If you set up unimportant applications that start "importing" after the system has started 10 to 15 minutes, Vista (or XP) will complete the boot process faster. The next step: you use Startup Delayer, a free utility that can delay (at the discretion of the user) launching applications along with the computer startup process. This will help boost both the start-up and operation performance of the entire system. First, if the computer is equipped with 1GB of memory, it's time to upgrade to at least 2GB. Solution: In fact, you have a lot of methods to make your Vista or XP system boot faster. Meanwhile, with the same computer, Windows 7 can finish booting in about 43 seconds. Problem : The 2-year-old Acer Aspire One netbook you're using takes almost 2 minutes to boot Vista. Better control over Windows 7 than in Vista and don't bother users too often.) However, you can apply some of the below methods to "Vista", from which the operating system will get a bit more. Unofficial speed tests show that Windows 7 is "faster" than Vista and many users also commented that Windows 7 feels faster in everyday tasks (probably because of the User Account Control feature). However, you can also equip Windows XP or Vista with the "top" features available in Windows 7. Shouldn’t applications get the functionality right before applying animated menus and Teletubby graphics, or is advancing age making me grumpy? I’d be pleased to hear your views, as always.People are eagerly waiting for Windows 7 because Microsoft promises this new OS version will be fast, beautiful and has more attractive features than ever. When users hark back to the halcyon days of Windows XP search, you know something is seriously amiss. I’ve experienced first-hand its stubborn refusal, despite a full index, to acknowledge the existence of a file I know exists, based on a search for a specific term within that file that I know is in there somewhere a file that Google Desktop search, or old wingrep, finds in seconds. However, it has not fixed the more fundamental problem that, for most users, the search still does not work reliably. It works more like a web search and offers a new search syntax, called Advanced Query Syntax, which allows you to search on file author, file size, date ranges (e.g. It’s certainly true that Microsoft has added new features and a certain polish to Windows Search 4.0, the latest incarnation. Sadly, with Windows 7, Microsoft seems to have fallen into the familiar trap of adding bells and whistles before finishing the song. I can actually read the files of my PC into a database, mimic the directory/folder hierarchies and then find files in a flash but when I do the same with Windows Vista, we are suddenly back in a 1960s time warp.įinding files based on their name is bad enough, but finding files based on the content that they contain is more or less asking for an opportunity to wait 20 minutes in order to see a “file not found” message. What’s this? It does a brute-force search for file names? Here we are in an age when we can breed mice that glow in the dark, and manufacture computers that fit in our shirt pockets, and we find an operating system that is still entirely innocent of managing and indexing content in hierarchical data. The first thing I notice within Windows is that the facility to find files or text within files is called ‘search’ rather than ‘find’. It is an important, though mundane, part of an operating system to be able to find files. I have a copy of Google Desktop that can find phrases within emails or documents, almost as quickly. Why is it that Windows has so much difficulty in finding content on its file system? This is not an insurmountable technical problem on my laptop, I have a database within which I can instantly find text or names within millions of records, within 300 milliseconds.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |