel DRM helps them accomplish those. Microsoft, however, did not produce the movies or the protected content, so why are they selling out their customer for the MPAA? At the very least, I will never approve such a move.

  7. Re:Thanks, but by dave420 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But what if there are some things you want to load (say, DirectX 10) which you can't load in Gentoo? Are you supposed to rejoice in the fact you got to choose which components you wanted in your functionality-lacking OS install? Being able to customise an OS install is not as important as being able to use that OS to perform tasks you want. I can't use Gentoo because it doesn't run the applications I need (Adobe, Office, games). Not that I'm knocking Gentoo, I just don't see how your argument is anything but fanboyish nose-cutting/face-spiting posturing, desperately trying to ilicit "hear hear"s from the rest of the slashdot crowd.

  8. nLite by Nimey · · Score: 3, Informative

    The same people also have a tool called nLite, which does the same stuff for Windows XP. It works well for stuff like slipstreaming SATA drivers, but I've had a few problems when I used more advanced features like removing un-needed Windows components -- when installing stuff like .NET from Windows Update, Windows required me to put in the XP install disc, which obviously is non-workable for user desktops.

    To be fair, that was an older version (1.3?), and they've had a couple of releases since then.

    --
    Hail Eris, full of mischief...

    E pluribus sanguinem
    1. Re:nLite by Sentry21 · · Score: 4, Informative

      nLite is definitely worth mentioning. I took a Windows XP Professional CD (580MB or so) and stripped out all the drivers that I never use, apps I never use, and functionality I never use, and it took it down to about 150MB. I also added in Service Pack 3, Firefox, Acrobat Reader, and drivers for my hardware, then customized it with registry tweaks beforehand (e.g. turning off the 'Welcome to Windows' page, disabling 'hide inactive notification icons', and so on), set it up to join a domain, added a new Windows theme (Royale, from MCE), and then set it up with an automated install with our company's volume key.

      The end result? A tedious two-hour install procedure ('Oh, is it asking you something? Ok, just click 'Next'... greyed out? Click on the... yeah, there you go...') turned into a TEN MINUTE INSTALL. The only thing I haven't managed to do yet is to set up a USB drive as a bootable volume, to install from a flash drive to speed installation even further.

      Definitely check it out if you have to do XP installs more than once a year.

  9. Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up by adonoman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    MinWin is a non-graphical kernel that doesn't do much more than boot up and host a webserver. It's not exactly a full functional operating system, so yes it's going to be considerably smaller.

    1. Re:Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 5, Funny

      MinWin is a non-graphical kernel that doesn't do much more than boot up and host a webserver. It's not exactly a full functional operating system, so yes it's going to be considerably smaller.

      Point is that by getting the cruft out of the kernel customization will be easier and the result probably still overall smaller.

      Amazing ideas these MS boys have these days. Imagine an operating system with a small, even micro, kernel. To this the user can add the operating system toys that he needs around that kernel, resulting in a lean, mean operating system that does what he needs and nothing more.

      I hear some crazy Finnish guy had a similar idea once but nobody listened to him.

    2. Re:Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ooooo, the pendants are going to get you for implying that Linux uses a "micro" kernel.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    3. Re:Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up by Draek · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, the pedants are going to get *you* for comparing them to some tiny jewelry. Andrew Tanenbaum will take care of the GP for comparing Linux to a microkernel.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    4. Re:Comparing MinWin and Vista doesn't hold up by powerlord · · Score: 5, Funny

      Ooooo, the pendants are going to get you for implying that Linux uses a "micro" kernel.


      That depends if they Hurd him.

      Even if they did, it might not Mach any difference.
      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
  10. That is a Convenience Some Cannot Afford by eldavojohn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'll stick with Gentoo. Load what I use, don't load what I don't. This is sage advice for you and I. However, we constitute maybe 0.05% of the populace (I do not mean to be elitist). You may find me on the other side soon in the unwashed 99.95% of the populace as I once enjoyed spending a whole Saturday installing a new Linux distro or "emerging" and acquiring a few new packages I didn't have.

    I do not have this kind of time anymore. The other day I received an e-mail from a friend. He wanted to know how he could get the absolute most out of his hardware for a very specific game he plays (World of Warcraft). I began with recommending plain old Linux and then installing wine and trying to run it. But I soon realized how hopeless this would be as I think he has a nice ATI card that once was top of the line five months ago.

