@AlienForcer I'm sorry for the low res but the file is the same. 17 Mb zipped, 62 unzipped. The file was downloaded from the Intel support site and it is a driver distributed in zip format. The Vista system is more powerful and has double the RAM of other system (used for XP and Ubuntu).
This was a known problem in Vista pre-SP1.
Anyway Vista (even though SP2 and powerful hardware) is still an OS with poor performances.
believe it or not this is a really good comparison becuase it uses the basic of all basic computing power for all OS's (except for windows xp its made for stuff like that) it pitting all the OS's on one file and how long it take to extract it (but then again he dose need a more powerful computer)
si la computadora no es la misma el test no sirve.
si descomprimo un archivo en una Windows 98 con 64 mb ram y 133mhz de procesador, seguramente va a tardar mas que si lo hago en una pc con Windows XP, 2,8 ghz de procesador y 3 gb de ram
Gayest video ever. Whats wrong with using a fuckin' stopwatch you nonce. Also, everyone knows Vista needs a stupidly new machine for optimized performance and not some stoneage machine (like mine).
I don't think this is a good test. for one he is useing a different pc with the vista machine, and second only 1gb of ram for vista is like 128mb ram on xp
Did you really have to make us wait while your HORRIBLY slow computer booted up? And really, you're trying to tell us that it takes 12 minutes to unzip a file! Upload the file and we'll see about that.
dude this vid sucks on the vista comp u have all kinds of shit which would make it slow an on xp u have the same amount as ubuntu but in ubuntu you u downloaded a different program so its not accurate
vista IS the problem. for toaday, vist is probably the worst (decently known) operating system. xp is probably your best bet. mainly because 90% of programs you will get are run on a .exe file extension. linux is un-arguably the superior operating system, but in order to run my games, i would need to use WINE. the lack of just being able to put in the cd ,install and play it is the only thing that has stopped me from switching completely.
Nothing, but it is definably not the "worst" OS, it's actually a great OS. I have Vista and I have no problems with it, and if I do, a simple google search solves the problem.
no, actually i have used it extensively, and seen enough to know about why its bad. my dad is a linux mandrake advocate, and spends the majority of his time researching things like this. if you knew some of the things vista was doing behind your back, you might not be so for it anymore...
vista was a mistake, and before you say anymore, try doing a large amount of research first. find out what vista is REALLY like, then tell me how you feel.
what part of i have used it extensively did you not catch? your a vista fanboy who believes that because its the newest thing from micro$oft, is the best thing there is. its what they push all over the place, and they did the same with the 360. i bet you thought that the 360 was the best game system on the planet when it came out didnt you?
i know you can do it dumbass, it was a sarcastic comment. i know what directx is and am aware how it works. your simply a fanboy of vista and beilive no matter what the truth is, vista is better.
and bill gates himself admitted that vista is bad. thats why there coming out with windows 7. to cover up the mistake we all call vista.
im not talking smack -fanboy- im telling the truth.
and how many damn times do i have to tell you, i HAVE used vista. ive crashed the same laptop, twice, the first time i sent it to micro$oft themselves and when they sent it back? it crashed a month later. my custom built rig moved slowly with vista 64, and after the hell i went to put xp back on, it works fine. i was doing reaserch for computer classes before it even came out. i along with everyone else that reaserched with me knew it was bad.
5 gigs of ram? how on earth would another gig of ram help? 4 gigs is overkill enough. my custom rig was a high end game rig dumbass. nothing was wrong with the pc itself, it was the shit os they sent me.
and i meant crashed the laptop as in, the fucking area-51game-laptop stopped working. i shortened it so it would fit here. its not specs you ass. the last 4 comps ive built have had top class specs, and windows xp.
Tell me stupid, how in the hell can you say that my rig sucks? its a custom built, specifically for gaming, and even vista 64 couldnt cooperate with it. stop trying to tell me i know nothing about computers, when clearly you know almost nothing yourself. do your research more often smart ass.
well to tell you the truth i dont care. vista has a tenacity to be stupid. along with people on youtube. i dont care about your knowledge on computers, spelling, (and the lack therefore of), or anything else you do. the computer didnt work at full capacity, benchmark tests proved it, and to this day i still use xp, in the face of moronic bastards who think because its the newest thing, its the best. vista sucks, and thats what it is. your a fanboy who doesnt want to be wrong. fine.
im done arguing with you, and if you have the audacity to comment back, you wont be greeted with the satisfaction of a reply. your a moron, and i dont care what you think about vista. it doesnt work good enough, and the undeniable community that thinks the same proves it.
I love Vista 64 on my main PC..i have had only a couple problems with it not workign with my older programs like Adobe premiere, Flash 4 and CPU, and Core temp...other than that is doing perfect for me.
However, ...Ubuntu is even MORE incredible! and if more things that i use regularly worked on it,i would ditch everything else and use it exclusively.
My Home theater PC is running Ubuntu and its a dream!. i can only hope Ubuntu continues to expand.
Maybe try turning off background processes for fair analysis? I see AVG running in Vista, Looks like Java on XP and who knows what on Ubuntu. Those can affect the times you know..
Just get Tiny Vista, much faster than the resource hogging Vista from M$. Even when I had Aero Glass enabled, and installed Dreamscene, it still ran as fast, or better than XP/Linux.
