JK opinion- Vista will never run well on mobile devices

OK, never say never so maybe I'll temper that remark by saying that Vista will not run well on mobile devices in the foreseeable future.  Feel better?  I don't, because we were led to believe that Vista was going to optimize our mobile computing experience.  It's open season on Vista in the media but my focus is on the mobile device space and it's failing miserably here.  I have run Vista on more mobile devices than most folks will ever use and it does something every single day that frustrates the hell out of me.  Quite frankly the only reason I still run Vista on my mobile devices is because the new Tablet bits are better than the older XP version, but even that is not enough on some days.  And those days are occurring with greater frequency.

So how is Vista failing my mobile experience?  First and foremost in the area of performance.  I have not seen adequate performance running Vista on anything less than a Core 2 Duo processor.  Those are only available in the larger Tablets so the UMPCs and smaller Tablets are out of luck.  Vista also needs 2 GB of memory to run well and the smaller mobile devices usually are only offered with 1 GB, which isn't enough.  The dreaded disk thrashing that occurs with too little memory leaves the device unresponsive to the user until it's done doing whatever it's doing, and that takes way too long on the slower processors.  I can't even imagine trying to run Vista on the new Intel mobile processors, the A1xx series.  Their performance clocks in at the old Celeron speeds, and Vista chokes all the time on slower processors.  It's going to take the ability for OEMs to put Core 2 Duo processors in these small devices to get acceptable performance, and that won't happen any time soon due to heat problems.  I do not have a good outlook on resolving the Vista performance problem on mobile devices in the near future.

Run Vista on mobile devices like notebooks and Tablet PCs with the Core 2 Duo processors and performance is decent enough overall, but Vista still has brain farts often enough that the device sits there and frustrates the user.  Who knows what it's doing when it freezes up temporarily but bottom line who cares?  It shouldn't do that.  If you use Sleep and Resume you quickly fall victim to the dreaded Vista la-la land where the device fails to resume properly.  Sometimes the device comes back fine but without a screen which is oh so useful.  Other times it comes back but hangs the entire device up in just a few seconds.  Both of these situations require a hard boot by turning off the power, which not even the OS likes, and then sitting through a boot time even longer than normal.  If you call several minutes to boot normal.  These failures are real killers on slower machines as the boot process goes on seemingly forever.  Even "proper" resumes on most mobile devices can sometimes take 45 seconds or longer which is a real productivity killer for the road warrior needing to do something quickly.  The whole experience can be summed up in one word- frustrating.  Scratch your eyes out frustrating.  That is so sad it's incredible to me that as mobile devices mature the OS can't keep up and in fact makes the user experience worse. 

One of the most beneficial things you can do to improve the mobile device experience is use it with a dock.  Don't even get me started with how badly Vista handles docking and undocking of these mobile devices, especially if you hang an external monitor off the dock. Screen flickering and flashing, time wasting confusion as Vista tries to figure out what to do.  The icing on this flickering cake is when Vista fires up the UAC in the middle and asks for permission to continue.  This fires off additional rounds of screen flickering and disk thrashing enough to give the user concern that the system is going to hang up.  Just for grins I've refused the permission request to see what would happen and you get the same flickering and disk thrashing just to get back where you started.  How silly is that?   Rotating the screen  on Tablet PCs, something they are designed to allow, can randomly fire off the same disk thrashing system tie-up.  So much so that I have to consider whether the risk of a slowdown is worth rotating the screen.  That is utterly ridiculous to me.

Speaking of disk thrashing Vista fires off a round at the most inopportune times.  The whole system is unresponsive while the OS does who knows what, the cursor won't move, the user taps stuff to see if the system will respond, which fires off unexpected actions from the cached mouse clicks.  This happens on every single mobile device I have used, even the very fast ones.  It's really embarrassing when you are showing off a new device, emphasis on new, and have to answer the question "what's it doing now?".  Especially when the answer is "I don't know".  This not only completely stops the mobile user from doing needed work but I am convinced it drains the battery unnecessarily, the ultimate taboo while mobile.

I have probably used more mobile devices than just about anyone alive. I have used them running Windows XP and all flavors of Vista.  Devices with Pentium M processors or Core Solo will run XP just fine, even with only 512 MB of memory.  Sure, performance is much improved with at least 1 GB of RAM, but XP will still run acceptably with only 512 MB. That same processor with 1 GB of memory will choke running Vista often enough to ruin the user experience.  You'd better have 2 GB of RAM to even consider running Vista with a poky Pentium M processor, and even then you'll experience the odd slow-down.  The scary thing is that these Core Solo processors are faster than the processors used in most UMPCs being currently released, and Vista mangles the performance enough to give serious concern. 

The whole Vista mobile experience is very unstable and that is unsettling to anyone who needs to get their work done, and get it done now.  I don't care how pretty the OS is or how much new sophisticated stuff is going on under the hood if it makes my performance unpredictable.  That is such a big step backwards that you have to wonder how it can be fixed in the short term.  I fear it can't.  Say what you will about Windows XP the one thing it is on mobile devices is stable.  Rock-solid stable.  Can anyone say that about Vista on mobile PCs?  I have a very bad feeling about the immediate future of mobile computing on the Vista platform.  And that hits me where I live.

Comments

[spinedoc]

I could not agree more with you. On my P1610 Vista ran so badly that I dual boot into XP 100% of the time. I basically handed over cash to MS for nothing, since my Vista OS just sits on a partition doing nothing of benefit.

The other kick in the ass is that we have to wait so long for SP1. A sneak peek at I think it was PCmag revealed that SP1 had pretty decent improvements. But who knows when we will get that.

[GoodThings2Life]

I haven't used Vista in a production environment precisely because of the same problems you describe existing in the RC1 and RC2 releases.

I tried it on my Tablet, and although I liked the Tablet PC bits and Mahjong Titans, that wasn't a significant motivation to use Vista considering how much I hated everything else about it.

