Slyck.com
 
Slyck Chatbox - And More

File-Sharing on Windows Vista

Discuss Slyck's latest news
Forum rules
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Slyck Forum Rules

File-Sharing on Windows Vista

Postby LANjackal » Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:37 am

Windows Vista has the dubious honor of probably being the most controversial OS that Microsoft (MS) has ever released. Critics have relentlessly assailed it as a resource hog, an attempt to copy OS X, being too little too late for an upgrade from XP, and/or as simply being XP with some window dressings.

Of all the characteristics of the new OS, perhaps none have received more attention than the content protection measures built into it. Combined with MS' announced Windows Genuine Advantage verification features, the issue has rapidly snowballed into a huge sphere of negative sentiment that Microsoft themselves have surprisingly done relatively little to mitigate.

Many users worried that their unprotected content would refuse to play, and there are various claims floating around the internet that this is the case. Others have fretted that Vista would block file-sharing altogether.

Due to the nature of most file-sharing, the lack of official information from MS or major tech news sources is understandable. Up to this writing, I was aware of only one such article - Paul Thurrott's <a href=http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_06.asp target=_blank>Compatibility Guide</a>, in which he reported that two programs widely used for content acquisition and sharing, <a href=http://www.slysoft.com target=_blank>AnyDVD</a> and <a href=http://www.utorrent.com target=_blank>uTorrent</a>, work perfectly. On the other hand, there seems to be a flood of uncertain information on the internet in the form of blog and forum posts.

As such, the Slyck team felt it was time to look into the issue ourselves and provide the file-sharing community with a clear picture of exactly what is and isn't possible on Vista.

<b>PLEASE NOTE: </b> This article is not intended to be a review of Vista itself. Nor is it a statement for or against that or any other available OS. It is certainly not an argument for or against switching or upgrading. Its primary purpose is to provide accurate information as to what works and what doesn't on a particular platform.

Testing was done on a Toshiba Satellite A135-S4527 laptop running Windows Vista Home Premium. It can be picked up from your local Circuit City (for those who live in the US) for $599.99. Specs are quite modest:

CPU: Intel Core Duo (1.73GHz)
RAM: 1GB 533MHz DDR2 SDRAM (PC2-4200)
GPU: Intel Integrated Graphics
HDD: 120GB 5400RPM SATA

During initial setup, Vista rated the system 3/5 for expected performance.

The investigation into file-sharing on Vista will cover 3 main areas: the operating system, clients, and hardware.

<b>Operating System</b>

Users do well to familiarize themselves with the following if they wish to do anything significant with Vista:

<u>UAC</u> - User Account Control, basically does for Vista what sudo does for *nix systems by giving users limited authority by default. Since many clients were developed on/for XP in which admin authority was a given, this is where users are likely to have the most issues, albeit minor ones that can easily be overcome. It can be disabled by following the instructions <a href=http://technet2.microsoft.com/WindowsVista/en/library/0d75f774-8514-4c9e-ac08-4c21f5c6c2d91033.mspx?mfr=true target=_blank>here</a>, but that was not attempted for this article since it is not recommended for security purposes any more than disabling sudo would be a good idea for Linux.

UAC is invoked even for some native MS apps, so it's likely to be a permanent fixture in the Windows experience from here on out almost regardless of the software vendor. You won't see it for every program you launch, just some. This suggests that are ways to develop UAC-friendly apps, but perhaps most developers haven't gotten around to doing so yet. Programs, options and links that require a UAC prompt will have a small "Windows shield" logo superimposed upon their own icon(s).

<u>Run as administrator</u> - this allows users to run programs with admin authority. It can be invoked once by right clicking on an executable and selecting "Run as administrator," or permanently by right clicking -> Properties -> Compatibility -> and selecting the matching check box. Note that this option does not necessarily exempt the program in question from UAC. It only generally gives it access to parts of the OS that it normally wouldn't have.

<u>Compatibility mode</u> - Accessed from the same Properties -> Compatibility menu as "Run as administrator" above. Allows users to run programs as they would on previous Windows versions.