Only issue I have is that Vista seems to have a problem with installing programs sometimes. It took 30-40 min to install an online game, and my computer is fairly modern -.-
I used Vista for a couple of months and I had The same problem with the builtin zip compressor. The strange thing was that compessing time was quite good... but decommpresing the same files took much much longer. However winrar was nice and cool (except for the fact that everytime I tryied to open a zipped file with winrar, Vista asked "are you shure about this?"... shit man, that OS made me crazy)
to make this interesting, you should dl and install virtualbox on the vista machine, install unbuntu as a VM within vista, and run the same test within the vm ubuntu. OR install vista within xp in the same way.
Assigning only 512mb ram in my c2d 2ghz laptop to the vm for execution, i used an UNPACKED 3gb windows 7 iso mounted as a virtual drive, and installed windows 7 within vista in around 10 minutes!!
If ur so sure its a pre sp1 problem, do it again with sp1 and compare the results?
Wubi is good. I've used it. It takes a lot of hard drive space, but that's obvious. I have not had any issues with it. Installing on x64 Windows might be a small hassle, but just use easyBCD to set it up if it won't work fully.
ooh cool cheers. i have just installed ubuntu through Wubi. i intend to give that a try. it looks kind of cool but just out of interest what software can it run?(im looking for a messenger and some picture editing software) because on websites they give you download links for Windows and Mac software but no Linux :D
For messenger you can use Pidgin, it's installed by default. Photo editing can be done with Gimp, installed by default too. Ubuntu has a package manager where most installing is done, no need to download install files usually. If you want to run Windows software there's an app called "Wine" that will help, it won't work on all software, but a lot will.
thanks a bunch very useful tools you have given me. i look forwards to experiencing the world of non-windows XP. i am finding it a little bit difficult because i have used XP/95 onwards all my life. but i am learning and the terminal has a few cool features that are easier to execute than the cmd equivalent:D
And... The Windows 7 beta seems good... Better than XP (but yet in beta!)
If you think that 8 Gb RAM DDR3 and an Intel Quad Core Extreme can make Vista a good OS, try on the same machine Ubuntu or Windows 7, you could discover that you bought a PC incredibly more powerful than you thought... Have a nice NOT Vista PC ;)
I would use linux if I never had to use a command line interface and it could run all the games I play :/
XP definatly can't hold a stick to vista if you have the hardware to optimize it ...(IE if your running a QuadCore /w 8GB of ram) I'd say XP Can't hold a stick to it in general... But of course people with old hardware will need to run XP for max speed
Vista is god damn awful fucking garbage and I HOPE i offend any faggots who actually use that pile of shit. anyone who says Vista is a good operating system is either a non-computer user who just likes it for its pretty UI, or is a fucking retard who believes the bullshit "Features" Microsoft says it has. Now I don't mind Vista... but it's a bad operating system. If you think otherwise, then you clearly do not understand how computers work in terms of speed and performance.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
your pc sucks i mean is that screen one of the old big ones i dont even think its a flat screen lets see the specs and seriosuly i extract gigs of files faster than this couple of mb lol your pc really sucsk
Vista took >42 times longer than XP to decompress the same file even though it was using FASTER hardware..... and it took >360 times longer to decompress the file than linux. Yes, Vista does SUCK.... and, at an all-time new level for Micro$oft.
It doesn't matter whether he was running Aero or not, Vista had a FASTER computer which shows that Vista really is bloated crapware. How many more times faster would XP have been on the same hardware as Vista used?
Something is wrong here... Installing Far Cry 2, which includes decompressing files, installing them, and making the registry changes takes less time than this "17mb" file did.
Can't fault ubuntu. Just gotta have sum linux knowledge to use it. Cant wait for vista to be replaced. One of the developers of dx10 slated vista openly about it leaving gamers in the lurch. Windows 7 hurry up!
And your Vista pc must suck and not be new enough to support vista, cuz i have the hp pavillion laptop and it takes me about 10 mins to unzip 1 gig files.
What you don't understand is that the computers are meant to be the same spec (except the vista computer is actually better than the other two). If you tried unzipping a 1GB file with Ubuntu on your computer, it would take much less than ten minutes.
there would be a smaller gap between the times on a higher end system. its undeniable that ubuntu will do arithmatic (compression) faster but vista needs more juice to stretch its legs. very good comparrison video!!
lolz...my vista can extract 2GB files in under a minute or 2.
the flaw with this is test is that the vista system was running well on par with the minimum requirements - the CPU is crap, and 1GB just doesnt cut it for vista.
the unbuntu system, although less demanding, is practically well over its recommended requirements. its like comparing a professional football player against a professional football player with no energy.
well, I understand the comparation, unlike you... the idea is , if 1 gb of RAM does that in linux , I wonder what 2 or 3 gb of RAM does... Vista will never be a fast OS, mabye in the far future , because only then , everyone will have a really powerfull PC ... its not that he's PC ain't good, its the fact that Vista and Microsoft Braged about this crap for no reason , a Good and stable OS will run on many Pc's with no problems what so ever, unlike Vista where you need well over 2gb of ram ;)
I don't think the basis for this test is credible. Vista performed so badly because you had the minimum RAM required to run Vista. Also, if you want to REALLY compare the three, turn off services in Vista that aren't on XP. You're running it on old hardware with the minimum amount of memory - no wonder why it runs so badly. Stick another 2 GB of RAM into Vista then we'll start talking. I think Ubuntu might have precached the files and all it needs to do is just to copy and paste.
I have run ubuntu on minimum ram, and it aint as crap as vista on 8gig of ram. Ubuntu is better than vista. Try it, then complain that it wasn't a fair test.
Don't forget to tell them about W.I.N.E. or they may switch back. Without W.I.N.E. I'd never be about to use Ubuntu without XP... but you won't find Windows on my Harddisk.