I hate the Network Center (actually I just hate Vista networking in general). I hate the Mobility Center. I hate the performance.

I run the Zune Desktop Theme for XP so I already have the slick looking "black" interface sans transparency (which who really cares about that?), so what motivation do I have for wanting Aero?

There are no worthwhile applications that require Vista yet, so that's not a motivator either.

Frankly, I installed the so-called Performance and Compatibility Packs on some test machines we use at work, and I haven't seen much of an improvement there either.

The bottom line is that Vista is just an all around resource hog, and unless SP1 works a miracle the way SP2 did for XP, I don't see the outlook changing on Vista.

But, I do see a trend in Microsoft's OS releases:

3.0 was horrible, but 3.1 and 3.11 were great.
95 was pretty decent, but 95B was great.
98 was horrible, but 98SE was great.
ME was horrible, but 2000 (regardless of SP) was great.
XP was pretty decent but insecure, XPSP2 is great.
Vista is horrible, what will we see with SP1?

[Ctitanic]

Guys, I don't know what you are talking about. Yesterday I was working in my Q1 and I was thinking for myself, I'm so happy with Vista responds time in my Q1 that I'm afraid to move on to any of the new coming UMPCs.

I have been optimizing it, but not so deep as others. I do not have any more those HDD bashing. The only thing that I would improve would be the time to come back from Hibernation but I have to say also that I have a lot of programs working in my taskbar and around 70 process running all time.

And that's in a Q1 Celeron running at 900 MHz. I tested Vista in a eo v7110 (VIA). It was slow and once the beta expired and have not comeback to Vista, I stayed in XP because I considered Vista too much for that processor. But... I had only 1 GB in that machine while in my Q1 I have 2 GB. And I mention this RAM difference because believe me, Vista does not run well in 1 GB of RAM. The performance is increased a lot just by adding that extra gibabyte.

In conclusion, I think that Vista is perfect for UMPCs but... it has to be optimized. I think that Microsoft should create some kind of optimization profiles where people can select what is better for them. And I say this because I'm that James, Kevin and other people reading our blogs can follow our optimization instructions but that's probably 10% or less of all consumers.

[James Kendrick]

Ctitanic, you more than all others are proving my point. You spent months "optimizing" Vista to get it to provide acceptable performance. If I remember correctly you turned off various OS services, hacked the registry, and as you state added 2 GB of memory to a mobile device that doesn't even ship with that much memory. That's exactly what I'm talking about here and you are spot on that the average consumer can't do this stuff. So they buy a machine with lousy performance and wonder why the platform doesn't work well for them. Your device is now configured better than most if not all of the mobile PCs shipping today. Vista will not work well out of the box on these devices. That is my whole point.

[Wiley Johnson]

James, how about a comment on the differences between XP Tablet bits and Vista Tablet bits.
My next machine will be a tablet; currently undefined but my short list is the HP2710, Lenovo X61 and the Fujitsu P1610.
Anyway, I intended to run Vista on the new machine because of Tablet bits comments but now, I almost think I should go stay with XP.
Unless, of course, Apple comes out with a 12 or 13 inch tablet if I can get a Notes program for OSX
..wiley

[GarrettD78]

Not only that but then throw in other promises that actually cause more problems they solve, thank you Readyboost. We actually just got a new Lenovo X61T with Vista installed on it. Problem was that only has 1 GB RAM, it had always intended to have XP on it. Now I am waiting for more memory to come in while the user of the device constantly chews me out for the poor performance.

[Peter Schreiner]

YES! I have an X60 Tablet with Vista (Core Duo, 1GB RAM) and it feels like I experienced every single problem that you describe here - ever tried to get something done on the last 10 mins of battery, but the system would not stop thrashing until the power ran out? Just thinking about it makes me reach for my pills...
I would install XP at once if it weren't for the tablet tools. Even my first tablet (a 386 Thinkpad with Win3.11) wasn't such a performance nightmare.

Peter

[Michael Venini]

James,

Your forgetting that when XP was released, people spent tons of time trying to optimizing it because it had it's problems. Heck, when my parents bought a new notebook last year, I had to spend time turning certain things off to optimized XP.

Up to this point I'm enjoying Vista. I spend about 20 minutes turning certain things off, but once I done that, I have Vista running just as well as it did on XP. And the notebook is a Acer Celron M 1.5, with 512MB!!!! Yes it's Vista Basic, but Vista runs with no problems. I have no problems connecting to the network. I have no problems surfing the net.

I believe Vista will be there one day. But I think Microsoft should of created another version of Vista. Vista for Mobile(or Smaller) machines. Ultimate, Business, Premium, MOBILE, and Basic.

[Frustrated Consumer]

Frankly, I thought your team was exaggerating the problems with Vista and docking. How could it possibly be that bad?

And then I tried using my new dock with my new Fuji notebook last night. Holy cow! You weren't exaggerating at all!

Fortunately Fujitsu put an XP install disk with my new notebook. I think I'm going to use it this weekend...

[Michael Venini]

James,

Your forgetting that when XP was released, people spent tons of time trying to optimizing it because it had it's problems. Heck, when my parents bought a new notebook last year, I had to spend time turning certain things off to optimized XP.

Up to this point I'm enjoying Vista. I spend about 20 minutes turning certain things off, but once I done that, I have Vista running just as well as it did on XP. And the notebook is a Acer Celron M 1.5, with 512MB!!!! Yes it's Vista Basic, but Vista runs with no problems. I have no problems connecting to the network. I have no problems surfing the net.

I believe Vista will be there one day. But I think Microsoft should of created another version of Vista. Vista for Mobile(or Smaller) machines. Ultimate, Business, Premium, MOBILE, and Basic.

[Ctitanic]

One thing, I had HDD trashing when I had Superfetch running. I deactivated using the registry tweak that we have been talking about here and in my blog and that HDD trashing virtually disappear. I have read a lot in other sites that this is a big mistake and they said that the problem with Superfetch is that it needs 2 GB or more to work properly in any device. But.. I have to confess that I'm so happy without superfetch that I have not undone the hack to check if now with 2 GB it works better.