<u>Permissions</u> - Since users now have limited access by default, access to some files and folders often have to be enabled manually either to allow access, period, or to allow access without a UAC prompt. Users will probably need to do this for external hard drives, as it was necessary for this test. It is accomplished by right clicking the object in question -> Properties -> Security. Depending on how many files you have on the drive, you may have to wait a while as the OS changes the permissions settings on each one. Doing so for a 250GB USB2.0 drive took a couple minutes, but was a lot better than having to go through a UAC prompt for nearly every operation within Explorer.

In rare cases, you may also have to grant yourself ownership of a particular folder. To do so, click "Advanced" on the Security tab -> Owner -> Edit.

The reason for the above complications is to prevent major changes to the system without the user's specific and deliberate consent. Whether or not this is effective is the province of security articles and will not be debated here.

<u>File transfer issue(?)</u> - When transferring files from one drive to another and emptying the recycling bin, Vista will attempt calculate the remaining time to complete the operation. For some reason, it often spends more time doing the calculation than actually performing the requested operation. This appears to be because it tries to calculate the time first before starting the transfer. So far, MS has not delivered a default Windows Update for this issue, but has provided a <a href=http://vistarewired.com/2007/04/10/speed-up-slow-file-transfers-on-windows-vista/ target=_blank>hotfix for it</a>. The hotfix isn't absolutely necessary, but if you're annoyed by the above problem, it should help you out. Once it is applied (no reboot needed), Vista will still do the time calculation but actually execute the transfer simultaneously, thus bringing the process back to XP-like speeds.

Other issues that users may have heard of, but are not very critical for the most part:

<u>DRM</u> - Our experience was that <b>if you avoid protected content, you'll never see the DRM in Vista, period</b>. MP3s, XviDs, etc. are handled with aplomb and unhindered regardless of their source. Not once was the impression given that the OS was maliciously interfering with my media files.

<u>Windows Genuine Advantage (WGA)</u> - 5 days into using the system, while applying updates regularly, this was never encountered.

<b>Clients</b>

For obvious reasons, not every client out there could be reported on, but care was taken to test the most widely used ones. Some common non-P2P apps for content acquisition and playback were also tested.

<a href=http://www.altbinz.com/ target=_blank>Alt.Binz</a> - On first startup after installation, the program complained that it couldn't load unrar.dll. When it closed thereafter, Vista presented a message saying that it detected that the program hadn't run correctly, and provided an option to run it as administrator. Accepting that option eliminated any further issues.

Aside: Vista apparently has a feature in which it can actively detect software compatibility problems and both offer and search for solutions of its own.

<a href=http://aresgalaxy.sourceforge.net/ target=_blank>Ares</a> - Works perfectly. Also, the bug some users experienced on XP with Ares killing their network connection appears to have been resolved.

<a href=http://cabos.sourceforge.jp/ target=_blank>Cabos</a> - Works perfectly.

<a href=http://www.emule-project.net target=_blank>eMule</a> - Works perfectly. May take a while to connect to Kad on initial startup after installation, but that has been a problem on XP also. Successfully imported incomplete downloads from an external hard drive previously attached to an XP Pro SP2 system and completed them.

<a href=http://host.filetopia.com/ft/index.htm target=_blank>Filetopia</a> - Initial run attempt ended in nondescript error from the program before it even loaded. Running as administrator and in XP SP2 compatibility mode fixed that problem. No other issues.

<a href=http://www.frostwire.com/ target=_blank>Frostwire</a> - Works perfectly.

<a href=http://www.kceasy.com/ target=_blank>KCeasy</a> - This is the only client I had unresolved issues with. Connections seemed to be a bit iffy. On one run, it connected to all 3 networks (Gnutella, Ares and OpenFT) well, while on the next (done the next day), it could connect to the OpenFT network only. Even then, the connection was held for only 15 minutes, after which no connections seemed possible.

Markus Kern, KCeasy's developer, responded to our email inquiry.