Ubuntu was being run on the exact same amount of ram Vista was. You stick another 8 gigs of ram into Vista, you'd have to stick another 8 gigs of ram into Ubuntu, meaning you'd say the test still wasn't "fair" because Ubuntu would run circles around Vista yet again. Also, I've used Ubuntu, using it now. I've downloaded files directly from a webpage and gotten speeds at least twice as fast as XP, dual booting the OS's, same specs.
U are dumb. That is the whole point of the video, you don't have to continually add memory to an Ubuntu machine like your crappy Windows Machines. I got a decently fast computer AMD 64 3200+ and 1 gig ram and runs XP good, but gets slower over time because Micro(Bloat)Soft keeps adding crap to the machine over time, In Ubuntu I run like a Supercomputer.
ur not so smart comparing these, u should know that even with ur core 2 u need at least 2 gigs of ram with vista, u just have to, im not saying vista is the best but if u have it run it with the right stuff and dont compare the shittiest version of it wit horrible ram.
Designed means that's what they want you to run. Ever read the specs for XP? They definitely want more than 128 megs. I read through all the specs for Ubuntu before trying it out. The minimum reccomended specs called for 256 megs of ram, but there's another section under that. The absolute minimum necessary to run Ubuntu is 64 megs of ram. They don't recommend that amount as it will run fucking slow. On 512 megs, Ubuntu runs circles around XP, while using all the vista comparable stuff.
I downgraded from vista to xp on my laptop. When my laptop crashed, I used my freinds computer to make a Knoopix recovery disk to get all my files off the computer because it would not start! So even though I love XP, linux comes to the rescue, so windows lovers dont bash Linux, you never know when your gonna need it!!!!
Dual booting XP and Linux. The difference between most linux users and most windows users comes down to one word, laziness. Just don't want to take the time to figure out the installation. Once it's done, Linux is faster, more stable, more able to utilize the same hardware to do amazing things. Half of what I can do with Linux, I can't do with XP on the same system with twice the install size. Just takes a little brainpower and less laziness.
You can't transfer 64MB of files in 2 seconds like that, hard drive speed alone won't allow it. I think Ubuntu is actually mounting the zip file as a folder, much like you can with windows.
No comparison. Vista sux. I have Ultimate and it seems to delete its own files randomly (no viruses found) Then one day, my removable drive (160GB) was plugged in- *poof* went all my data.
This machine is a year old.
I've reinstalled the entire system including windows anytime upgrade the dumbest 'feature' on Gods green earth.
I have 4G RAM, 256MB nvidia, Core 2 duo T8300, barely make vista working smoothly for me - for a while. It started to slow down in about 1 month. I finally believe it's the most fucked up system ever!
so what are you trying to imply?... i don't get it... speed of unzipping??.. why don't you use bench marking tools to accurately measure the difference...
I have Vista running and just unzipped a file a little bigger than the one on the video and did it in 18 seconds. Sure it doesn't beat the 2 sec of ubuntu but the test on Vista done here is not accurate.
Until MSFT stops supporting it next year and you have no choice. Ubuntu on the other hand, completely free, keeps getting upgraded to the next version, so just upgrade what you have and keep going. I'm currently covered until 2010 off of what I have installed and it didn't cost me a dime.
he has XP and Ubuntu on the same computer. Vista is on a different pc but it has higher specs so it all the more impressive that Ubuntu outperformed it.
Yeah, I want to see a strate file move. Music files take forever in window. First thing that I REALLY noticed in linux, thinking oh, you mean I didn't have to sit through those file transfers all that time? huh.
Wow, it took him an entire hour to switch windows systems. That sucks.
ubuntuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
cowboykhalid 6 months ago
Wait. If it takes longer it wins ?
cLick1333 7 months ago
Okay, there is NO EXCUSE for an OS to take more than 15 minutes to unzip a 17mb file. Vista is the worst OS ever.
Deliciousfruit233 8 months ago
ubuntu all the way
jfb112697 11 months ago
are both systems using the same hdd...if not ur test is invalid (unless the winner is using a crappy drive)
Yudraciell 1 year ago
I lolled so hard at this
MHCABI 1 year ago
Ubuntu/Linux way FASTER than Windows!!
Turbolad995 1 year ago
Why do people complain that your Vista rig has better specs? Those better specs didn't do shit.
Deliciousfruit233 1 year ago
Ok so the music is great!I 'll have to dirpy it!
Ashtonian54 1 year ago
that is a fake the file has 62 MB
AlienForcer 1 year ago
@AlienForcer I'm sorry for the low res but the file is the same. 17 Mb zipped, 62 unzipped. The file was downloaded from the Intel support site and it is a driver distributed in zip format. The Vista system is more powerful and has double the RAM of other system (used for XP and Ubuntu).
This was a known problem in Vista pre-SP1.
Anyway Vista (even though SP2 and powerful hardware) is still an OS with poor performances.
mrcsft 1 year ago
@mrcsft ah ok sorry
AlienForcer 1 year ago
lol Vista sucks. 12 minutes to decompress a simple 17 mb zip file?