[devwild]

Thanks James for laying this out. It really is true in all practical terms, and is key to why umpcs that are, and need to be for many people, windows based, will continue to fail in the next couple years.

The hardware market has changed significantly and Microsoft has not been able to keep up. There is a desperate need for a modular and scalable version of windows that is based on a simple, secure, functional kernel, with a toolset to build up from the most basic UI and API set needed to run most Windows applications, to the most flashy version for high-end workstations. That way windows can be custom tailored for the nature of the device, and the 4-5+ gigs of un-needed bloat in vista can be left by the wayside on a UMPC.

Vista has still continued to be plagued by the shoddy distributed programing methodologies and long term bloat that has been the root cause for many problems in past versions of windows... which is unfortunate because it was supposed to be a start-over, and an improvement over XP, but it has turned out to be worse.

Linux has long proved that scalable OS design can be successful on modern devices, and now Apple has proved the same with OSX by putting light-weight implementations of Darwin into the AppleTV and iPhone. It's time Microsoft took some real effort with that massive programming team, and did the same.

[Tax Man]

I bought Vista Home Premium when it first came out to install on my Q1. I was so unhappy with the performance with 1GB RAM that I rolled back to XP Tablet Edition, which I've been happily using ever since. On all my Macs, I run Windows XP in Parallels and not Vista. Thanks to Vista's automatic activation BS for the 2 weeks I had it on my Q1, I can't even use my stupid Vista license on another computer. I spend as much time as possible in the Mac OSX environment. I'm an Apple Fanboy, but I'm not a Windows hater. I've been using PC's since the very first IBM PC and I've used every version of Windows, IBM's OS/2, and every Mac OS since System 7. I'm not one of these Apple lovers that wants to see Microsoft fail. To the contrary, I want to see Microsoft WORK! I saw the glowing reviews on the HTC Advantage, but I've used so many Windows Mobile devices that I know that the mobile version of Office just doesn't cut it for me. I need to bring my whole computing environment like I can on the Q1, not just bits. Anyway, I appreciate your addressing the elephant in the room because when all the a-listers start talking, stuff starts happening!

[Ctitanic]

James I'm agree with your point. But... I do not think Vista is the problem. I think that Microsoft and OEM are the problem. They have to sell the units with the OS optimized. In the case of Microsoft they should create optimization profiles and put that into a program easy to understand by users.

[Brian]

Was on the OS cusp prior to the last laptop warmer (wait, make that burner) going toes up.
Always looking for devices and used every OS and profile from the dark ages of organizers to Psion, MS CE - better?, maybe better but... Had installed Linux on older handhelds then the 1st gen iPaq (Daylight screen and turn the back light off, expansion sleeve, bulky but - WooHoo, profile display software, a keyboard and someone gets it!) Rode that sucker into the dust but in the end - eh -, used a Sharp with a Micro Drive - mnt,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, - eh - , smart phones, the movie, "My two left thumbs" eh -, then UMPC's start to seriously show up. Several tablets along the way (even the daughters kick'n Toshiba she needs for Engineering school) then along comes Vista.
The MS experience is finally done for me.
Decided the MS Vampire had to die so committed to changing up the usage profile altogether.
Was all set for a Nokia N95 and/or E90 combined with a Foleo hacked with a Wacom digitizer.
Cheap (well okay, the Nokia's but hey, no extra camera or GPS so..) light alternatives that don't set my pocket (or pants) on fire.
Now the delay in the Foleo. If the N95 gets a bigger screen or the E90 goes video out, it's straight to larger monitors with keyboards and forget the Smartphone assistant.
Will dual boot XP SP2 at best when needed or borrow another box (da Wifes) but No Mas Microsoft.

[Sumocat]

Op-eds like this make me glad I haven't gotten off the wait-and-see bus for Vista. While it is loaded with functionality I'd like to use, like the improved Tablet PC bits and better search function, the sheer number of quirks that users are encountering is absolutely repellant.

That said, I wouldn't discount its potential for mobile devices just yet. I agree with CTitanic that the main problem with Vista is that OEMs aren't optimizing their devices for it and Microsoft isn't helping. If Microsoft and the hardware makers make the effort to tailor Vista to fit each device, then the real mobile benefits of Vista could start to shine. That is, however, a big "if", but perhaps the threat of Apple, with their seamless integration of software and hardware, will force MS to take action.

[Kent Pribbernow]

Vista has pushed me to the breaking point. Since installing this OS on my production workstation/gaming rig in January I have endured nothing but frustration. Driver support, even months after Vista's release continues to be problematic.

It is performance or lack thereof that has me running for higher ground. My system takes MINUTES to fully load the OS upon bootup, and once it loads the OS performs like molasses being poured through a straw. Applications run noticeably slower in comparison to XP. Gaming support and performance is abysmal.

The UI is ugly - Aero glass has far too much bling, it's gaudy and distracting. Yesterday I did something humiliating but necessary - I dropped back to Windows "Classic" theme. It's the only way to gain acceptable application and UI performance under Vista. So now, here I am staring at a GUI I haven't seen or used since Windows 2000 Professional, eight years ago. And that I think is the last straw for me.

Over the weekend, if free time avails, I plan on formatting my hard drive and going back to XP Pro. This time for good.

I work with both Mac and PC, and Vista has given me that final bit of encouragement to go completely Mac. Virtualization has all but made operating system choice irrelevant. Thanks to Microsoft's disastrous product release...my personal computing roadmap will take the nearest exit, away from Windows.

[Steve]

I can see vista running well for users who only need internet and ms office on umpc's. If you use it for anything more intensive than that, forget it!. If you look at the Ultra mobile space, UMPC's have not increased in speed over the old U50 - U70 Vaio's. These machines ran XP really well, so the next generation of vista is not likely to perform. If you have a nice grunty home desktop pc ... go for it, go for vista, otherwise stick to xp... I've owned almost every umpc out there... vista is pathetic.