“KCeasy's built in patcher for tcpip.sys, which raises the concurrent connection limit introduced in Windows XP SP2, is not working on Vista which might be one reason you see these disconnects," Markus told Slyck.com. "There are no other networking issues with KCeasy on Vista that I am aware of. The connection problems you see are most likely of general nature and may simply go away if you use KCeasy for a while so it is able to collect a stable node list.”

There are of course some things which could be done to generally improve KCeasy's connection stability but I haven't been working on it for a while due to time constraints.[/quote target=_blank>

Your mileage may differ, but on this end it was essentially zero with KCeasy. However, since the client is FLOSS, we can only hope that another developer will step in soon to patch the problem if Kern is unable to.

<a href=http://www.mirc.com/index.html target=_blank>mIRC</a> - Given the demise of AutoXDCC, I almost didn't consider any IRC clients until Slyck.com member lordfoul pointed me to this <a href=http://www3.telus.net/lordfoul/pics/Guide/Guide.html target=_blank>excellent guide</a> that works just as well with Vista as it does with XP. Caveat: you will probably have to grant yourself ownership of the C:\Program Files\mIRC folder as Vista will not allow you to unzip the XDCC browser script to that location otherwise. Refer to the "Permissions" section above to see how to do this. Once that is done, operation is essentially flawless. Unfortunately, mIRC's biggest bug is one that has nothing to do with the OS it runs on - it costs $20 ;).

<a href=http://pidgin.im/pidgin/home/ target=_blank>Pidgin</a> - Formerly known as Gaim, Pidgin is an IM client, but it can also be used for file-sharing via IM file transfers. No issues were observed besides that pressing Esc no longer exited IM windows as it did in XP.

<a href=http://www.shareaza.com/ target=_blank>Shareaza</a> - Crashed once on initial run when I tried to open my Library (shared files) using the Folders view within the app. Problem could not be reproduced, and operation was perfect thereafter.

<a href=http://www.slsknet.org/ target=_blank>Soulseek</a> - Works perfectly.

<a href=http://www.utorrent.com/ target=_blank>uTorrent</a> - Works perfectly.

<a href=http://www.videolan.org/ target=_blank>VLC</a> - An iPod video from <a href=http://www.mariposahd.tv/ target=_blank>MariposaHD</a> crashed the client repeatedly* No problems with other formats.

Windows Media Player 11 (built-in) - Works perfectly. No playback issues whatsoever, including the high CPU usage reported by some other users.

<a href=http://www.exactaudiocopy.de/ target=_blank>Exact Audio Copy</a> - Works perfectly with no UAC notifications at all. Given that EAC is actually recommended in published official MS OS guides, it's very likely it was tested for compatibility in-house.

<a href=http://www.foobar2000.org/ target=_blank>foobar2000</a> - Works perfectly.

<a href=http://www.firefox.com target=_blank>Firefox</a> - A few bugs. 2 upload sites, <a href=http://www.box.net target=_blank>Box.net</a> and <a href=http://www.fileden.com target=_blank>fileden.com</a>, didn't work. In the former case, I couldn't even open the "Add Files" dialog, while on fileden.com the upload never even started. An email to support@box.net produced the response that Vista is not supported (Windows 2000, XP and OS X are). However, since IE7 handled both tasks easily and without complaint, I believe it is reasonable to conclude that the problem lies either with Firefox or the upload sites themselves.

WinMX - I did not test this software due to WPNP's now defunct status. However, according to <a href=http://www.winmxworld.com/forum2/index.php/topic,4799.0.html target=_blank>WinMXWorld.com</a>, there is a patch to enable connectivity.

<b>Hardware</b>

Given the buzz on the internet about Vista being a severe system hog, I expected a slow, poky experience with the specs on the test machine.

WRONG.

Even with Aero enabled, response is snappy and the PC multitasks easily without so much as an audible fan noise increase. Aside from the file transfer issue mentioned at the outset, no complaints about stability, speed or capacity can be made. Given the fact that this machine is equipped with integrated graphics, a high powered graphics card does not appear to be necessary either.