Deliciousfruit233 1 year ago
XP is better then vista cuz still vista is slower,but alot more beutiful then XP.
zombis667 1 year ago
believe it or not this is a really good comparison becuase it uses the basic of all basic computing power for all OS's (except for windows xp its made for stuff like that) it pitting all the OS's on one file and how long it take to extract it (but then again he dose need a more powerful computer)
hi101100 1 year ago
omg
GokuMaxter 2 years ago
i only have 64 MB of RAM and a P3 @ 996 MHz and guess what ITX XP AND ITS FAST!
kuza261 2 years ago
@kuza261 I recommend Windows 2000 just as good but for 64 mb better than xp
vwxy20z 2 years ago
si la computadora no es la misma el test no sirve.
si descomprimo un archivo en una Windows 98 con 64 mb ram y 133mhz de procesador, seguramente va a tardar mas que si lo hago en una pc con Windows XP, 2,8 ghz de procesador y 3 gb de ram
2cool2you 2 years ago
Comment removed
joshkrz 2 years ago
SHATAP BLUD
DubPowah 2 years ago
What's the name of the music/song ?
amr619 2 years ago
Get a new comp dumbass
peterpetrelli45 2 years ago
Gayest video ever. Whats wrong with using a fuckin' stopwatch you nonce. Also, everyone knows Vista needs a stupidly new machine for optimized performance and not some stoneage machine (like mine).
Well done for have three O/S's, really needed...
RichTE 2 years ago
I don't think this is a good test. for one he is useing a different pc with the vista machine, and second only 1gb of ram for vista is like 128mb ram on xp
KevinDR1987 2 years ago
Vista is almost the whole video XD
glennzoo 2 years ago
Winrar is vista?
samptaro 2 years ago
la....dont know what this vid is about,..but all i have to say for a comment is LA( pronounced l-a)
Jose04811 2 years ago
Did you really have to make us wait while your HORRIBLY slow computer booted up? And really, you're trying to tell us that it takes 12 minutes to unzip a file! Upload the file and we'll see about that.
ClanInfectionist 2 years ago
I dub this a bullshit video. Vista was obviously crippled in this video by background processes. Nothing takes that fucking long.
JamesManes 2 years ago
dude this vid sucks on the vista comp u have all kinds of shit which would make it slow an on xp u have the same amount as ubuntu but in ubuntu you u downloaded a different program so its not accurate
rko418 2 years ago
vista IS the problem. for toaday, vist is probably the worst (decently known) operating system. xp is probably your best bet. mainly because 90% of programs you will get are run on a .exe file extension. linux is un-arguably the superior operating system, but in order to run my games, i would need to use WINE. the lack of just being able to put in the cd ,install and play it is the only thing that has stopped me from switching completely.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
You've obviously never used Vista if you think it's the worst. It's not the worst, lots has changed since it's release buddy.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
tell me -buddy-, what is worse than vista?
HrtV3w 2 years ago
Nothing, but it is definably not the "worst" OS, it's actually a great OS. I have Vista and I have no problems with it, and if I do, a simple google search solves the problem.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
well if theres nothing worse, than vista would be the worst.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
I doubt you have even used it, your just saying what most other people that haven't used it say.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
no, actually i have used it extensively, and seen enough to know about why its bad. my dad is a linux mandrake advocate, and spends the majority of his time researching things like this. if you knew some of the things vista was doing behind your back, you might not be so for it anymore...
vista was a mistake, and before you say anymore, try doing a large amount of research first. find out what vista is REALLY like, then tell me how you feel.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
I know what vista is like, as I've been using it since release. Open your eyes mate; you've never used it.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
what part of i have used it extensively did you not catch? your a vista fanboy who believes that because its the newest thing from micro$oft, is the best thing there is. its what they push all over the place, and they did the same with the 360. i bet you thought that the 360 was the best game system on the planet when it came out didnt you?
HrtV3w 2 years ago
I've never personally owned a 360 so I wouldn't say it's the best. I don't console game at all, I PC game.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
which is a surprise seeing as how you use vista.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
You can game with Vista lol, dx10 bud.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
i know you can do it dumbass, it was a sarcastic comment. i know what directx is and am aware how it works. your simply a fanboy of vista and beilive no matter what the truth is, vista is better.
and bill gates himself admitted that vista is bad. thats why there coming out with windows 7. to cover up the mistake we all call vista.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
Sure you know what DX is. Fanboy? No. I never said Vista was the best.
Actually use vista before you talk smack boy.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
im not talking smack -fanboy- im telling the truth.
and how many damn times do i have to tell you, i HAVE used vista. ive crashed the same laptop, twice, the first time i sent it to micro$oft themselves and when they sent it back? it crashed a month later. my custom built rig moved slowly with vista 64, and after the hell i went to put xp back on, it works fine. i was doing reaserch for computer classes before it even came out. i along with everyone else that reaserched with me knew it was bad.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
Crashed your laptop? Lmao, what an exaggeration/lie.
Your custom rig should have had another gig of ram.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
5 gigs of ram? how on earth would another gig of ram help? 4 gigs is overkill enough. my custom rig was a high end game rig dumbass. nothing was wrong with the pc itself, it was the shit os they sent me.
and i meant crashed the laptop as in, the fucking area-51game-laptop stopped working. i shortened it so it would fit here. its not specs you ass. the last 4 comps ive built have had top class specs, and windows xp.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
It's your computer that sucks then. Not the OS' fault.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
AMD Phenom II X4 3.2 Ghz (OC)
4 Gb DDR2 240 pin SDRAM
2X ATI Radeon HD 4890's Crossfire
1TB HDD (2X 500 Gb 7200 rpm Raptors)
Tell me stupid, how in the hell can you say that my rig sucks? its a custom built, specifically for gaming, and even vista 64 couldnt cooperate with it. stop trying to tell me i know nothing about computers, when clearly you know almost nothing yourself. do your research more often smart ass.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
Buddy, I can tell you never used Vista. That computer would have no problem with vista, your obviously lieing.
