Discussion on:

10+ tweaks, tricks, and hacks to make Windows Vista fly

What other tweaks or tricks have you discovered for Windows Vista?

Waiting for DreamScape, that should be a nice tweak for the system. Don't see it yet as an Ultimate Extra Download.

Thanks for the tips. Now all we need is for someone package up all the tips into 1 nice .reg file or executable, so that the tweakers don't have go through each of these settings every time they perform a new install. Slipstreaming would work, too.

is to use Linux instead. Its more stable,
cheaper TCO, open standards, not closed
proprietary formats, it's intercangable
between systems, and darn fun too!

Congratulations.

well said. After reading articles from several different sources, 2007 could be the year of the linux.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Thanks midnightriderz. I feel better already.

Duplicate due to false error message.

Over the weekend, I purchased a new HP Pavilion dv9225us laptop. Took it home and let it boot. Then I played with Vista for about an hour and then called HP and asked for XP drivers. Of course, being a new platform with Vista Ultimate 64 bit pre-installed, there are no XP drivers for the machine. HP can not even tell me the chipsets used in the machine other than the BIOS and the video card. Being new hardware for the most part, perhaps you could tell me where to find the Linux drivers? If not, perhaps you could accept that Linux is not user friendly enough for the average user and that without extensive alterations to the OS will never be mainstream.

I took it as sarcasm. Suggesting linux is just trolling. If you have to use Windows, it doesn't help at all.

Linux has what, 1% of the market?? I mean come on, stability is the only thing linux has on anything, because it cannot offer what Windows can. It isn't used much, you know, 1000 people use linux, a billion people use Windows!! My guess is that Windows costs alot because of the 1000s of employess MS has to pay for making Windows happen. Windows is the ONLY way to go. There are NO competitors good enough to give MS any worries, so why should they change?

MS is the biggest and the best at what they do. Because of this, there are always jealous people that want to try to hack and break Windows, and sue them because they are not as smart as MS. And then throw the blame on MS for all the trouble.

ALL YOU MS BASHERS ARE THE LAME BOZOS, AND JUST NEED TO GET OVER IT AND SHUT YOUR LID!!!

Most MS haters just like being different. Like the guy in the middle of the desert who swears he was abducted by aliens and probbed, or the only guy in high school who wears a trench coat and eats June Bugs. They pride themselves on being that 1% of the population that the other 99% wishes Natural Selection would deal with. With thier staunch fanatical stand on whatever issue they raise, they hope they look special in being the "I told you so!" people. If the O.S. market were flipped they would be screaming about MACs. (sigh)... Please Linux users, don't reproduce....

Man, do you need a hug or WHAT? I use Linux- it's interesting and I'm learning it as I go. But 99% of what I do is still on MS OS's.

I personally hate closed-mined @-holes like you SEEM to be.

When I started on linux I was the same but now I dont even run a microsoft box. But saying that I support them all day at work. IMHO XP seems far better than Vista at the moment FWIW.

I have no intention of installing Vista for quite some time.

Meant it as a joke - didn't come out right. My Apologies.

You call yourself an IT Consultant with that attitude...

the last dozen years or so in computer science has taught me a few things that we all come to understand sooner or later. One of those things is: "the average Linux user" knows their way around a computer, far better, in all aspects than does "the average Microsoft user". THAT is a FACT. MS has advertising muscle and uses it wisely. That is why they are the giant that they are today, NOT because they have a better OS. To call Linux users "Lame Bozos", is foolish to say the least. The offering of multiple OS's in the IT world is good for everyone involved. It keeps us all on our toes.

I'm sick of all these windows bashers...Give a user a choice between the slick Windows OS or a Linux OS and there is no choice. No business is ever going to seriously consider linux for a desktop OS and for a general home user linux would never touch their systems. You have a few IT enthusiasts who even then Linux is a hobby OS. Yeah there will be some linux servers out there and for a web server there great but that?s about their limit.


Linux could be like Mac OS X eventually and would then be useable. But it is open source and there are so many distros and the development is so fragmented that this is never going to happen. Windows is so good because of the development team Microsoft has in place concentrating on one distribution. So to all the windows bashers seriously think twice before you start trying to hype up something which is clumsy at best. This comes from someone who uses server and desktop versions of Windows and OS X and runs RedHat on his company?s web server. I am not anti-linux just a realist.

Even if you are a committed Windows user, it is in your interest to support open source efforts. IE 6 stagnated until Firefox started to take away market share. Same for PhotoShop/Gimp and MS Office/OpenOffice.org.