RAM usage is large by default, but that's because of a feature of Vista called SuperFetch. SuperFetch actively learns the user's program usage habits and preloads programs/files that are likely to be used into memory. The philosophy behind this is apparently that empty RAM, like idle CPU cycles, is about as useful as a 7 car garage with a single motorcycle in it. The real challenge is NOT how much RAM is used, but how well it is used and how fast data can be moved into and out of the existing capacity. As such, Vista's RAM usage will almost always be high and so is not a fair performance metric for the OS.

Test experience mirrors that of ZDnet blogger Ed Bott's <a href=http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=256 target=_blank>3rd Day</a> with a similarly equipped $422 Dell desktop. Even on a (relatively) cheap machine, the OS barely seems to make the PC break a sweat. In fact, if the test laptop did this well while rated only 3/5, it's likely that a high powered OEM machine would have performed even better.

<b>Conclusion</b>

If you have XP Pro SP2 and are happy with it, you don't need Vista as long as the former is still supported, especially for P2P. But if you already have Vista or were planning to get it anyway, there's no need to wait for SP1. It's ready to go as is.

My firsthand experience leads me to believe that a lot of the negative "issues" buzzed about the OS on the net are just inaccurate, malicious or plain wrong. File-sharing is easy and indistinguishable from XP (minus the Aero look) once you understand how the OS is set up. DRM (or at least the effects thereof) is practically nonexistent unless you personally decide to buy protected content.

Ironically, if you're a Linux user, you may be slightly more comfortable with Vista's new "security everywhere, access denied by default" set than the average Windows user (this is not to be interpreted as an argument for or against switching).

Because there are quite a few things that I didn't have the space to cover here that are different between Vista and XP, there will be a slight learning curve even for experienced XP users if they really want to become Vista power users. While it's not absolutely necessary, it's a good idea to take advantage of MS' excellent and extensive documentation. I picked up <a href=http://www.pricegrabber.com/search_getprod.php/isbn=9780735622708/search=9780735622708 target=_blank>Microsoft Windows Vista Inside Out</a> from my local Barnes and Noble. Thanks to it, I was able to easily solve the Permissions issue I mentioned above. The same information can probably be found easily online via the Microsoft Knowledgebase, but if you prefer quick answers to 15 minutes of Google, you can take the route I did.

Microsoft has rightly been severely criticized over the years for being a monolith that's difficult to interact with directly, and unfortunately that's still the case. Still, if you'd like to keep up with where Vista's going and what the dev team is up to, check out the <a href=http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/default.aspx target=_blank>Windows Vista Team Blog.</a>

In this author's opinion, 2 words sum up the Vista file-sharing experience:

<b>All clear.</b>

Unless you rely exclusively on KCeasy/the OpenFT network or religiously use Firefox for uploads, there is nothing to be concerned about. In any case, the problems with those 2 apps appear to be external to the OS itself - i.e. <u>it's not that Vista's blocking them.</u>

Because I never had to upgrade via an installation, I can't comment on exactly how the new OS works in that case. However from the above there's a distinct likelihood that there's a lot less truth and fairness to the nightmare stories floating around out there than their authors would like you to believe.

That's it. Go right ahead.



*EDIT: It has been discovered that this issue is resolved by opening VLC -> Settings -> Preferences -> Video -> uncheck "Overlay Video Output" -> Save
Follow me around the internet!
[Windows 7 Pro x64 (Primary OS)
User avatar
LANjackal
 
Posts: 5895
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 1:58 pm
Location: Various networks. In the physical world I'm an adaptive AI that pretends to be human

Postby SlyckTom » Thu Jun 28, 2007 7:47 am

Excellent first article LanJackle and welcome aboard! Very well thought out and researched, this article is just what the P2P community needed to dispel many of the myths out there.
Follow us on Twitter @SlyckDotCom
Join our Facebook Fan page
SlyckTom
 
Posts: 5713
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 7:22 pm
Location: New York City

Postby multivariable » Thu Jun 28, 2007 8:10 am

Great article Lj, excellently written and objective.

