Final Names for Windows Vista Performance Features
Posted by Daniel Fleshbourne on 07 April 2006 - 19:06 · 71 comments & 31162 views
About the Author
Full name: Daniel Fleshbourne
Forum name: Daniel
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Full name: Daniel Fleshbourne
Forum name: Daniel
Contact: via forum PM
Submissions: Normal · Headline
Slashdot It!
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live
Add to Google- Advertisement
-
-
(2 replies)
#1 Posted by guardian_uk on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:13
- Why does Windows ReadyBoost need to know whether the copy of Vista is genuine or not?
-
#1.1 Posted by Glassed Silver on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:30
- they just want to ensure no pirat may use the cool new technologies...
-fm
-
(1 reply)
#2 Posted by Ficman on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:16
- Interesting names....
-
#2.1 Posted by HellBender on 08 Apr 2006 - 03:59
- These new features are totally fetch.
-
(1 reply)
#3 Posted by McG on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:32
SuperFetch?
-
#4 Posted by Soham on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:32
- lol funny names
-
(6 replies)
#5 Posted by BigCheese on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:35
- I don't see how using a flash drive will speed up your PC. Isn't a hard drive much faster than a USB flash drive?
-
#5.2 Posted by Divide Overflow on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:55
- Not my flash drive. My budget 512 mb stick tops out at about 10 megabytes per second. Only way a flash drive could possibly beat a hard drive is in seek times, which would merely be an academic measurement with flash drives. .
-
#5.3 Posted by Angel Blue01 on 07 Apr 2006 - 20:09
- Flash memory is faster. In a computer with a hybrid drive it'll be faster.
-
#5.4 Posted by obake on 07 Apr 2006 - 20:51
- Flash memory itself is much, much faster, but I don't know if it'll be bottlenecked by using USB/Firewire to the point where a hard drive would be faster, relatively speaking.
-
#5.5 Posted by scyphe on 08 Apr 2006 - 09:21
- The average MB/s may be faster on a HD but the seektimes on a Flashdevice is much faster. Exactly how the function works and takes advantage of the flashdevice makes all the difference.
-
#6 Posted by hotdog963al on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:35
- New features sound good, didn't know about them.
-
(7 replies)
#7 Posted by zentradi on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:36
- you'd think with a recommended hardware spec of 512 megs of ram that Vista wouldn't require all these little craplets to keep it from running like the sloppy pig that it is. Guess not.
-
#7.1 Posted by reidtheweed01 on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:48
- so you have never upgrade your memory
but anyways what the **** is wrong with you people, all they do is say what the official names are for some of the features, and yet you find a way to come and bitch about. I knew alot of you here like to complain, but **** you complain about everything no matter what it is, unless its done by apple. -
#7.2 Posted by Betaz on 07 Apr 2006 - 19:58
- Quote - zentradi said @ #1you'd think with a recommended hardware spec of 512 megs of ram that Vista wouldn't require all these little craplets to keep it from running like the sloppy pig that it is. Guess not.
Uhh, ignoring your ignorant comments such as "craplets" and "the sloppy pig that it is", your comment makes absolutely no sense.
Did you even attempt to read what these do? Do you have a clue what they do? None of them are required to make Vista run better because it's a "sloppy pig". They are all enhancements that MS has integrated into Vista to take advantage of new technology and the fact that more and more systems have large amounts of RAM.
Superfetch allows you to take advantage of systems with large amounts of memory by preloading commonly used files into the memory so you don't have to spend time to pull them off your HDD when you use them. This would be used for system files, commonly used programs, etc.
ReadyBoost allows you to use that extra space on your USB drives that isn't being used for anything right now as extra high speed storage and use it as memory for your system. Allowing you again to cache more files so you don't have to get them off the HDD. When you take out the USB drive, Vista falls back to using the files off the disk.
And ReadyDrive allows you to use a hybrid drive with high speed solid state storage to put things like hibernation files in which will greatly reduce startup time since it's not limited by the speed of the drive. -
#7.4 Posted by trparky on 07 Apr 2006 - 20:21
- Ok, so should I run out and get a 1GB memory card to put into my notebook computer so that it can use it as swap instead of the hard drive?