    So I told him to get a fresh XP install and not install anything else on it. Perhaps this MinWin or core of a Windows will satisfy him? Perhaps it will also satisfy me in finding simplicity in an operating system that can run my games and programs that are only for win32?
    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:That is a Convenience Some Cannot Afford by Entropius · · Score: 3, Informative

      The unwashed masses can just install Ubuntu. I was a doubter until I tried it a month ago -- it installed in 10 minutes painlessly and everything Just Works.

  11. Add free version by christurkel · · Score: 4, Informative

    A free software tool that promises to strip down the Windows Vista operating system -- which even some Microsoft (NSDQ: MSFT) officials have called "bloated" -- to a minimalist state is attracting big interest on the Internet.

    vLite, created by developer Dino Nuhagic, automatically removes a number of non-essential Windows Vista components in order to pare the OS's heavy footprint by half or more.

    vLite allows users to preselect numerous Vista features for automatic removal prior to installing the OS on their personal computers. Among them: Windows Media Player, Windows Photo Viewer, MSN Installer, Wallpapers, SlideShow, Windows Mail and other utilities.

    "It's not just about hard disk space. There is also an increase in OS responsiveness and you don't have to tolerate all kinds of things you don't use," said Nuhagic, in an e-mail to InformationWeek explaining why he launched the project.

    vLite, however, isn't for the technically timid. The software warns that the changes it imposes on Vista are "permanent, so be sure in your choice."

    Nuhagic said he doesn't know exactly how many downloads vLite has seen -- but a forum that asks users to submit suggestions for the next version has drawn almost 50,000 views.

    The emergence of tools like vLite reflect the frustrations voiced by many computer users over Vista's bulk and resource requirements.

    Loaded with an abundance of features and tools designed to ease navigation and bolster security, the Home Premium and Ultimate editions of Vista both require a whopping 15 GBs of available disk space for installation. By contrast, Windows XP -- Vista's predecessor -- requires 1.5 GB of available space for installation of the Professional version.

    With Vista bearing a footprint 10 times larger than XP's, even Microsoft officials are expressing concerns about Windows' growing waistline. Speaking last year at the University of Illinois, Microsoft distinguished engineer Eric Traut said the operating system had become bloated.

    "A lot of people think of Windows as this large, bloated operating system. That may be a fair characterization," said Traut.

    In response to such concerns, Traut said Microsoft has adopted a new, modular approach to OS development that will yield more streamlined products beginning with Windows 7 -- a successor to Windows Vista that's expected to be available some time in 2010.

    The approach calls for Windows developers to use a bare bones version of the OS -- dubbed MinWin -- as the building block for their next programming effort. MinWin is built on about 25 MBs of data -- making it smaller than Windows Vista by an order of magnitude.

    Until it's ready, there's always programs like vLite.

    --

    CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
  12. Not The Operating System by gsslay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think it's fair to call Vista a bloated operating system. You look at the list of crud that this tool removes; that's not Operating System, that's application crud that should be optional in the install anyway.

    Just because MS wants it to be part of the compulsory install (all the better to monopolise your computer and online profile) doesn't make it part of the operating system. I mean, come on, what makes MSN Installer part of an OS?

  13. Order of magnitude description is not quite right. by Kaptain+Kruton · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think the person that said that MinWin is smaller than vista by an order of magnitude needs to rethink their description or check their numbers. The article says that Vista Ultimate requires 15GB to install (I am not sure if it is saying 15GB is only needed during the installation process or it needs that much after installation). However, the article also states that MinWin is based on 25MB of data. The article does not say how large an entire installation of MinWin will be. However the article phrases things in a way that leads me to believe they were only speaking of the base of MinWin when stating that it is smaller than vista by an order of magnitude. The differences is more than an mere order of magnitude.

  14. Very good news for VMWare and gamers by (H)elix1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    nLite let you tune the core OS install - exposing uninstall options the 'default' installer, letting you fold in service packs and patches, drivers, pre-sorting license keys, users, and custom settings. When you get done, you can do a clean slate install and end up with something that won't take another four hours of tweaking to get where you wish was a starting point directly from the ISO.

    I started using nLite to build an XP distro that would run on a CF card. Running minimal services, I noticed how much faster it was too -- became the install for my gaming rig. Space was also a concern when building VMWare images, so starting with a mean clean install was a godsend. Granted, it took a couple tries - it is very easy to kill off a critical bit when you do this sort of chainsaw sculpture to the OS. Once you get it right, it is a fantastic (free!) tool. It is wonderful to see the same technology available to Vista.