I recently obtained a Toshiba Satellite laptop with very slightly superior specs to your test machine, also running Vista Home Premium, so it will be interesting to see if I can replicate your results.
User avatar
multivariable
 
Posts: 27959
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 11:28 am

Postby AW » Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:16 am

I do everything else on my vista box, The important stuff like p2p/pg2 is on XpPro.

No pg2 (peerGuardian), No P2p. :D

After all, P2P and no Pg2 is like a $5 hooker and no condom 8)
"Any Society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both"- Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
AW
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:53 pm

Postby HalOfBorg » Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:28 am

Terrible article. Lots of rambling and confusing stuff.

Oh wait - I just read it. GREAT ARTICLE!! :D

FYI - I use the WinMX from Winmxworld (3.54 Beta4) and have no trouble with it on Vista Home Premium (or XP SP2). I just run it as Administrator and all is well. With PG2 on XP.

And - a number or programs like WinMX and uTorrent run OK, but without "as administrator" they can't seem to save their option/settings changes.
Help HalOfBorg fight his cancer: http://www.gofundme.com/21ygdk

We are The Borg.
Lower your weapons. Disarm your explosives.
Your spawn will adapt to service Us.
Resistance is futile.
User avatar
HalOfBorg
 
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 1:04 pm

Postby LANjackal » Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:03 pm

Thanks guys :)
Follow me around the internet!
[Windows 7 Pro x64 (Primary OS)
User avatar
LANjackal
 
Posts: 5895
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 1:58 pm
Location: Various networks. In the physical world I'm an adaptive AI that pretends to be human

Postby forbuyfor » Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:15 pm

I wouldn't be so quick to give the ok to Vista. I think the mere idea of trying to control how people use their own computers is reason enough to not upgrade to this system, EVER! Even if most file sharing programs do work, how do we know that they haven't configured it that way in order to get the new os out there and then when enough people switch to vista along comes service pack 1 or 2 with a whole bunch of new restrictions. Microsoft can NOT be trusted! Some of the articles I've read have indicated that many of the so called "restrictions" will only become apparent over time. I have several copies of XP plus all the service packs so I really don't see any need to ever update. I can do EVERYTHING on my computer now that I will ever want to do, so why upgrade? The whole concept of a new os being necessary every couple of years is nothing but a big corporate money grab. There are other industries out there who have even attempted to adopt the same marketing principles. Look at the Home audio field. Suddenly after many years stereo wasn't good enough anymore so they came out with pro logic, which was good, then Dolby digital 5.1, which was better. Now they have Dolby digital 7.1 which is where I believe they adopted the computer industry model of useless upgrades to boost profit margins. I think anyone who would upgrade from 5.1 to 7.1 has more money than common sense, why not just wait for Dolby 9.1. I'll do that upgrade just as soon as I grow my extra ears.

I don't mind shelling out my money to upgrade electronics when there is actually something new and useful about a new product, but to do so just because a corporate message says I should, or because I have to have the latest of everything, that makes no sense to me.

I realize many people have to upgrade to vista for many different reasons, but if you don't have to I don't see any point. I don't even want it for free!
forbuyfor
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 1:08 pm
Location: Canada

Postby LANjackal » Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:31 pm

That's why I said the article wasn't about upgrading.

Also, MS can easily deliver restrictive updates via XP also, as it proved back in 2005 when Windows Update started forcing reboots.

If you're paranoid about Vista, there's no logical reason to feel any safer about XP either.
Follow me around the internet!
[Windows 7 Pro x64 (Primary OS)
User avatar
LANjackal
 
Posts: 5895
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 1:58 pm
Location: Various networks. In the physical world I'm an adaptive AI that pretends to be human

Postby Ickypoopy » Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:43 pm

AW wrote:I do everything else on my vista box, The important stuff like p2p/pg2 is on XpPro.