Sometimes I hear IT professions say "I just use the best software for the job." If everyone acted that way, Firefox never would have matured and IE6 would continue to stagnate.

I believe, as IT professionals, we have an obligation to help spur competition, innovation and open standards. Supporting open source projects, like Linux, The Gimp, Firefox, OpenOffice.org, etc, is a great way to do that. Try to use a mix of both.

A Bootable OS, Knoppix is one of the best tools as an IT professional that I have in my bag of tricks. I have used in on several occassions to repair windows and on others when windows was not worth saving I retrieved user files and saved the day. below you will find the place to download it
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.knoppix.org/&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=1&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dknoppix%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4GGLR_enUS241US242

.
"...Linux has what, 1% of the market?? I mean come on, stability is the only thing linux has on anything, because it cannot offer what Windows can. It isn't used much, you know, 1000 people use linux, a billion people use Windows!!...

You must have computed that using Windows Calculator. If Linux has 1% of the market, and there are 1000 Linux users, there would be 100,000 Windows users, not a billion.

If you're really an IT consultant, you must work for Fisher Price.


"...My guess is that Windows costs alot because of the 1000s of employess MS has to pay for making Windows happen...

Guess again. Windows costs a lot only because people are willing to pay for it. The price of Windows is not determined by the cost of manufacturing. Microsoft sold $44 BILLION last year and cleared $18 BILLION profit on people like you.

It's called supply and demand. Check it out.


"...There are NO competitors good enough to give MS any worries, so why should they change?..."

There are few competitors left because Microsoft uses unethical and illegal tactics to kill them, not win business away from them in the marketplace. Microsoft was convicted by the United States government of illegal monopolistic behavior.

There ARE competitors that worry Microsoft. One of them is Linux. Microsoft's response is to try to kill Linux by threatening to sue Linux customers instead of beating Linux in the marketplace. Microsoft's theory is that the best way to get the girl is to kill all of the rival boyfriends. Nice. Very nice.

I'd rather roll out Vista in a business environment than Linux any day.

Linux may be great for you and I, but the average desktop worker will flip if they had to use Linux. Until Linux becomes 'as familiar' (and pretty) as the Windows flavors, don't look for your dream to come true.

The average user would either:
1. Quit
2. Cry
3. Cost an incredible amount to the Company in terms of productivity until they got the hang of it.

I work with the "average users" Sometimes I think we're lucky the button is marked "power".

Sometimes they even don't know how to work in Word and Excel!
My mother works with Linux now. Not because she likes Linux and doesn't like Windows. She doesn't care. Just her computer isn't so new to run even WinXP. I had to install OS and Open Office for her, show how to work with it, how to use e-mail from beggininng, how to use internet in Linux. And now I have forgotten about her computer.
My mother is VERY low than average user, and doesn't see any differences between Windows and Linux except, as she said, design. She have never (and I suppose will not) user control panel or adjusted any settings in computer, that was my responsibility. As she said "I just need it working as I want". So, IMHO, Linux isn't good or bad, it's just different. I like it. And if somebody doesn't like it - I don't care. I like freedom of choise.

The familiarity to a users home PC and application compatibility unfortunately makes IS more or less stuck with an OS that is highly flawed and insecure.

Whether we like it or not..

The instability of Windows is still an irritant, but I thought XP was the most stable Windows OS I have seen yet.

The most irritating thing to me is the lack of multiple desktops. If MS has such a great software development organization, why can't they do this very simple thing that has been in Unix and Linux since day 1?

There is a lot of freeware out there (MS even has it) that purports to provide multiple desktops, but none of that stuff works worth a flip.

Now comes Beryl, which is called desktop eye-candy. It is a very cool interface (for Linux) and it's implementation of multiple desktops is the coolest thing ever. Maybe it will push MS over the edge to give us multiple desktops.

My interest in multiple desktops may seem to be motivated by "coolness", but in my everyday job I can have 50 or more windows open. It would be so much easier for me if I could have 10 or 12 desktops, say one for each project I am working on. I think you get the picture. Also it would be great if each desktop would remember what I had open so that if my OS (Windows, of course) were to crash, when it comes back up all of those desktops would just open all of the windows that were there when it crashed. How hard could that be?