[James Kendrick]

When I say Vista I am referring to the entire Vista ecosystem which includes the OS, OEMs and us consumers. Yes, we consumers must share part of the blame too. The OEMs and MS are playing on the mobile playing field we consumers built and that causes them to release mobile devices with processors that are underpowered and systems lacking sufficient hardware resources to run Vista properly. We consumers grouse now about UMPCs costing over $1,000 so OEMs are not about to put proper processors, 2 GB of memory and other hardware requirements to run Vista the way it should run. Intel shares in the OEM blame by trying to make processors much cheaper for the reasons above, and those processors don't have the oomph to handle the needs of Vista. Not in the long haul.

I am not saying that this can't be fixed, but I am adamant in my claim that it can't be fixed in the short term. Too many pieces of the puzzle must fall into place for this to happen, and that won't be quick.

[Lee]

I agree completely. I returned a brand new X61T and ate the restocking fee, because after playing with it for a couple of weeks, I was convinced that Vista was simply *still* not ready for prime time - especially on mobile devices. I had more BSOD on my X61T in 3 weeks, then I had in 5 years COMBINED on my TC1100 and my Vaio T250. I believe that I had narrowed the problem down to memory conflicts related to ReadyBoost, but I just wasn't prepared to spend I don't know how many more weeks tweaking, optimizing and cursing at the X61T just to get Vista to run smoothly.

In fact, the only thing that is preventing me from finally upgrading my Vaio T series (which still performs just fine) to the smoking hot TZ series, is my absolute dread of dealing with Vista on the laptop. I want the computer to work out of the box and other then normal personal configuration preferences, I don't want to be the one to have to figure out why Vista is not working right and what do I have to do to fix it.

In many ways it is similar to why I like my iPhone more then my tricked out Treo WX - because I spend almost no time tweaking my iPhone to make it run smoothly, or watching it hang up on something or having to reboot it. Yes, conceptually the Treo is supposed to allow me to do more then the iPhone - but I actually ACCOMPLISH more with the iPhone then the Treo - which I have started to use less and less - and which I never thought would happen.

I couldn't agree with you more James - I don't think Vista is ready for prime time on mobile devices.

[scoobie]

There goes the MVP...

[Mickey Segal]

James: you are right in identifying the problems, but most of these problems can be solved rather quickly if Microsoft and users took a few crucial steps.

Microsoft needs to deal with the problem that you labeled as "brain farts". Using Process Explorer (http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/Utilities/ProcessExplorer.mspx) it seems that most such episodes are instances of svchost.exe running some service that would best be deferred while mobile. Having such services not run while on battery power would be an important step to making mobile computing work better, and this should not be very hard for Microsoft to arrange.

Another thing that Microsoft needs to do is fix the docking problem. Although part of this may be due to third party graphics drivers, Microsoft needs to use its clout to get that problem fixed.

Users can also do some simple steps such as using "Sleep", after which Vista returns quite quickly, and avoiding resource hogs such as Norton AntiVirus.

All these steps can be taken very quickly. However, it will take longer for this to boost computer sales, and prices will fall fastest as sales go up, so the mobile sector is not going to show its true promise very quickly. But with proper steps from Microsoft the situation can be improved dramatically.

[James Kendrick]

Mickey, I wish it were that simple. I experience heavy disk activity resuming from Sleep randomly on five different Tablets. It's like Russian roulette pulling the device out of my bag in a meeting and hitting the power button to resume. There is a disconnect with what Vista is trying to do and when it does it on mobile devices.

[Scott]

I run Vista Home Premium on a new, moderately equipped Gateway retail laptop. It has 1 GB of RAM (which I hope to uppgrade to 2 GB soon) and an AMD Turion 64 2.2 Ghz CPU -- a single core CPU. It runs pretty well. Everything is fairly zippy until I start multi-tasking -- then, it starts to slow down a bit (but, my older 1.7 Ghz desktop did too with XP). I'm hoping more RAM will help.

I've had no disk thrashing -- at least, not that I'm aware of.

When I knew I would be getting this laptop, I had seriously considered re-formatting and installing WinXP. Unfortunately, I can't go to XP because there are no drivers for the thing. It was "designed" for Vista.

Btw, I did end up blowing away the OEM installation and re-installing Vista to get rid of all the crapware -- which also meant I got to tweak it my way, not Gateway's. Fortunately, Gateway actually gives you a full Vista DVD so you can do a fresh install (not just a restore from the "Restore" partition, which, incidentally, I also blew away).

My biggest problem is some error (probably some errant driver) that inconsistently -- but frequently -- causes a BSOD on shutdown. Beyond the fact that there is a condition serious enough to cause a BSOD, this normally wouldn't be THAT big of a problem since it only seems to occur when I shut down. The problem is, however, after the BSOD, the PC immediately re-starts -- so I have to wait around until it gives me the chance to tell it to shutdown, again.

Of course, then there's the dreaded "Calculating Remaning Time" bug...THAT drives me nuts. So much so that I installed xplorer2 Lite just so I won't have to use Vista's goofy Explorer.

[Chuck]

Over on GottaBeMobile there is some sugestion that the real problem lies with Intel. http://www.gottabemobile.com/CommentView,guid,6fe124d2-c918-4a03-97b7-aacfa2d20b24.aspx#commentstart
The Intel graphics chip drivers don't seem to be cutting it. This, coupled with the lackluster A1** processors, makes me wonder if they are setting us up for MID.
AMD and VIA had better get Vista Capable UMPC graphics functionality soon.

[Big Wes]

I agree with James about the negative impact that Vista has had on mobile computing. When I ordered my Gateway m285 (yes, it's a behemoth), I was ecstatic that I was able to get XPTPCE with the express upgrade to Vista Business. However, it's been sitting on the shelf ever since it arrived and I have absolutely no immediate plans to install it.