-
#7.5 Posted by zentradi on 07 Apr 2006 - 20:58
- I read and comprehended exactly what they are about, thanks very much Mr. Betaz. They are FLUFF features in a feeble attempt to compensate for all the crap they couldn't manage to finish in a usable state on time.
"More systems have large amounts of RAM".
Gee, when Vista runs like Rosanne Barr on a treadmill on any system with less than a gig of ram, I wonder why?
An operating system is about what you do with the applications that are installed, what you GET ACCOMPLISHED, not about the simple act of using the OS. Microsoft have forgotten this fact, hence they will squeeze this hog out the door in its sorry state. If you are in the least bit impressed or excited about what Vista has been reduced to, then you need to get out more, or maybe expand your horizons. -
#7.6 Posted by rm20010 on 07 Apr 2006 - 21:32
- Wow, you seem to enjoy s***ing on every MS/Vista related topic. What the hell are you trying to accomplish anyway - be vigilant in "saving" consumers from wasting money on this "pig OS"?
Even if MS delayed Vista by 2 years you'd bitch. Sheesh, go back to using whatever OS you like and be happy about it instead of running around with a bloody torch.
On topic, how will ReadyBoost react to situations where the user accidentally yanks the USB key? What about the data stored on it - will it be lost and cause programs to crash? (and hopefully MS won't be that stupid enough to make the core OS components utilize ReadyBoost for memory) -
#7.7 Posted by nvme on 08 Apr 2006 - 05:56
- rm20010 said "On topic, how will ReadyBoost react to situations where the user accidentally yanks the USB key? What about the data stored on it - will it be lost and cause programs to crash?"
there was a PDC event where they showed this feature off and talked about it. i dont remember if they stated how the os handled yanking the key out but they did say you could just pull it out and it would be fine. also the data stored on the key would be encrypted so other computers couldn't read the contents of the data.
-
#8 Posted by protias on 07 Apr 2006 - 20:32
- and when ur memory is filled with all this "ready" apps and then u get a virus that doesnt take up cpu time and only uses ram and little by little say good bye to ur data without ever knowing it... pfft
-
(1 reply)
#9 Posted by Croquant on 07 Apr 2006 - 20:49
- Microsoft® Windows® Massive Hype™ is also included with every copy of Vista™.
-
(1 reply)
#10 Posted by SimplyPotatoes on 07 Apr 2006 - 20:57
- im excited like a school girl
-
(8 replies)
#11 Posted by 6XGate on 07 Apr 2006 - 21:12
- That first one sounds familar... I think XP has that ability already, called prefetch I think, I bet Microsoft made some major improvements on it though.
-
#11.1 Posted by Treefrog on 07 Apr 2006 - 22:38
- "Windows SuperFetch™ is a memory management innovation in Windows Vista that helps make your PC consistently responsive by tracking what applications are used most on a given machine and intelligently preloading these applications into memory. "
I was thinking the same thing. I guess with Vista, everything that is old is new again. That's innovation folks. -
#11.2 Posted by Betaz on 08 Apr 2006 - 01:49
- Quote - 6XGate said @ #11That first one sounds familar... I think XP has that ability already, called prefetch I think, I bet Microsoft made some major improvements on it though.
Yeah, SuperFetch is based off prefetch, but greatly improved. -
#11.3 Posted by werejag on 08 Apr 2006 - 14:46
- Quote - Treefrog said @ #11
I was thinking the same thing. I guess with Vista, everything that is old is new again. That's innovation folks.
thats renovation folks, not innovation folks
sadly vista is not the os we was promised, but prefectched readyXP -
#11.5 Posted by Coolme on 09 Apr 2006 - 21:15
- PCyr, how is Treefrog being a troll? He is just stating that prefetch is not something new, it's something improved upon. And werejag is saying that the vista is a xp renovated, which isn't too far from the truth.