I am one of the many IT people that have a job because of MS. Some good points about Linux, FREE Open source and Open Office for Linux works good also. I had a duel boot system for about 2 years and word boot Windows XP or Mandrake Linux till Mandrake one day would not boot the LELO boot loader. Did and MS update do this ? I will never know. I removed the Mandrake partition and did not return to it.
Some bad things I saw with Mandrake, any time I added a new pice of hardware the kernal had to be recompiled and I was LUCKY to find a drive most of the time.
Because of Linux there are a few job's and there mostly sells jobs - not repair job's and the sells jobs don't pay - and the is a fact. It is true that MS had it's start as a bad " big brother " on the block but that is America and freedom. Not just hundreds of jobs have been created because of MS but millions of jobs ALL OVER THE WORLD ! WHY ?
People need to eat, have kid's, have love, and have computers ! Because of MS we have Programmers - open source and paid, IT persons, MCSE, MSP, A+ and more. Linux has ... aaaaaaaa... ? ? ? Hackers hacking what ? Microsoft products, Cisco Products and you name it ! Linux is good for hackers and people that know computers and X Windows but that is not all bad, some things need to be hacked and some people need to know the computer so well that if a Microsoft user has a problem , go find a Linux user and he or she can fix it most of the time and the Linux user don't have a MCSE.

Back to Vista tweaks, I would like to see a tweak to allow Linux to boot inside Windows.

Yeah, until you actually need to upgrade a piece, oh wait, that has a dependency that needs to be upgraded, oh and that dependency has a dependency that needs to be updated, but that update breaks the functionality of the only other useful thing a linux box does...give me a break. Linux is GREAT at menial tasks (DNS, DHCP, WWW, etc) but as a desktop, it still got EONS to go in usability to catch up, it's gotten FAR better, but still has a LONG way to go.

OK, I've had no formal computer training whatsoever, so maybe I may have a different perspective?:
I started with MS WIN98, trained myself to write complicated spreadsheets, 6 different websites, and to date 7 different fairly complex MSAccess databases which can not only "talk" with my complex MSExcel spreadsheets, but also dump information to MSStreet & Trips- basically automating the process of managing my customers, but also the process of getting to them, preparing proposals, and keeping track of them. Pretty cool deal. I personally have a laptop running XP pro, a core2 duo desktop at home dual booting with XP pro and Ubuntu Edgy Linux, a desktop running Ubuntu dapper, and an old Compaq that I'm in the process of turning into a file and print server (Kubuntu Linux (a lite version for older systems)) for home use.

My thoughts on the whole Vista/Linux thing.

FACT- MS stuff are ALL memory hogs (RAM & HD space)-keep in mind that a well-oiled and maintained MS system needs alot of constant, diligent care (antivirus, spyware, defrag, disk cleanup, etc, etc. etc) which if you add all of this stuff to your running processes, it can really bog down a system.
BUT- if you have stout enough hardware- it is the EASIEST way to go.

FACT: (ON the 3 different computers that I have Linux on., the choice to run Linux was made after attempts to get them to run a MS operating system ('98 or XP)and remain stable (AND QUICK). At first the older desktop (800Mhz Celeron) actually ran FASTER on XP than on Ubuntu, but after awhile, the performance on the XP machine dropped dramatically- to the point of basically just being plain old annoying- (this machine is on a firewalled network, runs antivirus and firewall, etc- BTW I keep my systems maintained- why the performance drop is still unknown.
Rather than pitch the machine (I use it as a second desktop (kids), and as a test machine when working on other peoples computers (did I mention that I had no formal training?)- I installed Ubuntu on it. It has been running superbly for quite awhile now, works well with one kids Ipod, does the email, IM'ing, etc excellently.

On the core2 Duo machine, I have XP pro and Ubuntu dual booting. On Ubuntu, I also have Beryl installed. and It is FAR and AWAY the most amazing desktop computing experience I have ever had- you really have to do some searching around and check it out.

Bottom line though- until those that are "in the know" and write code for distros like Ubuntu realize that the vast majority of "regular folks" WILL NEVER WANT TO OPEN A TERMINAL WINDOW AND THAT ONE FACT WILL FOREVER KEEP THEM FROM LINUX.

That is a fact- I look at it as a "learning experience" If it takes me a while to figure something out (frequently with Linux), it's like solving a complex puzzle. Unfortunately, most folks want to Push the button and do the things they want to do, not figure out HOW to do it.

Conversely, I HATE it when MS thinks FOR me- Overthinking an OS leaves you with a bunch of preconfigured Cr@P that you have to live with.

So, which is better? Define better and I'll give you an answer.

Riley

Finally a balanced view from someone who uses both.

*applause*

I can't say much about Linux with my very limited used, however I will give Linux that does have less problems than windows in security. Is that because of good programming or lack of target base? Linux use less memory. Could that be you really dont need anti-virus or spyware? Maybe and if that the case. Could because lack of target base? But Linux is very good of not having problem running for long time or slowing down after sometimes.