Four of my coworkers got machines with Vista. Since then, we've reverted those machines back to XP because of performance and incompatibility with mission-critical applications (like the very expensive GIS application our organization uses). While some of the blame lies with the application vendors, most of it can be squarely pinned to Microsoft. Vista, even after the extensive beta testing process, still felt rushed to release. Not everyone is technically savvy enough to hack the registry and disable advanced features to restore some usability. Our organization does tech support by committee, and we threw our hands up with all of the Vista woes we were having and chanted our new mantra “Back to XP!”

Vista left such a bad taste in my coworker's (one who got a Vista-based notebook as her new work machine) mouth that when her daughter needed a notebook for college and all they could find were Vista notebooks at the big box stores, she bought a Mac instead. While I thought that was a little harsh, I will say that I can't imagine why anyone would leave XP for Vista until several more significant patches are issued.

I love getting 8+hours of battery life and great stability with my M285. Until Vista can offer me comparable performance IN ADDITION TO ALL OF THE NEW FEATURES THE OS OFFERS, my upgrade copy of Vista will continue to gather dust. I refuse to disable all of the new features of Vista to get an experience that is in many ways inferior to XP performance-wise. IMHO, that’s “dumber than a bag of hammers”…

[James Kendrick]

Dwight Silverman of TechBlog understand the problem:

http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2007/08/heres_why_the_windows_ecosystem_is_broken.html

As I commented earlier it's the whole Windows ecosystem that is broken.

[Guy Adams]

I think anyone here that has been dealing with Microsoft operating systems will read these comments and think

"Gee, I've heard all this before"

Every single first instance of a operating system has been off the mark at a normal level, let alone a specialised sector like UPMC's.

Unlike Apple's, Micorosft operating systems have to work on all manner of hardware and there is no optimisating what so ever.

I'm not defending Vista, I think its far too resource hungry, I think Microsoft are taking the wrong direction with bigger and better operating systems. My opinion is operating systems should be getting smaller, allowing for less space taken or less hardware required but still keeping the features we all know and love.

Just my two cents

[Michael Venini]

I would love to here Kevin See Tofel's opinion on this.

[Eddie]

I hear ya! I was ready to ditch Vista and go back to XP. I'm running the usual suspects on my IBM (uh, Lenovo) X60 Tablet: Office 2007, OneNote 2007, Firefox Portable, GIMP Portable, and so on. Right now, though, I'm very happy with vista and performance and stability. Even though I've slept and hibernated indiscriminately between meetings and while commuting, my uptime sidebar gadget/widget/thingee shows 3 days, 14 hours, 18 min. I think what happened was a couple of weeks ago, I installed the four patches listed in a recent Windows Secrets and let the two reliability patches from Microsoft get loaded.

Now my system sleeps fine and hibernates fine and awakens fine. It resumes in about 5 seconds from sleep (somewhat longer for hibernate, natch), finger swipe, five seconds more, back where I left off. Also I can log off then sleep/hibernate, then log back on successfully, where that totally failed before. The system also seems to run cooler now in my lap, where before, the thing would run hotter than all get out when plugged in (maybe the CPU is now responding correctly to the adaptive setting and actually slowing down like it should when not busy?).

It may be my imagination, but I seem to get more life from the 4-cell battery when unplugged. Sitting around in the evenings watching TV (and/or doing homework), I can get through about three one-hour shows before getting the low battery warning. Before I wasn't even getting through two shows. The disk thrashing I experienced has almost totally stopped. Interestingly, process explorer showed that Urge and WMP database updates were doing a *lot* of maintenance, in addition to whatever else was happening with the svchosts. Perhaps the recent forced switched to Rhapsody may be helping in the thrashing department since it uses its own software. I don't have a dock to test, so no idea about that.

Happy Happy, Joy Joy!!

[Eddie]

By the way, my remarks were to say that maybe these updates will help the UMPCs somewhat also. I need to load them on PeeWee (my Q1) to see what happens.

[Jake]

As I may have mentioned before, I'm running Vista Ultimate on my P1610 (1Gb of RAM) and I'm not experiencing any of these problems.

Like CTitanic I've also switched off Superfetch and a couple of other unnecessary services like Parental Controls. I don't think this really counts as full on tweaking but I will concede that it would be nice if this sort of thing was available as a simple option for users - the problem is that it's highly specific and unlikely to be easy to create a profile that targets certain services. Anyway, I'm currently playing around with this tweak I found at neowin to see if it will allow me to run superfetch without it effecting boot times (http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?s=ee91a2cb835b61ab3d85b453ca1300e2&showtopic=583150)

I don't experience any abnormal disk thrashing and things like waking from sleep, screen rotation happen instantly - no brain farts here.

Of course, the P1610 is not the most powerful laptop in the world and I don't expect too much from it. It will run apps like VS.NET but only just, because of the 1Gb RAM limit. This would be the case with XP as well. I'm also careful about what I install on my PCs and I don't let apps like Skype, MSN Messenger, etc. start automatically as there's no need to have these things running if I don't need to use them. I think this is a really important fact that a lot of people ignore as all these little things loading at startup slow your boot times and will effect your system's performance and battery life to a certain extent. This is the case with XP as well as Vista.

In regards to program compatibility, Microsoft's guidelines are no secret and a program that followed them in XP should be compatible in Vista. If a program isn't compatible with Vista then that is the developer's fault, not Microsoft's. Additionally, Microsoft made it clear that they were going to enforce some rules like not writing to system folders, the registry, etc. long before Vista was released to consumers and they still made an effort to try and get Vista to deal with programs that break these rules gracefully- what more could they do?

The main point I do agree with however is that OEMs should be releasing better hardware to meet the needs of modern operating systems. As people expect their OS to do more it is naturally going to require better hardware. I see far too many laptops and PCs being sold with Vista and low-end processors or too little RAM.

I also think that all the moaning about Vista on the internet at the moment is ignoring the fact that every version of Windows has had a few issues prior to the release of the first service pack. Why should Vista be any different? Once SP1 comes out I hope that most of the concerns will be addressed but in the meantime people just need to be patient. I also hope that users learn to take responsibility for their PCs - if you are getting BSODs for instance then it's most likely due to faulty hardware or an incorrect driver setup.