-
#11.6 Posted by PCyr on 10 Apr 2006 - 01:24
- No, Treefrog also said: "I guess with Vista, everything that is old is new again. That's innovation folks." You see, you can't call someone a troll from a single comment. The reason I called them trolls is because in practically *every* Vista related article (and sometimes even in non-Vista related articles) they bash Vista. Now, you may disagree about that being trolling, however they almost always purposefully post mis- or highly single-sided information and when people question them on it, they often will not reply. A troll is someone who posts comments with the goal of creating disruption. Their comments are almost never productive, and the fact that they often don't reply to people's concerns, shows that they are really just posting to create problems and won't actually stand by what they say.
As for your last comment, I suggest you read this before commenting on how what werejag said isn't too far from the truth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Features_new_to_Windows_Vista . Many people see the pretty screenshots and think it's XP with a new theme. Of course when you ask them about WinFX, WGF and WCF they have no clue what you're talking about, and unlike stuff like the IPv6 support, those three are the most talked about features. -
#11.7 Posted by Coolme on 10 Apr 2006 - 07:01
- Avalon, Indigo, winFX and maybe winFS (maybe) will also be avaliable to Windowx XP and maybe 2000. Although these features are a direct result from the developements of vista, they will be avaliable as an free add-on to XP, which leaves vista little to be desired for. (I am aware about the new networking/audio stack and built-in security programs that are exclusive to vista, but there isn't a single killer reason to switch to vista, all the other new stuff in vista are just small features/changes that are polished from win xp/03, nothing ground breaking. Don't get me wrong, they are nice to have, but I don't know if it's worth hundreds of dollars.)
-
#11.8 Posted by PCyr on 10 Apr 2006 - 21:16
- I completely understand your views. IMO what you said will be the deciding factor for many. Although Vista was originally thought to be a huge upgrade, I find that it is mostly an upgrade for developers (which is a huge plus, but most consumers won't care until apps require Vista because of WinFX) and a lot of smaller end-user features. There is no single "WOW" feature with Vista IMO that will cause most end-users to want it for the price. I definately think that MS has been very productive with Vista and aside from the switch to Server 2003 codebase, have spent the time well. And I do think for some people, it will definate be worth the few hundred dollars for end-user features currently included. They still have many months left in development, so hopefully they will add some stuff that when you tell a customer about, they will say "I'd love to have that", instead of having them fall asleep after explaining how the core technologies will allow developers to create much better programs.
-
#12 Posted by MNS on 07 Apr 2006 - 22:41
- WOW! never knew trademarks turned me on as much.
-
(1 reply)
#13 Posted by ollie_webbuk on 07 Apr 2006 - 22:50
- Nice stuff.
But that site it links to, WOAH! Massive MS fanboyisms!
Seriously, they all HATE Macs for no reason. -
#13.1 Posted by reidtheweed01 on 07 Apr 2006 - 22:55
- are you serious, have you ever even looked at the comments made about microsoft. The only reason you dont see the apple ones is because they get deleted.
-
(2 replies)
#14 Posted by Daffy_Duck on 07 Apr 2006 - 23:46
- OK, while flash memory may be faster than a hard drive, USB would be a bottleneck that makes it slower than an internal hard drive. Compare the speed difference of a external HD connected to USB and an internal drive. The USB interface is slowing even the hard drive down.
Expresscard maybe. -
#14.1 Posted by leeveson on 08 Apr 2006 - 00:26
- USB 2.0 ~ 400mbit/s
Firewire 400 ~ 400mbit/s
Firewire 800 ~ 800mbit/s
ATA133 ~ 133mbytes/s
SATA 1.0 ~ 150mbytes/s
SATA 2.0 ~ 300mbytes/s
Changed bits to bytes for hard drive interfaces and undid previous changes.
Last edited by leeveson on 09 Apr 2006 - 02:22 -
#14.2 Posted by Daffy_Duck on 08 Apr 2006 - 01:39
- MNS,
Thanks for the clarification. Leeveson obviously trusts some (incorrectly formatted) numbers off of a website more than personal experience and common sense (IE. how would an external connection be faster than an internal one).