However M$ wins with more software/drives vs Linux. Yes, Linux have some software could possible replace M$, however in game its complete bow out of the water. etc. Yes, I do know Linux more for IT and thing of that nature.

Of course this only noob's two cents. Onces Linux gets to be newbie friendliness (first time using pc), has large base software, etc. It be nice to see how those two will compare.

This is meant to be a discussion on tweaking Vista, not an all out flamefest between Linux and Windows users on who has drunk the most corporate Koolaid.

It is refreshing to see someone debate the issue rather than slam someone as "lame Bozos' etc....

I too have used both systems as well as Unix on corporate servers.

There is a stability that *nix provides that MS does not. However that does come at the price of simplicity, at least until now. The latest Linux distro based on Debian, Ubuntu is the first that comes to mind, provides a rather simpel uncomplicated way of installing Linux. I have used an Unbuntu server edition on an older PC that really wouldn't run Windows, worked great for that purpose.

I agree that one OS isn't everything to all people. I do know that if anything goes wrong on a MS windows machine most "average" MS users are lost and cannot correct it, so much for usability.

The majority of the machines I use are MS windows but the ones with Linux are just getting easier to use every day.

As long as Corporations are run by Vice Presidents, Presidents and Board chairman, the majority of them will insist on Microsoft for the desktop, (Period).

As long as corporations hire the most experience for the least money, (admins secretaries etc.) they will insist on Microsoft (Period).

As long as Corporate Officers have to concentrate on the business at hand, (Making Money), they will insist on Microsoft, something they don't have to learn.

I started out as a lab rat, then went onto systems engineering in the field, now I am a Project Manager. I do not want any company I work for to have to STOP business, so that they can TRAIN everyone with LOTS of MONEY, so that they can use anything other than the corporate standard. I can come up with too many reasons right now why a global company will not put Linux or other non MS product on their desktops.

As a server in the IT department, Internet,Intranet uses.... wonderful. Desktop, nope, nada, never. ........ FINI!

NOT.

Why are there people like you?
Why do you think it is funny and original to add comments like this to any MS related forum going?

So you do not like Vista - fine MOVE ON THEN.

How about you explain each of the elements in your list V vista and try to enlighten others?

Hi
how can I make the All program appare as a menu like in XP
and how can I disable the Hibernat

Thanks

Open a command prompt and issue the command:



powercfg -H OFF


Jim

are available with a program from YamicaSoft called Vista Manager. I do not want to advertise for the program; but as it is...

It incorporates all of the tweaks mentioned here and many more from a GUI and was apparently written for Vista and is not an extension of XP tweaks, though it incorporates some. It is the only registry cleaner that I have found that does not destroy some setting.

So far my only complaint is that it is incredibly slow - like Java on downers. It comes in 32 and 64 bit flavors and can be found at: http://www.yamicsoft.com/

The trial version seems to be unrestricted for 30 days.

Hi Pals:
These are tricks or helps, but not tweaks. Is there any way to make Vista more productive an faster, other than adding 2GH of RAM?
Rgrds.

Jorge Ricaldoni

All you have to do to get to the run command is to use the windows and R key combination and the run command opens right up. Why would you want to put it into the menu? This key combination has worked for a while on previous versions of windows.

yes, "Windows-R" still brings up "Run".

I agree with Rob, I found the "Run" facility under XP not very useful. Instead, I put a shortcut to cmd.exe on the Start menu. That is much mure useful.

I'm curious if the author has even used Vista?

Why do you need the run command on the start menu? You have the search box. It is your NEW run command.

Go ahead try it. Type Calc, type ping www.techrepublic.com; it does it all.

Why waste valuable space on the start menu?

Didn't know you could do that with the search box.. I was wondering why they hid the run command by default. Now I know.. Thanks for the info!

Once I found the quicklaunch bar and found I could show it above the running apps, I all but stopped using the Start Menu or Desktop. I have shortcuts to all of my commonly used apps there (including the Run command) and can acces them with one click no matter what's on the screen.


As a side note, all of these Tips and Tricks could apply to XP. It must have been a slow news day...

many laptops do not have the Windows key.

I only buy laptops for myself and I have some very old ones. Even my old PII laptops have windows keys on them and I would certainly not run Vista on that. If you have a laptop without a windows key (that is not a mac) I would doubt that it can run Vista.

apparently these other professionals overlook this simple shortcut...

I use it multiple times a day