[Jake]

I forgot to mention that I'm not using a dock but by the sounds of things I'm glad I'm not :) Following the attention that this issue has received here and at GBM recently, I hope MS issue a fix sooner rather than later.

[Alslayer]

Great article, all we need now is for you to talk about activesync and we have hit your 2 pet peeves.

:)

[Montevale]

Quite frankly I'm actually amazed that it runs at all. Motherboard is one company, cpu by other, ram-third, video-whatever that new start up is?... none of the drivers digitally signed by Microsoft and yet!!! it boots up. After this ungodly fit we pour a myraid of different software some of which was made years ago written in a combination of fortran, pascal and tied in together in VB... Ha! sitll works but it has hick ups now. I guess I need to get more Ram?
and while at it I'll get this super cool new MP3 player made by BreakEveryPatentAndRun and sync it with my pc via the drivers that came on a shiny CD. I will also download every single gadget off the net ...cause it will give me that extra stuff I need!!!
I'll talk to all my friends on MSN, AOL, Yahoo messengers just to name a few install desktop search from MS and the one from Google just in case if I need to find something real fast...
IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN... Well not yet, but we are almost there. Windows Vista needs a service pack 2 or 3, but most likely it needs MS to make their own closed proprietary system lets call it Windows Vista Elite which runs only what and on what MS approves. No BS, no betas, if the soft doesn't work you get a 100% refund.

Mind you even Mac which tightly controls everything is nowhere as stable as it should be when you think of what windows is up against.

[bmhome1]

Rewind back to 2003: XP SP2 shipped on latest 1 Gz Pentium M Tablets with 1GB RAM (even heresy then to suggest beneficial). New owners furious how slow to boot, how slow to run, how slow to shut down, how whatever to underwhelm expectations "newest" OS performed on "newest" hardware.

Usual good advice was to dump Norton, tweak startup and running processes, choose new software installs wisely, and other predictable boilerplate user involvement simply because they were solutions that worked. The OS could be rendered to crawl or made fly by such choices.

Fast forward to present: nostalgia towards XP SP2 colored by Core Dou processor speeds masking such historical issues made less relevant makes similar Vista issues appear unique instead of evolutionary. The same fat trimming applied to Vista provides the same benefits as did 2003 era XP SP2.

There's never any "disk thrashing" on mine simply because ALL such backround processes were wisely deselected. Those are features better handled by desktops, as always. Certainly the last thing to burden 1.8" drive UMPC with, ever. Not one can't be easily turned off. If by design they couldn't, that would have been true issue.

The need for user involvement in getting full OS speed remains unchanged. Neither has both open mind attitude and persistence to accomplish diminished in value, nor rejecting myths perpetuated by negative group mentality lessened as factors affecting successful outcomes.

My 1Gz 1GB RAM 2003 tablet runs Vista as well and as fast and stable as when booted XP SP2, if not actually clearly better, certainly Sleep 100% reliable. Only external monitor support single exception and no docking experience.

On my tablet, Vista made XP ancient history without benefit even running four year old technology, by accounts here an assumed impossibility.

Then again, XP SP2 rarely was regarded as "rock stable" venerable OS in 2003.

[John in Norway]

It's alright people saying 'We had this problem with XP. Get over it.' What's wrong with Microsoft learning from their mistakes? Isn't that one of the things that makes humans 'different' from other animals?

They had over 5 years to iron out basic problems and they haven't. I've installed these two latest 'updates' and I'm still having the same problems of slow file transfer on the same computer and crawling network speeds on file transfer (not only on mobile PCs). And don't get me started on that UAC! Even though I've turned it off I still get a warning about it when I restart the computer (usually after yet more Windows updates).

[I.P. Uptown]

So perhaps instead of beating up the manufacture of the OS which is clearly well beyond the capabilities of the OEM, maybe people should be criticizing the OEM’s or Intel, etc. for not stepping up to the plate and building a proper device? Do you really think that Apple could get the same performance on their old chip architecture that they are getting under Intel? Come on, it’s time for the OEM’s to stop making low end crap and really build something that can work. How many DECADES now have we accepted a battery life of 3 hours? When you get to address the issues from hardware to software like Apple you can correct these types of issues, Microsoft isn’t proprietary in that manner however and must address their issues like the Automotives do with the Union’s. Look at the iPhone, it’s battery talk time is 8 HOURS!!! The new Verizon PPC 6800 coming out in September is 4!!!! Not even close. Who’s fault is that? Microsoft’s or the Vendor? Now look at the software applications you can install and you are virtually unlimited in choices.

No offense, but I’m tired of hearing how Vista blows when it doesn’t. It’s a good OS that is ahead of the hardware curve. Time people direct the fodder where it rightfully belongs. Some is ours, but most is the OEM trying to sell you a “killer” system for $399.00.

[Peter Norman]

Hi James! I just read about your post via Warner over at GBM. I don't know what I'd do without you guys - I visit JKontherun and GBM almost a dozen times a day - more when I'm sufficiently propped up on the caffeine crutch.

Anyway, I'm sorry for repeating myself but as I posted at GBM:

"Whatever the reasons for Vista's performance, surely what matters is Microsoft's response? They've had almost a year, since releasing Vista to manufacturing, to work on updates.

- the Reliability & Compatibility updates came only a few weeks ago, 7 months after retail release/9 months after corp
- after a year of work, SP1 is due in December as a beta - A BETA!
- the monthly release schedule produced expected security patches rather than OS updates, though occasional driver updates have made steps in the right direction

With all the programmers & related resources that it has available, Microsoft's efforts have shown very little results. The three points listed above demonstrate that they've been doing SOMETHING, but it also shows that they haven't produced much.

Is anyone resentful about Microsoft's plan to release SP1 as a beta, after over a year working on it? Is anyone encouraged by it?"