And F.y.i, I know WAY more about computers then you.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
well to tell you the truth i dont care. vista has a tenacity to be stupid. along with people on youtube. i dont care about your knowledge on computers, spelling, (and the lack therefore of), or anything else you do. the computer didnt work at full capacity, benchmark tests proved it, and to this day i still use xp, in the face of moronic bastards who think because its the newest thing, its the best. vista sucks, and thats what it is. your a fanboy who doesnt want to be wrong. fine.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
Lack of spelling? Wtf? I have 100x better grammar then you.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
im done arguing with you, and if you have the audacity to comment back, you wont be greeted with the satisfaction of a reply. your a moron, and i dont care what you think about vista. it doesnt work good enough, and the undeniable community that thinks the same proves it.
HrtV3w 2 years ago
Lol, yeah sure, I'm a moron. Buddy, use vista before you diss it.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
dude he doesnt like it cause its new he likes it cause he has it and doesnt wanna admit that it sucks
rko418 2 years ago
and that is exactly the kind of thing that vista is programming into the poor souls of our society.
or something like that. :P
HrtV3w 2 years ago
Vista is a horrible operating system, don't kid yourself...
warlord90210 2 years ago
I love Vista 64 on my main PC..i have had only a couple problems with it not workign with my older programs like Adobe premiere, Flash 4 and CPU, and Core temp...other than that is doing perfect for me.
However, ...Ubuntu is even MORE incredible! and if more things that i use regularly worked on it,i would ditch everything else and use it exclusively.
My Home theater PC is running Ubuntu and its a dream!. i can only hope Ubuntu continues to expand.
RamoneTalarico 2 years ago
Maybe try turning off background processes for fair analysis? I see AVG running in Vista, Looks like Java on XP and who knows what on Ubuntu. Those can affect the times you know..
Sirhyro 2 years ago
Just get Tiny Vista, much faster than the resource hogging Vista from M$. Even when I had Aero Glass enabled, and installed Dreamscene, it still ran as fast, or better than XP/Linux.
Only issue I have is that Vista seems to have a problem with installing programs sometimes. It took 30-40 min to install an online game, and my computer is fairly modern -.-
LuvPeaceAndCookies 2 years ago
its becuse of the ram not vista
peterpetrelli45 2 years ago
1GB ram rofl
peterpetrelli45 2 years ago
That's a very good test man!
I used Vista for a couple of months and I had The same problem with the builtin zip compressor. The strange thing was that compessing time was quite good... but decommpresing the same files took much much longer. However winrar was nice and cool (except for the fact that everytime I tryied to open a zipped file with winrar, Vista asked "are you shure about this?"... shit man, that OS made me crazy)
EpiDe 2 years ago
vista can't be that slow nust be a problem.
tazss159 2 years ago
no problem its fucking vista!!!! lol
ll8520ll 2 years ago
Funny, when I un-zipped 17Mb on XP, it took around 3 seconds.
RIPxTroyxDixon 2 years ago
It depends heavily on the file you are decompressing. Not every 17mb file will take the same time to decompress.
EpiDe 2 years ago
Comment removed
Sirhyro 2 years ago
to make this interesting, you should dl and install virtualbox on the vista machine, install unbuntu as a VM within vista, and run the same test within the vm ubuntu. OR install vista within xp in the same way.
Assigning only 512mb ram in my c2d 2ghz laptop to the vm for execution, i used an UNPACKED 3gb windows 7 iso mounted as a virtual drive, and installed windows 7 within vista in around 10 minutes!!
If ur so sure its a pre sp1 problem, do it again with sp1 and compare the results?
fenderfez 2 years ago
Uploaded the file please any where. Check host
GreshNiknsk 2 years ago
I know this might be a stupid question but what is "Windows 7"?
fussface44 2 years ago
the new operating system after Vista, only beta verstions have been released to date
antongreek 2 years ago
We all know vista is good. A few pointers to this video:
First, why the hell you using that inbuilt unzipping tool? Sucks
Second, probably the computer is crappy.
Third. could you share the driver file so i could test the speed?
Oh and to those who says that vista is a piece of shit obviosly can't handle an computer.
leopardftw 2 years ago
No, system wasn't crappy, when I posted this video I have seen many times the same problem.
Was a serious bug of Vista Pre-Sp1...
However, the performance of Vista remain quite away from all other OS, including Windows 7...
File used for the test is an Intel driver for Vista distributed in ZIP format.
mrcsft 2 years ago
vista isnt shit, but is slow and dosnt look as nice and isnt as productive as ubuntu
antongreek 2 years ago
No Vista is shit...
I have it and it's a memory hog similar to how the company Microsoft is a money hog.
warlord90210 2 years ago
Get some more ram, problem solved. Lmao, ignorance.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
MOAR RAM? How much RAM do you need to unzip a simple file??!!?!!?
Lmao your the ignorant one here!
warlord90210 2 years ago
More ram as in the operating system needs more then other OS'. Nothing about the 17mb zip file.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
Yeah because Vista is an horrible operating system...
warlord90210 2 years ago
Maybe in your opinion.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
No it's fact... even Bill Gates knows it, he said it himself.
warlord90210 2 years ago
No.
lavenpine88 2 years ago
yes
glennzoo 2 years ago
how can vista be so slow my vista ultimate on my duron 1.5 Ghz copies 100 Mb files faster than that what the hell are you on about.
tazss159 2 years ago
daim!!! is this fake??
MIKAEL454 2 years ago
No it's not a fake... Additional questions?...
mrcsft 2 years ago
I don't fully understand it, I took my beat up old laptop that I bought in 2004 and put Ubuntu 8.10 on it.