    1. Re:Very good news for VMWare and gamers by Sentry21 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If anyone is curious, I took screenshots of a default XP Pro install vs. a customized (for my uses) XP install, both running in Parallels with the Parallels Tools installed.

      Default XP Install - 22 processes, commit charge 105 MB
      Custom XP Install - 17 processes, commit charge 52 MB

      The difference is astronomical. It installs faster, boots faster, runs faster, and shuts down faster. Definitely worth the time, even just for one install.

  15. We'll see MinWin in 2010... not by dpbsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah, right. A big company's approach to all difficult problems is to imagine a solution for them and create a name for that solution. Problem? Vista is bloated. Solution: create the name "MinWin."

    If Microsoft wanted to reduce Vista's bloat, they'd just reduce it.

    They might, if they had any good faith about it, analyze and SQA vLite and license it or offer and approved version. Or structure the present Vista so that it installs a reasonable core and allows you to "opt in" to the extra stuff.

    What's likely happening is a turf battle between all the managers that want their bloat in the product, are threatened by any suggestions that it be trimmed, and will fight it's being trimmed to the death--or at least for a couple of years when they move on to their next assignment.

    If MinWin happens at all, what will happen is that they'll trim Vista by 20% and then pack on 100% of new bloat.

    1. Re:We'll see MinWin in 2010... not by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Microsoft would never offer something like vLite or nLite to end users.

      It's hard enough to test the current limited set of installation options. vLite gives far more possibilities and would therefore need far more testing. Most likely a commercial company that did it would get a reputation for producing unstable software. Microsoft don't have a perfect reputation with the limited options they offer now of course, but offering nLite would make things worse.

      Open source stuff can do this of course, but that's because the people adding the options don't have to respond to clueless people misusing them. I noticed it with wget. The version I downloaded would die on an access violation if I used -np and -L. Which is legal as far as I can see, but the latest build crashes with that command line.

      Now since it's free and open source, I just fiddled with the batch file that called it to work in a different way. But if it was commercial and as widely used as Windows that break would trigger an avalanche of tech support calls.

      The economics are different in commercial software - you're better off offering a limit set of options and making sure you test every combination of them on the few supported platforms. With open source anyone can add an option, anyone can introduce a bug and anyone can fix it.

      In fact I think Microsoft sit in the middle of scale of customizability - somewhere between Linux which is highly customizable and Mac which is almost totally locked down. They do offer embedded versions of desktop OSs incidentally which are more modular and customizable. But those are sold to engineers in very small volumes, and presumably have more expensive support contracts.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    2. Re:We'll see MinWin in 2010... not by secPM_MS · · Score: 2, Informative
      Actually, look at Server 2008. When you install, you get the choice of standard GUI or server core. Server core is for headless servers and does not come with a GUI or the windows explorer - you get a command line. If you install the standard server configuration, you server with no roles or features enabled. No media player, no sidebar, et. This is what I run on my notebook. I added the wireless feature and the search indexer from the file server role. It runs well on low power on my notebook and ran well when I was using what is now a 3 year old notebook.

      Consumers seem to like all the bells and whistles. To make sure that the consumers have lots, all the PC vendors ship their systems with gigs and gigs of various stuff. I would pay extra to get a clean system and clean install discs without all the extra *hit!

  16. Now microsoft can prove it by jollyreaper · · Score: 4, Funny

    Microsoft alway said Vista wasn't fat, it was just big-boned. Now they can prove it!

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  17. Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* by Torvaun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    3 years running AVG: $0
    3 years running Ad-aware, Spybot, and CCleaner: $0

    Now, I don't run Vista either, but saying it's cheaper to buy an iMac is a little disingenuous.

    --
    I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
  18. Re:Thanks, but by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've not used Gentoo, but if you want to load what you want and not load what you don't then a source-based distribution has a lot of advantages. Try running ./configure --help on one of the packages you use frequently. There are typically a large range of options and distributing every possible combination in binary form is impossible. By selecting the ones you want, you can often eliminate several dependencies (which have their own dependencies and so on).

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  19. Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* by afedaken · · Score: 2, Interesting

    By the time you add the cost of 3 years antivirus, Free as in beer

    3 years other malware/bugware, Free as in beer

    etc., its cheaper to buy an iMac. Not free as in $1199.