So, clearly I agree with you, James and I'm amazed at how the Vista situation is unfolding. But its brought to light some startling discoveries for me. Its all confirmed, to as much an extent as is possible, that there's something behind all this that helps make sense of it all - which isn't the same as justifying it since its obviously not proving to be an entirely successful way of doing things for Microsoft customers like you and I!

Please note up front that I'm a longtime Mac nerd and have come back into the Microsoft world full force via the TabletPC, though I've supported and maintained Microsoft products (SBS, SharePoint, WinXP, etc) for years in my day job. The upshot is starting in 2005, for the first time since the early 90s, I got to watch how Microsoft does things, but this time from the eyes of a 'grownup'. Reading the blogs of Microsoft employees helped a lot. (That was a strategy with potential dividends definitely not missed by Microsoft.)

First, Microsoft's OS goals are motivated by the enterprise market, not the consumer market. Duh, you might say, but hey! I've been 'wandering in the wilderness' for 13 years - when I last looked up, 'shoegaze' was all the rage! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoegazing) This is significant because a small, lean Apple can move fast on product strategies when dealing with the consumer space - hell, they had 3 major OS releases in five years! Given the kickback by Dell and other OEMs when faced with a retail Vista rollout just before Christmas 2006, can you imagine their reaction if this happened EVERY year for four years? Microsoft can't be as nimble for loads of reasons I'd never considered - that doesn't mean you and everyone else hadn't recognized this, of course. But IMO its helpful to bring it up in this context. The proof is in the fact that Microsoft CHANGED their retail release plan to suit those OEMs.

Second, Microsoft has established perhaps the best (happiest?) place on the planet for IT people to work. They've done this by removing the rat-race as much as possible, developing a career path for everyone from the paper-jam jockeys (like me!) to the Unit Managers. IT is still very young in the business world and executives on down to assistants still don't know what IT people really get up to, in the same way that they understand what accountants do; if this isn't the case, then why are accountants paid so much more than IT staff? The accountants have had hundreds of years to carve themselves an identity in the business world. Anyway, somehow, Microsoft made it possible to be a programmer/developer without a 3-pack a day habit, be healthy, and have relationships longer than a few minutes (!?) up against a wall in the back of a club (ok, minutes sounds optimistic, but not when foreplay (the pizza) and cuddling (ie: cigarette) is included!). When even the testers and interns can have what Maxim or even Jugs magazine would characterize as "a life", we can't expect the kind of results that are characterized by Apple's early days or current shareware developers.

So, within this giant, IT-safe, bureaucratic workplace, its not so much about the customer as it is about the process; sure the customer motivated the original development of this process but the argument stands: a better product will roll out the door in the end, and thats what drives any business - see Microsoft's Mac Business Unit's recent 'pr' on the delay of Office 2008 for Mac to see this approach in action.

Third, the software industry (perhaps following Microsoft's lead or perhaps simply falling victim to the demands of the new marketplace) has changed its goal of releasing finished products to releasing works-in-progress. Everyone from Apple to Microsoft to Xandros now work this way and it has a lot to recommend it. Ship a product and with the new broadband world its easy to address any shortcomings. We've been effectively living in this world for a long time but Vista may be the first time its been evident on such a large scale.

The promised Vista SP1 fits this 'theory' and why it matters is to do with expectations - your article sets out the parameters of those expectations very well: what worries me is that we can no longer apply the same expectations that a lot of us grew up on, the 'world order' has changed, requiring a new set of expectations. We are being expected to 'work with' Microsoft as they release updates; whether they are 'beta quality' can hardly be a valid point when the original software (Vista in this case) was of similar quality upon release.

Instead, the SP1 beta release will serve as an ongoing updating, testing, and tightening effort - its just badly named given the new world order. For instance, since its release in May 2005, Apple has released ten point releases to Tiger; thats about once every 3 months over 27 months - not including security patches. In Microsoft's parlance these ten updates would be viewed as Service Packs. But Microsoft won't be able to release as many Service Packs - the OEMs etc would freak.

Are we now stuck with this way of doing things. If this really is whats happening, then why couldn't Microsoft have released the beta of SP1 in July and followed with a schedule of regular updates? Thats anyones guess but I'm thinking their work culture has informed the state of updates as much as anything. Perhaps they're sensitive to the perception that Vista's delay was due to making it properly fit for release and have been avoiding quick (or slow) update schedules for fear that the enterprise market would scream and retreat on their Vista transition plans if they 'see proof' that Vista is not as ready as they were led to believe. Apple's method of an update every two months is cool for consumers but as I said earlier, the enterprise market would have a lot of problems with such an approach.

Finally, while it looks to be the case, Microsoft is not actually making this up as it goes forward. According to Microsoft's Partner site, Windows XP will not be available to anyone but builder/OEMs after January 2008. As mental as it sounds, they do have a strategy; they are on a path and following it. However, its as much of a strategy as you CAN have in a marketplace where the enterprise is dictating the schedule in more ways than is always apparent; mix in the time it takes to develop and test with the usual delays and soon, the prospect of leaving Vista customers alone (except for security updates) for a year with a new OS makes some kind of mad sense. Its obscene but they've got us by the short hairs with one hand while the other caresses and placates the enterprise. Unfortunately, no individual is Microsoft's customer. If we want that kind of experience, then the closest you'll find is probably Apple, based primarily on their product release/update cycle. We're stuck with this new world order and its corresponding slow pace. Sadly, its all about making things easier for Microsoft and the enterprise.

[Allan Hirt]

Well, as someone who has been buying small PCs since I first got the U70, Vista has been fine for me with relatively no tweaking. I tend to be more of a power user and I always max out memory and change hard drives to put a faster one in if I can.

I currently have a Sony VGN-G1 as my main laptop computer. It's got a Core Solo 1.33, 2GB of RAM, and a 32GB SSD. This thing is, for the most part, every bit as fast (if not a tad faster) as the SZ90 I have with 3GB of RAM and a 7200rpm drive. It's not the drive, because the Vista experience number is very close. Hands down, it's the best small PC I've owned. I can easily run 3 or 4 VMWare images and still use Office with no problems.