Now it is an Internet beast! My roommates brand new Vista machine that is theoretically twice as powerful can't even compare.
gonyea12 2 years ago
is he using Wubi? because i was tempted to give that a try. anyone any information on it? (is it good?/is it useful?/will it effect y Windows?)
1337videosearcher 2 years ago
Wubi is good. I've used it. It takes a lot of hard drive space, but that's obvious. I have not had any issues with it. Installing on x64 Windows might be a small hassle, but just use easyBCD to set it up if it won't work fully.
ComputerGeek000 2 years ago
Also, that is not Wubi, that's a separate partition.
ComputerGeek000 2 years ago
ooh cool cheers. i have just installed ubuntu through Wubi. i intend to give that a try. it looks kind of cool but just out of interest what software can it run?(im looking for a messenger and some picture editing software) because on websites they give you download links for Windows and Mac software but no Linux :D
1337videosearcher 2 years ago
For messenger you can use Pidgin, it's installed by default. Photo editing can be done with Gimp, installed by default too. Ubuntu has a package manager where most installing is done, no need to download install files usually. If you want to run Windows software there's an app called "Wine" that will help, it won't work on all software, but a lot will.
ComputerGeek000 2 years ago
cool
thanks a bunch very useful tools you have given me. i look forwards to experiencing the world of non-windows XP. i am finding it a little bit difficult because i have used XP/95 onwards all my life. but i am learning and the terminal has a few cool features that are easier to execute than the cmd equivalent:D
1337videosearcher 2 years ago
:) have nice day people
JAcKFiDoTheCracker 2 years ago
Vista is not good and Bill gates say that :) lol :)
and now we hope that Windows Vienna or 7 will be Good
JAcKFiDoTheCracker 2 years ago
You're right ;)
And... The Windows 7 beta seems good... Better than XP (but yet in beta!)
If you think that 8 Gb RAM DDR3 and an Intel Quad Core Extreme can make Vista a good OS, try on the same machine Ubuntu or Windows 7, you could discover that you bought a PC incredibly more powerful than you thought... Have a nice NOT Vista PC ;)
mrcsft 2 years ago
vista only needs a good cpu. the people who say it is a 'god damn awful fucking garbage' are NOT using vista properly.
Thushan44 2 years ago
"Properly" meaning, "Turning off/removing all the necessary crap installed by default", or, "As it came from the manufacturer"?
If it's the latter, then yeah, my step-dad has been using Vista "Properly" on his laptop, and still needs me around to fix the damned thing.
Thesupermadman 2 years ago
Gay music!
thiswonthurtbaby 2 years ago
That Vista's probably fake. No Vista could run on 128MB RAM, not even starter edition.
ikcti 2 years ago
Vista is running on a system with 1Gb RAM NOT 128Mb RAM (are you able to read?!?!)
Vista before SP1 had a serious problem unzipping files. That problem has been partially fixed in SP1 but performance of Windows Vista are always poor.
Compared to any operating system, on many machines Vista shows the worst performance in every kind of test.
The two computer used in the test are a bit different but the machine running Vista is more powerful.
mrcsft 2 years ago
I would use linux if I never had to use a command line interface and it could run all the games I play :/
XP definatly can't hold a stick to vista if you have the hardware to optimize it ...(IE if your running a QuadCore /w 8GB of ram) I'd say XP Can't hold a stick to it in general... But of course people with old hardware will need to run XP for max speed
exo232 2 years ago
vista would beat it, xp pc get more ram and better cpu vista ftw
LeetKrew090 2 years ago
Vista is god damn awful fucking garbage and I HOPE i offend any faggots who actually use that pile of shit. anyone who says Vista is a good operating system is either a non-computer user who just likes it for its pretty UI, or is a fucking retard who believes the bullshit "Features" Microsoft says it has. Now I don't mind Vista... but it's a bad operating system. If you think otherwise, then you clearly do not understand how computers work in terms of speed and performance.
marvelousdan1 2 years ago
what - that vista computer only has 128MB of RAM and a less than 2GHZ processor. no wonder extracting those files was slow.
deltanalliance 2 years ago
says so in the welcome center!
deltanalliance 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
your pc sucks i mean is that screen one of the old big ones i dont even think its a flat screen lets see the specs and seriosuly i extract gigs of files faster than this couple of mb lol your pc really sucsk
bradyk25 3 years ago
haha stupid ignorant
sosghz 2 years ago
''Oh my god. If it has big screen it must be bad'' said in this moron's voice.
martincrotty 2 years ago
dont bash vista just because your computer is junk.
gabrielsimut 3 years ago
You extracted 620 mb on vista btw >_> My pc running vista extracts 7 gig in under 3 minutes you monkey fuck ...
maninator2 3 years ago
no not 620 its 62.0
chatpiecewrstbestman 3 years ago
Comment removed
maninator2 3 years ago
specs?
chatpiecewrstbestman 3 years ago
no vista doesn't suck, both ur fucking computers suck, ur fucking running aero on that shitty machine. its called winrar noob
bigez954 3 years ago
If they weren't sold LIKE THAT you'd be on to something.
russkeller 3 years ago
Vista took >42 times longer than XP to decompress the same file even though it was using FASTER hardware..... and it took >360 times longer to decompress the file than linux. Yes, Vista does SUCK.... and, at an all-time new level for Micro$oft.
It doesn't matter whether he was running Aero or not, Vista had a FASTER computer which shows that Vista really is bloated crapware. How many more times faster would XP have been on the same hardware as Vista used?
6wi 3 years ago
Vista Sucks LOL
yixxt 3 years ago
Something is wrong here... Installing Far Cry 2, which includes decompressing files, installing them, and making the registry changes takes less time than this "17mb" file did.