By the way, Expresscard is about 2.5Gb/s...close to SATAII speed. Wonder when there will be a useful Expresscard I can use on this empty slot on my laptop.
-
(2 replies)
#15 Posted by zentradi on 08 Apr 2006 - 00:31
- I've liked every version of Windows with the exception of ME and now, Vista. I would like Vista, had it even been more than a shadow of what it could have been. Now it is nothing more than a glorified XP SE. All these little "features" and hardware requirements stink of nothing more than a cash grab and attempt to sleeze people into thinking they need a new PC, moreso than any other Windows release in history.
-
#15.1 Posted by Betaz on 08 Apr 2006 - 01:38
- Quote - zentradi said @ #7.7I've liked every version of Windows with the exception of ME and now, Vista. I would like Vista, had it even been more than a shadow of what it could have been. Now it is nothing more than a glorified XP SE. All these little "features" and hardware requirements stink of nothing more than a cash grab and attempt to sleeze people into thinking they need a new PC, moreso than any other Windows release in history.
You're preaching to the choir. I agree, Vista is crap compared to what Longhorn was going to be, but that's not the point. Not one of the mentioned features are "fluff" features. They are features that will be very nice to have. Just because the rest of the OS is a disappointment doesn't mean that these aren't good useful features, and they aren't being added to make up for where the rest of the OS lacks either. They are just a few features on the short list of actual improvements in Vista. Also, each one of these features are optional. If your system supports them, then they will make your system run faster, if it doesn't, then these improvements won't run. In no way will any one of these features ever even begin to degrade system performance, and in no way do they push system requirements up even further, they just offer extras for those of us who have nicer systems (increasingly more people daily, and probably a majority by the time Vista has been out for a few years).
-
(3 replies)
#16 Posted by MNS on 08 Apr 2006 - 01:17
- @leeveson: lol.
so FireWire has pretty much the fastest transfer speeds available?
you were right about the USB/FW bit, but the hard drive connections are all measured in megaBYTES. SATAII has a theoretical limit of 3Gb/s or 300MB/s, which is, by far, faster than any external connection. how this ReadyBoost thingie is supposed to work is beyond me. -
#16.1 Posted by Betaz on 08 Apr 2006 - 01:45
- Quote - MNS said @ #14.2@leeveson: lol.
so FireWire has pretty much the fastest transfer speeds available?
you were right about the USB/FW bit, but the hard drive connections are all measured in megaBYTES. SATAII has a theoretical limit of 3Gb/s or 300MB/s, which is, by far, faster than any external connection. how this ReadyBoost thingie is supposed to work is beyond me.
Bus speed is just a bunch of numbers thrown up to make sales. Try actually getting 3 Gbps out of a HDD. Just becuase the bus isn't saturated until then doesn't at all mean the disk actually reads that speed.
And to be fair, the same applies to flash memory. There are different speeds of flash memory. They don't just run at your USB/Firewire's max bus speed.
Edit: Why are my replies pulling the threads out of order and putting them at the bottom?
-
(1 reply)
#17 Posted by Quick Reply on 08 Apr 2006 - 02:50
- Took the words out of my mouth™
I always thaught that you could only trademark a product, not a feature... that's what patents are for®
-
(2 replies)
#18 Posted by gadean on 08 Apr 2006 - 05:09
- Wait.
leeveson,
Isn't USB asynchronous and firewire synchronous? That would make firewire 400 capable of performing twice as fast.
Also, you have your "B" and "b" mixed up. "B" = bytes and "b" = bits
There's a big difference there since 1B = 8b
So to clarify:
USB 2.0 operates at 400Mbps (asynchronous)
Firewire 400 operates at 400Mbps (synchronous)
Firewire 800 operates at 800Mbps (synchronous)
ATA133 operates at 133MBps
SATA 1.0 operates at 150MBps
SATA 2.0 operates at 300MBps -
#18.1 Posted by sLm4ever on 08 Apr 2006 - 13:32
- Quote - gadean said @ #14.3So to clarify:
USB 2.0 operates at 400Mbps (asynchronous)
Firewire 400 operates at 400Mbps (synchronous)
Firewire 800 operates at 800Mbps (synchronous)
ATA133 operates at 133MBps
SATA 1.0 operates at 150MBps
SATA 2.0 operates at 300MBps
ummmm ..... but my sata doesn't copy a 150 MB file in one sec = ..... or is it the speed of the disk what's slowing it down !? -
#18.2 Posted by Croquant on 09 Apr 2006 - 00:11
- Um, no. Get your facts straight.