    --
    If there's a castle floating upside down in the sky, then there's a castle floating upside down in the sky.
  20. MinWin? What's next? by filbranden · · Score: 2, Insightful

    First, they said that 95 was buggy and that 98 fixed them. Then, 98 was too unstable and XP was rock solid. Last year, XP was too old and Vista was new and shiny. Now, Vista is bloated and MinWin is lean.

    Could perhaps Microsoft decide if their products are good or bad?

  21. AVG not free for use on LANs or outside the home by trolltalk.com · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the AVG free version license: http://free.grisoft.com/doc/98/us/frt/0

    You must not use the program in a network or on more than one computer. This particular software version is distributed free of charge, therefore, the applicable license is only granted for home use thereof. In case of this free version, the program is not subject to any guarantees, and the user has no right to any technical support whatsoever.

    So: http://www2.grisoft.com/doc/buy/us/crp/0 2 years AVG Antivirus: $39
    - or -
    2 years AVG Internet Security: $70

    So, 3 years of AVG Internet security is another $140.00. - total is $1,040.00

    http://www.macmall.com/macmall/families/new_promo~dp~7349100~family~macbook~promo~1.asp Apple MacBook: $1,019.00

    The Apple is cheaper over 3 or more years.

  22. OMG! You got GoogleNewsed! by LukePieStalker · · Score: 2, Informative

    Funny. This article appeared on the top of the Google News page. Now Slashdot has been slashdotted!

  23. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  24. Benchmarks by Toreo+asesino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What I'd be interested in seeing is benchmarks for desktop and 3d performance. It's all very well saying "ooooh look at how much shit it removes!" if it has no actual impact on performance. Most of the things it appears this thing removes will have barely any impact on hard disc space, cpu cycles or memory usage - MSN Installer for instance; removing that will free up a couple of megabytes of hard-disc space at best.

    Anyone got any useful benchmarks?

    --
    throw new NoSignatureException();
    1. Re:Benchmarks by immcintosh · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not really what you're asking for, but somewhere up above in the chain of comments somebody posted screenshots of XP before and after having been reduced by the XP version of this utility. I don't want to go find it again, but it about halved the memory footprint of a fresh install. I can only imagine that Vista has more to trim off than XP.

  25. WARNING: Use with care!!! by Captain+Sarcastic · · Score: 4, Funny

    I tried it, and it did such a thorough job of stripping down my system that my wallpaper of Pamela Anderson was replaced with a skeleton.

    --
    Strike while the irony is hot! -- The Freethinker
    1. Re:WARNING: Use with care!!! by mattgoldey · · Score: 2, Funny

      How were you able to tell the difference?

  26. Virtual PC doesn't run on Vista Home Premium by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    2) The 64-bit version of Vista removes backwards compatability for 16-bit applications. I dunno about you, but sometimes I get nostalgic for the games I grew up with... and some of those games are good enough that horrible dated graphics don't matter. I understand the other points, but honestly... If you want to play the old 16-bit applications, run an emulator. That would be a solution, except that Microsoft's emulator doesn't run on Windows Vista Home Premium. Users of Virtual PC need Windows Vista Business or Windows Vista Ultimate. Apple, on the other hand, included the 68LC040 emulator with all editions of Mac OS X 7 through 9 for PowerPC-based computers and all editions of Mac OS X 10.4 and 10.5 for Intel-based computers.
  27. 512M is not miniscule. by Viol8 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Windows has brow beaten you into thinking that you need crazy amounts of RAM for an OS when in fact thats just BS. I've got Linux happily running on a 128M machine and I don't think I've seen it thrash the drive yet even when using open office.

    Any OS that needs 1 Gig of RAM to run properly is a bloated , badly written POS which should never have escaped from the lab.

  28. Re:vista ultra-lite - rm /dev/sda1/* by Torvaun · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Amazingly enough, it's all scriptable. They will run when you're not using the machine and they will automatically apply updates. Installing is generally pretty damn fast too.

    --
    I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
  29. Re:AVG not free for use on LANs or outside the hom by afedaken · · Score: 2, Informative

    So: http://www2.grisoft.com/doc/buy/us/crp/0 2 years AVG Antivirus: $39
    - or -
    2 years AVG Internet Security: $70

    So, 3 years of AVG Internet security is another $140.00. - total is $1,040.00 Free as in Speech and Beer.
    --
    If there's a castle floating upside down in the sky, then there's a castle floating upside down in the sky.
  30. Bare Necessities by Cyanara · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And yet, what's the bet that Microsoft will still find some pressing need to make Internet Explorer a critically integrated part of MinWin?