MastaSquidge 3 years ago
why is the ubuntu file a third of the size of the others when it is unzipped?
AMartin223 3 years ago
this is pure crap vista is not the best i will admit that but it isnt that bad.
Disturbed116 3 years ago
Just shows how inefficient vista is.
They had a good 1 with xp.
Can't fault ubuntu. Just gotta have sum linux knowledge to use it. Cant wait for vista to be replaced. One of the developers of dx10 slated vista openly about it leaving gamers in the lurch. Windows 7 hurry up!
pieceofcake2008 3 years ago
Yeah, because that's mainly what we're using our operating systems for... Unzipping files all day, isn't it :]
neehoo 3 years ago
Ну насчет Висты Это полный чес.У меня она стоит ,но вот таких фокусов как на видео я никогда не видел!Что же там за комп такой-16мин?
maybah1 3 years ago
Um vista had a 68 mb file
Xp and Ubuntu had a 17 mb file
And your Vista pc must suck and not be new enough to support vista, cuz i have the hp pavillion laptop and it takes me about 10 mins to unzip 1 gig files.
mikethecrimson 3 years ago
It was not a 68 mb file, it just contained 68 mb of stuff, and was compressed down to 17 mb.
acm3212002 3 years ago
What you don't understand is that the computers are meant to be the same spec (except the vista computer is actually better than the other two). If you tried unzipping a 1GB file with Ubuntu on your computer, it would take much less than ten minutes.
H2OStudios 3 years ago
WinRAR-is good thing.
halfangelfreak 3 years ago
lol me two narutomania
DOOMKOOMA 3 years ago
there would be a smaller gap between the times on a higher end system. its undeniable that ubuntu will do arithmatic (compression) faster but vista needs more juice to stretch its legs. very good comparrison video!!
ausdublin 3 years ago
lolz...my vista can extract 2GB files in under a minute or 2.
the flaw with this is test is that the vista system was running well on par with the minimum requirements - the CPU is crap, and 1GB just doesnt cut it for vista.
the unbuntu system, although less demanding, is practically well over its recommended requirements. its like comparing a professional football player against a professional football player with no energy.
nice attempt.
narutomania 3 years ago
well, I understand the comparation, unlike you... the idea is , if 1 gb of RAM does that in linux , I wonder what 2 or 3 gb of RAM does... Vista will never be a fast OS, mabye in the far future , because only then , everyone will have a really powerfull PC ... its not that he's PC ain't good, its the fact that Vista and Microsoft Braged about this crap for no reason , a Good and stable OS will run on many Pc's with no problems what so ever, unlike Vista where you need well over 2gb of ram ;)
DjSamarium 3 years ago
luckily i used ubuntu not that windows crap.
myasskick 3 years ago
I don't think the basis for this test is credible. Vista performed so badly because you had the minimum RAM required to run Vista. Also, if you want to REALLY compare the three, turn off services in Vista that aren't on XP. You're running it on old hardware with the minimum amount of memory - no wonder why it runs so badly. Stick another 2 GB of RAM into Vista then we'll start talking. I think Ubuntu might have precached the files and all it needs to do is just to copy and paste.
idq000 3 years ago
I have run ubuntu on minimum ram, and it aint as crap as vista on 8gig of ram. Ubuntu is better than vista. Try it, then complain that it wasn't a fair test.
laurielegit 3 years ago
Don't forget to tell them about W.I.N.E. or they may switch back. Without W.I.N.E. I'd never be about to use Ubuntu without XP... but you won't find Windows on my Harddisk.
meoblast001 3 years ago
Ubuntu was being run on the exact same amount of ram Vista was. You stick another 8 gigs of ram into Vista, you'd have to stick another 8 gigs of ram into Ubuntu, meaning you'd say the test still wasn't "fair" because Ubuntu would run circles around Vista yet again. Also, I've used Ubuntu, using it now. I've downloaded files directly from a webpage and gotten speeds at least twice as fast as XP, dual booting the OS's, same specs.
tmsbrdrs2 3 years ago
U are dumb. That is the whole point of the video, you don't have to continually add memory to an Ubuntu machine like your crappy Windows Machines. I got a decently fast computer AMD 64 3200+ and 1 gig ram and runs XP good, but gets slower over time because Micro(Bloat)Soft keeps adding crap to the machine over time, In Ubuntu I run like a Supercomputer.
Lightbringer12 2 years ago 4
ur not so smart comparing these, u should know that even with ur core 2 u need at least 2 gigs of ram with vista, u just have to, im not saying vista is the best but if u have it run it with the right stuff and dont compare the shittiest version of it wit horrible ram.
zoyberg 3 years ago
At least 2 gigs of Ram for Vista? You know, Ubuntu is designed to run on a minimum of 256 Mb of Ram.
webbie878 3 years ago
Really? Well my XP runs on a min of 128 with a 400 MHZ processor, really fucking slow but it runs.
TheIntarwebTruth 3 years ago
Designed means that's what they want you to run. Ever read the specs for XP? They definitely want more than 128 megs. I read through all the specs for Ubuntu before trying it out. The minimum reccomended specs called for 256 megs of ram, but there's another section under that. The absolute minimum necessary to run Ubuntu is 64 megs of ram. They don't recommend that amount as it will run fucking slow. On 512 megs, Ubuntu runs circles around XP, while using all the vista comparable stuff.
tmsbrdrs2 3 years ago
first of all, pentium 4 sucks
second of all, u used the same song 4 times in the same video
bloodcell7 3 years ago
I downgraded from vista to xp on my laptop. When my laptop crashed, I used my freinds computer to make a Knoopix recovery disk to get all my files off the computer because it would not start! So even though I love XP, linux comes to the rescue, so windows lovers dont bash Linux, you never know when your gonna need it!!!!
ultima3210 3 years ago 2
yeah, i use linux all the time to troubleshoot and fix computers. super easy way to find out if its a hardware or software problem.
windows 98 CD's can do this, but they are getting on in years...
earthpigg 3 years ago
file operations on vista are junk
hooray for ext3!