Comparing my older Sharp MW70J (Japanese version of the M4000) which had a Pentium M 1.73, 1.5GB of memory, and a 7200rpm drive, the G1 blows it away even with Vista. VMWare would choke that thing.

Just as an FYI, my SZ really didn't run faster with XP vs. Vista. It's about the same. So the OS choice there didn't affect me at all.

I know many have had issues with Vista out of the box and I agree it should perform better even with 1GB of memory like XP did with 512MB. Hopefully SP1 will fix that. However, Vista for me hasn't been the horror show some have experienced and I like it much better than XP as a mobile platform.

[stephen]

Thanks James - er should I say no thanks!

Was about to purchase the Fujitsu P1610 with Vista this week, but now confused - perhaps XP tablet edition better.

Two Question back to you James on P1610:
1. If you had the choice today would you get XP or Vista (even with shortcomings.
2. Any way we could increase the memory from 1GB to 2GB - why doesnt Fujitsu supply 2GB?

Thanks

[Alan Hyman]

Hello James. I have been reading your blog for a long time. I am an IT profession. I have my own clients and I work at a small bank.

I will NOT recommend Vista to anyone...at all. The only thing good is the hard drive encryption.

The problems XP had now have been raised to a new level in Vista. The problems you outline here have been in XP, but to leaser degree. I have always had to get a patch for these problems. Why does the end user have to work so hard to get something fundamental to work? My Apple friends do not have these issues. Things just work. (I am not talking about application corruption as that happens on both platforms)

I think the main problem is how Vista uses memory on the machine. Instead of using the memory efficiently it is a hog. This is accepted by the industry as then the customer will then buy more memory, better video or a better hard drive. There is something ethically wrong here. Why is Vista with a fast processor 1Gig plus of RAM running slower than older OS’s? For the money and the processing power Vista should be very very fast.

Microsoft needs to address this ASAP. I am not comfortable recommending Vista to anyone. When I price a computer today I tell the vendor to include XP not Vista.

[Leonard J. Egan]

James, you are quite correct. The sad thing is that I haven't had real good luck with it being stable on "larger" mobile devices either.

I had a tricked out Toshiba M-400 Tablet with a Core- Duo and 2 GB of RAM. I did the Vista Upgrade and it was dreadful. I then did a totally new format of the hard drive and did a dean install. I got more "blue screens" in 1 month than I had in all my computing years combined !

My Toshiba suffered! I sold it for sixty cents on the dollar (which killed me) and bought a Motion LE 1700 running XP. You couldn't make me put vista on it. Microsoft had a better product with Windows ME and I thought I'd never say that. Cuddos to you for having the guts to tell it like it is!

[dre]

What an about-face from this earlier article...

http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/wireless/ontherun/archives/the-state-of-vista-on-the-fujitsu-p1610-13605

[James Kendrick]

Not an about face dre. That earlier article was about the fact that I could get Vista running at all on the P1610 because Fujitsu took their good time to get Vista capable drivers. That article goes on to mention some problems with docking and undocking, problems that continue today. Subsequent articles deal with all the registry tweaks that need to be done to get reasonable performance.

[Woadan]

Vista is not going to be accepted beyond techie geeks if it doesn't work out of the box.

Even though computers and the Internet are not toasters, the media and manufacturers have made everybody believe that using them are as easy as using a toaster.

You throw your bread in, and if it's too light, you turn it up. Next batch is too dark, you turn it down. 2-3 tries, and then you always have your toast the way you like it.

It's because it doesn't behave like a toaster that Linux hasn't caught on with Mom and Pop in Podunk. And it's also why UMPCs and their kin have not either.

Woadan
Professional Curmudgeon

[RC]

Not sure what this is all about? Some sort of voicing frustration with Vista and mobile devices? Well, I'm afraid I can't fully agree.

I used Vista since day 1 of the first beta.
Yes, Vista eats up more resources but it also is a safer and more stable OS than Windows XP is. Don't believe it? Well, maybe because you don't want to? Or because you believe all that crap floating around the internet about Vista performance?

I have Vista running on a Sony Vaio UX90S (1GB RAM, 32GB SSD), a Samsung Q1 Ultra Baron (2 GB RAM though!), an OQO e2 (1.6GHz, 32GB SSD) and other mobile devices (mostly ultraportable laptops) with single processors and usually 1GB RAM, processor speed usually not higher than 1.2 GHz. Does Vista work perfectly? Well, it runs fine with Office 2007 and other programs but has some quirks especially with iTunes.
Turning Aero off (who needs this anyway), turning the Sidebar off, turning off some visual effects like mouse/menue shadows already enhance performance a lot and make the Vista experience pretty enjoyable, even on tiny mobile devices.
Especially the SSD versions of my gadgets usually don't have real problems to run iTunes videos, so I suppose that the performance bottle neck is actually the HDD speed.

So yes, Vista is definetely having some performance issues compared to Windows XP but they're not as dramatic as people want us to believe. Turning Aero off already takes some pressure away from Vista and I also have the feeling that you need to use always the latest drivers/software for everything to run smoothly with Vista.

Making a general statement that Vista doesn't work well with mobile devices is untrue and confusing. Of course I don't play 3D games on these gadgets, I usually use Office 2007, some ftp/SQL utilities, the Internet Explorer, iTunes (always latest version since Apple is improving Windows performance with each version) and...believe it or not and it works fine...Adobe Photoshop CS3.

Even the Samsung Q1 Ultra with that crappy A110 Intel machine and 800 MHz seems to work fine with iTunes, you just need to adjust the screen size (full screen gives you stuttering but reducing it by around 20% works fine!) and of course to turn off Aero.

Also, believe it or not: all these machine are running Norton Internet Security 2008 in real-time in the background, protecting ALL processes. ;-)