How would you rate Vista so far? Other Vista Discussions Discuss How would you rate Vista so far? in the Windows Vista forums; Originally Posted by felix8406 I wonder how long your going back and forth will last though. I would bet that once you are running the final version for a while, ...

[Znod]

Originally Posted by felix8406

I wonder how long your going back and forth will last though. I would bet that once you are running the final version for a while, you'll stop your going back to your XP. We’ll see what will happen around this same time next year.

The biggest difference in between RC2 and RTM I noticed is in the speed; RTM, at least in my case, runs faster. Although like I mentioned before, RTM found all drivers for my laptop, something RC2 didn't do.

Well, yes, I do wonder how long I'll use the dual boot. I have never been missing any drivers that seemed to cause a speed difference issue. And, I can't much trust my SOP judgments especially since I have a somewhat natural bias towards wanting the latest to be the greatest.

[Galt]

Originally Posted by Znod

Well, yes, I do wonder how long I'll use the dual boot. I have never been missing any drivers that seemed to cause a speed difference issue. And, I can't much trust my SOP judgments especially since I have a somewhat natural bias towards wanting the latest to be the greatest.

The only issue I have with Dual Booting, is that it's extreamly hard on the system hardware, regardless of which OS becomes a favorite. Computers were never meant to be, and still aren't to be re-booted, or shutdown and re-started but left running.

[Znod]

Whoa!!! Say what??? "aren't to be re-booted, or shutdown and re-started but left running."

[felix8406]

Originally Posted by Znod

Whoa!!! Say what??? "aren't to be re-booted, or shutdown and re-started but left running."

Turning a unit off and on put a lot of stress in all components, especially those generating the most heat. Also, the initial current surge through the various circuits creates a shocking effect. So technically, your PC would last longer if left on constantly.

Of course there are some disadvantages, e.g. energy waste.

[Snuffy]

I was Beta testing XP before it was XP..and had FAR LESS problems with XP than I have had with Vista..I do like much of Vista.. but the problems are getting much worse , XP had solutions for almost all of the problems within 12 to 18 hours... with Vista every morning that I receive a upgrade... I have a previous working program fail... several I can no longer uninstall..
Sorry but Vista has a long was to go before it is ready for the PUBLIC..

[Znod]

I think that what you say has not really been proved conclusively in the context of lots of types of electrical components. I agree though that your point often is made and believed. And, also there are other benefits from shutting computers down as you say--e.g., power savings, less danger from power surges and thunderstorms, etc.

But, regardless, my comment has to do with trying to figure out what the heck Galt said. As I read him, he says computers aren't to be (1) re-booted or (2) aren't to be shutdown and re-started (i.e., re-booted) and left running. So, if you aren't supposed re-boot them or to leave them running, I'd say you are in big trouble.

[felix8406]

Znod, I'm sure Galt will get back with you concernibg his comments.

In regards to the coments made by Snuffy about his issues with Vista, maybe I'm one of the lucky ones. I haven't had any bad issues at all during the installation or after installing every available upgrade to the RTM. I wonder who else in this forum have those issues.

[Davehc]

It's not my field, so I consulted my son, a qualified electronics engineer. HIS opinion, for the thread is that, say for example, your computer would last, running all the time, for a comfortable 6 years. Switching it off and on MIGHT shorten its life by, say a couple of weeks of that period. Rather insignificant. He also points out that there are several components, top of the list the cooler fans, which would suffer far more wear during that period, if left running, and need to be replaced at least once. This could outway the cost of the computer breaking down for those precious few, saved weeks.

[felix8406]

I found this article at MS dealing with turning the PC off. It is not a scientific test though. http://www.microsoft.com/smallbusine..._at_night.mspx

[Znod]

Yeah, I think the decision is something of a breakeven. It doesn't really matter what you do--except from one perspective--IMO.

If, as on an OS X machine, the computer tends to accumulate more and more frequently used instructions in RAM effieciently, then one would never want to do a shut down, except in the cases where one is necessary, because OS X is not prone to needing "cobweb" clearing as Windows has been prone to historically. Perhaps Vista will require much less cobweb clearing so that leaving Vista machines on all the time more clearly is the winning strategy. And, I have seached several times, but I have never found a study online dealing with the leave on or turn off issue with respect to electronic devices.