Amebixfan 3 years ago 2
Stupid test done by a tipical Linux mongo...its funny...
lnaujorks 3 years ago
Dual booting XP and Linux. The difference between most linux users and most windows users comes down to one word, laziness. Just don't want to take the time to figure out the installation. Once it's done, Linux is faster, more stable, more able to utilize the same hardware to do amazing things. Half of what I can do with Linux, I can't do with XP on the same system with twice the install size. Just takes a little brainpower and less laziness.
tmsbrdrs2 3 years ago
You can't transfer 64MB of files in 2 seconds like that, hard drive speed alone won't allow it. I think Ubuntu is actually mounting the zip file as a folder, much like you can with windows.
daleighcom1 3 years ago
have you tried it? its free, ya know...
earthpigg 3 years ago
No comparison. Vista sux. I have Ultimate and it seems to delete its own files randomly (no viruses found) Then one day, my removable drive (160GB) was plugged in- *poof* went all my data.
This machine is a year old.
I've reinstalled the entire system including windows anytime upgrade the dumbest 'feature' on Gods green earth.
M$N is seriously kafunct.
Abuzete 3 years ago
It's not Vista, it's your PC.
Pentium 4 and 512 MB Ram.
You need AT LEAST 2 GB or more or a Intel Dual Core to run smooth.
Get a new PC and record using CamStudio, its free and better.
LittleBigMacedonian 3 years ago
OK read the description it said for the vista machine it has dual core and 1gb of ram
And second of all Vista is a part of it because of all the flashy effects it drags the system down
TRWMP 3 years ago
I have 4G RAM, 256MB nvidia, Core 2 duo T8300, barely make vista working smoothly for me - for a while. It started to slow down in about 1 month. I finally believe it's the most fucked up system ever!
laduch 3 years ago
so what are you trying to imply?... i don't get it... speed of unzipping??.. why don't you use bench marking tools to accurately measure the difference...
jrmaiza 3 years ago
it's not a fair comparison since the vista computer is so much faster.
f4phantom2500 3 years ago 2
I'm not insulting Windows or anything but I must say that ubuntu is far faster in certain areas (I run XP and Ubuntu on 2 seperate partitions)
sc0tt10 3 years ago
scrammer
12doty34 3 years ago
I have Vista running and just unzipped a file a little bigger than the one on the video and did it in 18 seconds. Sure it doesn't beat the 2 sec of ubuntu but the test on Vista done here is not accurate.
barrafp 3 years ago
im confused in what you were trying to do in this video
Lamborghini64 3 years ago
is this before sp1 came out for vista?
splinter3217 3 years ago
Yes, it looks like. This video was uploaded at 2007 but sp1 was out in 2008. SP1 improved overall performance and I Love it!!!
ttat1108 3 years ago
This is the kind of videos ubuntu needs, please no more compiz videos there are lots of them already and people already got that point clear
2Ademar2 3 years ago
Look at
Vista XP Ubuntu 8.10 Speed Comparison
douguk47 3 years ago
UBUNTU! :D
ibloxProductionz 3 years ago
xp all the way u can get it to do everythink vista does but not with the problems vista has because vista is shit
Caseytheboa08 3 years ago
Until MSFT stops supporting it next year and you have no choice. Ubuntu on the other hand, completely free, keeps getting upgraded to the next version, so just upgrade what you have and keep going. I'm currently covered until 2010 off of what I have installed and it didn't cost me a dime.
tmsbrdrs2 3 years ago
Questo si che è un video utile per dimostrare la lentezza di Vista contro la velocità di Ubuntu.
LinkinMark007 3 years ago
oltre alla velocità anche la protezione da malware, la compatibilità di software e hardware...........
Continuerei per ore, in poche parole:
Vista per i poveri, Ubuntu per i ricchi :|
Doggyduu 3 years ago
I never thought that vista was that slow, Why is that
dragonkx 3 years ago
Your using different computers for each test so it is obvious that the result would be different
dragonkx 3 years ago
he has XP and Ubuntu on the same computer. Vista is on a different pc but it has higher specs so it all the more impressive that Ubuntu outperformed it.
jonothewright 3 years ago 3
You would think that the OS with a system all to itself would have the upper hand and yet, it came in last. XP did admirably, but Ubuntu kicked ass.
tmsbrdrs2 3 years ago
I think neither Windows nor Ubuntu are bad operating systems and they can compete.
But lets compare the prices Windows Vista costs about 300$ and Linux is free!
Tompazi 3 years ago
Nothing to say...
Ubuntu FTW
luzifer1125 3 years ago
Yes Ubuntu No things Vista much things and high grafik settings
derguru1245 3 years ago
Woohoo...
NTFS, defragment!
Since i use ext3 my hard disk's are MUCH faster than ntfs
luzifer1125 3 years ago
Yeah, I want to see a strate file move. Music files take forever in window. First thing that I REALLY noticed in linux, thinking oh, you mean I didn't have to sit through those file transfers all that time? huh.
Wow, it took him an entire hour to switch windows systems. That sucks.
jasonofcompsci 3 years ago