USB 2.0 has a signaling rate of 480 MB/s and has a maximum transfer rate for a single device of 55 MB/s.
IEEE 1394a signals data at 400 MB/s and has a maximum transfer rate for a single device of 41 MB/s.
IEEE 1894b signals data at 800 MB/s and has a maximum transfer rate for a single device of 83 MB/s.
IDE ATA devices transfer data between the bus and any device on that bus at 66, 100 or 133 MB/s, whichever is the best speed that both the bus and the device support. (The 66 MB/s and 100 MB/s busses are obsolete, but are still in use on some legacy hardware)
SATA signals data at 1.5 GHz, yeilding a maximum throughput of 150 MB/s per device.
SATA II still signals data at 1.5 GHz, but it signals on both the rising and the falling edges of the signal. This yields a maximum throughput of 300 MB/s per device.
So, as you can see, SATA II is more than five times as fast as USB 2.0 when it comes to transfering data from device to device. Don't be confused by the 480 MB/s rating: That's the rating of the entire USB bus, not the rate a device connected to that bus transfers data at. Remember, USB is designed to have multiple devices attached to a single USB port (through external USb hubs) while SATA is designed to have one device per SATA port.
If you really want to see speed, take four SATA II drives, put them on a SATA II RAID controler, and set them as a RAID 0 array. How does 1200 MB/s sound? That fast enough for you?
Last edited by Croquant on 09 Apr 2006 - 00:23
-
(1 reply)
#19 Posted by PCyr on 08 Apr 2006 - 05:26
- I love how you post multiple times on the same topic. As if trolling once wasn't enough for you!
EDIT: What the? I guess there are still a few Neowin comment kinks that need to be ironed out.
Last edited by PCyr on 08 Apr 2006 - 20:45
-
(1 reply)
#20 Posted by Guol on 08 Apr 2006 - 05:53
- haha what cool names..
and WTF is happening with 'Betaz's replies
-
(1 reply)
#21 Posted by nvme on 08 Apr 2006 - 06:02
- like i said in an above post, they talked about this and showed it at a pdc event. the difference between the xp prefetch thing is that when xp reboots, it has to start all over and it learns from the point windows starts back up. superfetch remembers throughout the life of the install of the os, so in theory, if you have an office computer where you use a few key programs alot over a long period of time. vista should get to the point where when you turn the computer back on in the morning when you get to work, it should immediately start loading your apps into memory in anticipation that you are going to use them so that by the time you do actually request the app(s) to launch, they will already be in memory and ready to start.
-
#21.1 Posted by Farquaon on 10 Apr 2006 - 13:31
- Quote - nvme said @ #11.3like i said in an above post, they talked about this and showed it at a pdc event. the difference between the xp prefetch thing is that when xp reboots, it has to start all over and it learns from the point windows starts back up. superfetch remembers throughout the life of the install of the os, so in theory, if you have an office computer where you use a few key programs alot over a long period of time. vista should get to the point where when you turn the computer back on in the morning when you get to work, it should immediately start loading your apps into memory in anticipation that you are going to use them so that by the time you do actually request the app(s) to launch, they will already be in memory and ready to start.
So if i understand its almost like the recently used icons on the start menu, just it would load applications in memory and not just the icons?
-
#22 Posted by gaurav on 08 Apr 2006 - 09:34
- w00t?! me is getting pleasured up already.
-
#23 Posted by Mathiasdm on 08 Apr 2006 - 11:08
- Quote -* Windows® SuperFetch™
* Windows® ReadyBoost™ (formerly code-named “EMD”)
* Windows® ReadyDrive™ (formerly code-named “Piton”)
Will it be possible to disable SuperFetch? Just in case it fetches 'not so intelligent'
Or perhaps just say: 'I want this partical application loaded in memory, as well as that one.' I'd like that so much better!