No pg2 (peerGuardian), No P2p. :D

After all, P2P and no Pg2 is like a $5 hooker and no condom 8)

PG2 works on Vista now.
http://phrosty.phoenixlabs.org/pg2-rc1/
Ickypoopy
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 2:22 am
Location: Beaverton, Oregon

Postby Dazzle » Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:14 pm

PG2 works on Vista now.


No chance of them aquiring some decent block-lists yet then ? :roll:

Great article Lan Jackal, articles like this are great as reference material for folks to get a handle on how their favourite file-sharing app shapes up, I will direct many to read this in the future im sure.

But... pretty please can you add something for winmx as we are actually seeing numbers rise again and its disheartening to work for 2 years and be told your defunct :shock:

Cheers 8)
Dazzle
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 7:50 pm

Postby GraphiX » Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:31 pm

like i said before it's like this

imagine if they decided right now to block all content and make it DRM restricted only before they fully locked us all in what would happen?

yep people would jump ship back to XP or other OS.
now take 3 years down the line they got shut of XP pretty damn fast made shops even stop selling it.

All new hardware supports DRM/Trusted Computing
hmm do you think they are going to spend millions of dollars on all these restriction policy's if they wasn't going to enable them or use them?

Vista has over 21 layers of different protection that once they have locked everyone in over time and all the new hardware does support their crippled DRM systems they will silently introduce patches which will stop you using un-licenced content.

and what anoys me is no-one bellieves this but yet they see news every day about DRM systems about hardware being created now like the blueray BD++ where if your caught using a cracked or blacklisted serial key code all your existing content works but newer content wont until it updates the firmware.

again you all see this happening you even see all types of media services opening up with DRM systems inplace but for some strange reason people still sticking their head into the sand over this MS vista thing.

WAKE up! is all i have to say.
GraphiX
 
Posts: 922
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 7:19 pm

Re: File-Sharing on Windows Vista

Postby -KM- » Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:34 pm

calling a network defunct, then pointing out that it's not and is still around, contradicting yourself in the same sentence - I thought only the various industry groups did that ;-)

Actually when doing initial testing for vista compatibility for winmx I did (i believe during the second set of tests) go for the full "what would a beginner do" approach once installing a blank system, such as following the annoying "security advise" - try doing that

one of the things it says you need is "malware protection" and gives a short list of things to buy followed by a "free trial" of OneCare (at least at the time i looked) - it is likely a typical user would follow that "important security advise" and would install onecare, which would significantly alter the results you see testing p2p apps. in fact it was so extreme that it completely crippled not only all of the p2p applications I tried, but also many non-p2p applications

Also when doing performance comparisons, don't compare how XP runs on your few years old computer with how vista runs on a new computer, always test using the same computer varying only the software installed - for example try running vista on a typical single CPU system that XP will run happily on - not advised for those who like their computer to do things now as apposed to "in 10 minutes when i get around to it"
-KM-
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 5:15 am

Postby forbuyfor » Thu Jun 28, 2007 2:25 pm

LANjackal wrote:If you're paranoid about Vista, there's no logical reason to feel any safer about XP either.


I disagree Lanjackal. Since Xp is now a few years old and is now not the "current" windows OS, Microsoft really has no way of screwing this os on me as I already have the Service os packs I need and I NEVER download new "security updates" (and I've never had any security problems) there is no way microsoft can screw with my system. Now that vista is "the new thing" all the hackers and virus writers will be focusing on that and you WILL need updates eventually. That is when they'll get you. I suggest you read graphix post on this thread, I think he is absolutely right. Microsoft would be stupid fools to release Vista with all levels of built in DRM protection already activated. That would be suicide. Think about it. They may be greedy but they sure as hell ain't stupid.
forbuyfor
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 1:08 pm
Location: Canada

as long as the machine is new...