ReadBoost sounds like a nice way to kill your USB drive quickly (limited writes... ?).
ReadyDrive, now that sounds like a nice feature!
-
#24 Posted by Jugalator on 08 Apr 2006 - 11:11
- Since USB drives generally are advertised only having an expected limited number of writes due to its Flash memory (a bit like hard drives, but IIRC it's far lower than a drive), I have to wonder how much using it as a swap drive limits the lifetime. You know, Windows often uses its swap file quite a bit, even if you have, say, 1 GB RAM. I hope this is taken into account, but *I* will at least not risk its lifetime by letting Windows use it in a way I lack complete control over.
-
#25 Posted by callumy on 08 Apr 2006 - 11:40
- Something you guys might not have thought of, but using flash memory (generally a fast CompactFlash card is the best) to store your work and stuff while using a laptop away from power (ie: on battery) can save a fair bit of battery. If all you do is type for three hours straight and not save, instead of saving every ten minutes, you can end up with a tidy sum left over!!! Maybe this is what ReadyBoost is for? SuperFetch sounds like a good idea too, but couldn't they come up with less cartoon/childish names - they are the bigest software company on the planet and they can afford to 'buy' the best marketers.
Cal
-
(1 reply)
#26 Posted by Windows X on 08 Apr 2006 - 20:58
- I recall 512MB of memory is as cheap as 512MB of flash drive. Why don't you buy more memory which is *SURE* faster instead this technologies?
-
#26.1 Posted by Croquant on 09 Apr 2006 - 00:37
- Only reason I can think of to use this ReadyBoost™ thing is if I was on a laptop and I had already used all of my available SODIMM slots. Then I can see it would be nice to be able to add a 2 GB USb flash drive and have it show up as RAM.
On a desktop PC, I'll already have my 2-4GB of RAM. Possibly 32 GB if I'm on a server-class machine. I don't think memory will be a problem there.
Really, though, all this is doing is taking the Vitrual Memory (swap drive) concept and updating it for flash drive technology. Slap a *Shiny!* *New!* *Buy Windows Vista* label on it, and there you have Windows ReadyBoost™
-
#27 Posted by Ahmadbondk on 09 Apr 2006 - 12:34
- i have 2GB Flash memory
i should wait for the Vista
-
#28 Posted by Gaius Baltar on 10 Apr 2006 - 10:20
- readyboost?
anyone remember ramdoubler?
god i am so glad i'm on a mac
-
#29 Posted by mog0 on 10 Apr 2006 - 12:23
- I have read that they duplicate all of the cache on both the flash device and the hard disk. If a small amount of data is needed, the flash is used (fast seek time) but when a lot of data is required the hard disk is used (fast transfer rate).
How it makes the decision as to which one to use I don't know but it sounds quite a clever idea. Personally it shouldn't make much difference to me as I already have 2GB of RAM and on XP I've never seen the task manager report less than half a gig free.
- Windows® SuperFetch™
- Windows® ReadyBoost™ (formerly code-named “EMD”)
- Windows® ReadyDrive™ (formerly code-named “Piton”)
Windows SuperFetch™ is a memory management innovation in Windows Vista that helps make your PC consistently responsive by tracking what applications are used most on a given machine and intelligently preloading these applications into memory.Windows ReadyBoost™ (formerly code-named “EMD”) makes PCs running genuine Windows Vista more responsive by using flash memory on a USB drive, SD Card, Compact Flash, or other memory form factor to boost system performance.
Example: Windows ReadyBoost™ is an easy way to make my computer feel faster. I just put in a USB key and follow the instructions on the screen.
Windows ReadyDrive™ (formerly code-named “Piton”) enables Windows Vista PCs equipped with a hybrid hard drive to boot up faster, resume from hibernate in less time, and preserve battery power. Hybrid hard drives are a new type of hard disk that integrates non-volatile flash memory with a traditional hard drive.