Postby credulousDolt » Thu Jun 28, 2007 3:40 pm

vista most decidedly does *not* like to be installed over anything. on my third addled machine now, i can't state this categorically, but i can be reasonably certain that it's likely to go badly.

if this holds, your article is missing a very important assumption--the machine should be new, or it should be wiped perfectly clean--and this will surely be relevant to someone's decision-making.
credulousDolt
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 3:35 pm

Re: File-Sharing on Windows Vista

Postby LANjackal » Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:00 pm

-KM- wrote:calling a network defunct, then pointing out that it's not and is still around, contradicting yourself in the same sentence - I thought only the various industry groups did that ;-)

To you and the other WinMX fans: I can't test everything. There are obviously more P2P clients out there than the ones I went through. That is all.

-KM- wrote:such as following the annoying "security advise" - try doing that

one of the things it says you need is "malware protection" and gives a short list of things to buy followed by a "free trial" of OneCare (at least at the time i looked) - it is likely a typical user would follow that "important security advise" and would install onecare, which would significantly alter the results you see testing p2p apps. in fact it was so extreme that it completely crippled not only all of the p2p applications I tried, but also many non-p2p applications

I don't know about your case, but Vista has yet to give me any buying advice whatsoever about anything.

-KM- wrote:Also when doing performance comparisons, don't compare how XP runs on your few years old computer with how vista runs on a new computer, always test using the same computer varying only the software installed - for example try running vista on a typical single CPU system that XP will run happily on - not advised for those who like their computer to do things now as apposed to "in 10 minutes when i get around to it"

Actually, I didn't do any performance comparison against XP, because that wasn't the point of the article (which I explicitly said). Therefore I'm not really sure what the point of your advice is. The only time I mentioned XP's performance was in describing the effect of the file transfer patch.

forbuyfor wrote:I disagree Lanjackal. Since Xp is now a few years old and is now not the "current" windows OS

Actually, MS is allowing XP license sales until the end of the year (which is why Dell is still offering it), and support will run into 2009 at the least. XP isn't the latest, but it's certainly current.

forbuyfor wrote:Microsoft really has no way of screwing this os on me as I already have the Service os packs I need and I NEVER download new "security updates" (and I've never had any security problems)

Malware development is independent of updates for any OS. Therefore, while your system is sitting static, malicious programmers are figuring out new ways to break into it. By your reasoning, we should still be defending ourselves as a nation with WWII era technology because we have never been invaded. Yeah, that makes sense :roll:

forbuyfor wrote:Microsoft would be stupid fools to release Vista with all levels of built in DRM protection already activated. That would be suicide. Think about it. They may be greedy but they sure as hell ain't stupid.

That was part of my point. Given that there is a very viable free option in the form of Linux, ANY overly restrictive (that definition varies depending on the user) OS release would be doomed.

credulousDolt wrote:if this holds, your article is missing a very important assumption--the machine should be new, or it should be wiped perfectly clean--and this will surely be relevant to someone's decision-making.

Again, missing the point of the article, which I stated therein: it is NOT about whether or not to upgrade. Make that call yourself.

I'm not really too sure what you mean by "assumption"... I said from the outset that it was an OEM machine with Vista pre-installed. Then in the conclusion, I emphasized that my experience did not involve an installation.
Follow me around the internet!
[Windows 7 Pro x64 (Primary OS)
User avatar
LANjackal
 
Posts: 5895
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2004 1:58 pm
Location: Various networks. In the physical world I'm an adaptive AI that pretends to be human

Postby HouseCrowd » Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:19 pm

Great article LJ!!! 10 out of 10!! :D

Very well written - a pleasure to read!

Will look forward to your next one :)
There are 10 types of people in the World; those who understand binary, and those who do not.
User avatar
HouseCrowd
 
Posts: 33862
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 4:18 am
Location: UK

Postby IceCube » Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:26 pm

Nice one LAN! :D
User avatar
IceCube
 
Posts: 17079
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 5:31 pm
Location: Igloo Country?

Postby NocturnalVagabond » Thu Jun 28, 2007 5:21 pm

I'd also like to give LJ a pat on the back here - first articles are very hard, and this one was well written.

While I can't share LJ's known enthusiasm for Vista in general :wink: :P I do think the article was written without bias towards the OS, and simply did what the title proclaimed: evaluated P2P on Vista.
"I'd hate to be a teetotaler. Imagine getting up in the morning and knowing that's as good as you're going to feel all day"
- Dean Martin
User avatar
NocturnalVagabond
Tin Foil Hat Salesperson
 
Posts: 915
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 10:59 pm
Location: Downunda

Postby TorrentMama » Thu Jun 28, 2007 5:40 pm

I liked the article and although I will never be a vista user, I think this type of review was necessary to quell some of the anti vista rhetoric.
User avatar
TorrentMama
 
Posts: 2827
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:42 pm

Postby piXelatedEmpire » Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:22 pm

Let me congratulate you on your first Slyck article LJ, well done. 8)

I know one day I will probably have the need to upgrade to Vista, but until that day, I won't be going near it. XP for me.
Ross Wheeler, CEO of Albury.net.au, referring to the Australian Governments internet filtering plan wrote:"It's the most ill-conceived pile of stupidity by the biggest bunch of cretins that I've ever seen in my life"
piXelatedEmpire
 
Posts: 4680
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 4:45 pm
Location: ESPNs NBA page

Postby curzlgt » Fri Jun 29, 2007 12:18 am

Very well done and informitive Lj! Thanks for the contribution, keep em coming :D
“The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long, plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side,” - Hunter S Thompson
User avatar
curzlgt
 
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 1:17 am
Location: Land of the tall corn

Re: File-Sharing on Windows Vista

Postby forbuyfor » Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:24 am

LANjackal wrote:forbuyfor"]I disagree Lanjackal. Since Xp is now a few years old and is now not the "current" windows OS

Actually, MS is allowing XP license sales until the end of the year (which is why Dell is still offering it), and support will run into 2009 at the least. XP isn't the latest, but it's certainly current.

forbuyfor wrote:Microsoft really has no way of screwing this os on me as I already have the Service os packs I need and I NEVER download new "security updates" (and I've never had any security problems)

Malware development is independent of updates for any OS. Therefore, while your system is sitting static, malicious programmers are figuring out new ways to break into it. By your reasoning, we should still be defending ourselves as a nation with WWII era technology because we have never been invaded. Yeah, that makes sense

I realize xp is still current what I meant was it is no longer the main focus of those individuals that are looking for security holes. Also I do stay abreast of new security patches, but usually don't need them because I don't use software that usually seems to be targeted such as ms internet explorer or messenger or outlook express. Many hackers seem to focus on these so if you don't use them, you don't need the patches.
By the way I liked your article, it must have been time consuming! Also I know you weren't pluggin' Vista, it's just that I don't think Vista has yet shown it's true colors. Big corporations are just so sneaky!
forbuyfor
 
Posts: 412
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2005 1:08 pm
Location: Canada

Motorola phone tools.

Postby Djgaz1 » Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:54 am

I can tell you that vista wont work with motorola phone tools 4, as of yet I cant find a version that does, but it's to be expected with a new operating system

Bitlord works fine on Vista too, so i'm fairly happy with it, but it came with my new system i just bought, dual processor and it runs like a rocket on here.
User avatar
Djgaz1
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 4:50 am

Postby Scavenger » Sat Jun 30, 2007 10:58 am

excellent, thorough, and well-written article.

thanks for the disclaimers about it trying to have a neutral stance on Vista - however, that seems to be a heated topic and unfortunately many will want to rave or rant about that OS and not the primary focus of the article.

i have been using Vista for a very long time now and utorrent has always worked well for me - glad to see so many other P2P programs doing well on the new OS.
User avatar
Scavenger
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 4:38 pm

Postby ArchiveAngel » Sun Jul 01, 2007 1:23 pm

If you don't like Microsoft products and the way they work on your computer, there are alternatives.
ArchiveAngel
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Canada

Next

Return to Slyck News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

© 2001-2008 Slyck.com