| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Ultimate Extras, Where are you? | |
|
||
| Time: 00:27 EST/05:27 GMT | News Source: Windows Connected | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
It has been over three months since we last saw anything from the Ultimate Extra team. Intially this was offered by Microsoft as one of the big value adds to the Ultimate version of Windows Vista, but to date I can't say they have delivered that much value. DreamScene was sweet but lasted only a few hours, Holdem was fun again only a half usable thing since it wasn't network capable, the Bitlocker tool was useful for some.... So what is up guys, have you gone on an extended vacation? Are we not going to see any more Extras? Is Microsoft out of ideas for what to offer? Anyone else disappointed in this so far? | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 175 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:25:52 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 11131 (24.136.209.253) at 6/14/2007 12:49:17 AM |
| I guess because all of the hype around Vista has died down.... |
| #2 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 6/14/2007 7:58:52 AM |
|
It's about time someone addressed this rip-off.
TL |
| #3 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 6/14/2007 8:23:44 AM |
|
As much as "Ultimate Extras" may disappoint, Windows Vista Ultimate can't be viewed in that limited context.
Here's just one example [okay, 2], let's say that a home power user (not to be confused with a user type in XP) wants to maintain UAC, but also wants UAC elevations to be less jarring - well, the user of Vista Ultimate has support for group policies and can disable the "Secure Desktop" when a UAC event is fired - Vista Home Premium users do not have the GPO Local Security Policy editor and they can't do this - they're stuck without as many options. Seems small, but it lets home users of Ultimate control and balance their experience with UAC. Another area is the credential cache - not present in Home Premium, but fully supported in Ultimate - and that matters for home SOHO users who lease space and services with a hosted Exchange provider using NTLM in support of user authentication. Just a couple of tiny areas that can have a huge impact on how a person works with a machine and as regards Vista Ultimate, that is only the a small part of what makes it unique and worth the difference in price. I know the temptation will be to brand me a shill <again> and a "Defender of the Empire" - which is silly - the threads track along the lines of "what makes Vista Ultimate different and worth the price?" I assess there is a lot that is different, more complete and better - and much that does not apply to purely business versions, or systems dedicated for home media support [hence the segmentation across Vista's different versions]. This post was edited by lketchum on Thursday, June 14, 2007 at 08:34. |
| #4 By 16797 (142.46.227.65) at 6/14/2007 8:35:01 AM |
|
#3 Oh, come on Iketchum - no need to defend Vista Ultimate. He is very specific and targeting Ultimate Extras.
|
| #5 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 6/14/2007 8:41:30 AM |
|
Well, no... a lot of guys have stated, "If I had it to do over again, I'd have skipped Ultimate and bought Home Premium" - when the topic was about Ultimate Extras.
Also, my defense is not of Ultimate, or Microsoft - that is for sure - my defense is of the people who bought Ultimate and their investment - trying to show how they can get the most out of it [for those that may not be in the business as TL is]. |
| #6 By 1474 (138.162.0.42) at 6/14/2007 9:02:31 AM |
| You are 100% correct #3; it's Ultimate because of what you get; comparing it to it's lesser versions; I wish that my MCE 2005 had all the processes of Windows XP (not Home). I have a copy of each Windows Vista; including the one I use at work (Enterprise) editions. Each one has been put thru the wringer; Ultimate (user) or Enterprise (business) is the best Vista’s. I don’t know why anyone would keep using XP. iPhone will have the same type problems because it won’t have buttons. |
| #7 By 25030 (12.159.165.115) at 6/14/2007 9:24:10 AM |
|
Yeah, somewhat disappointed about the lack of Extra's, but anyone who would buy Ultimate solely on the basis of the "extras" is simply either foolish or has too much money to spend. I run a domain at home, wanted the media features of Home Premium, and thus Ultimate was my choice for my main PC, and Business suits my other "lesser" boxes quite nicely.
Plus, since I run a small computer business, I would have gotten Ultimate anyway just so that I had every Vista feature and could provide better support to my Vista customers, given the array of "flavors". |
| #8 By 135 (216.17.26.137) at 6/14/2007 10:11:20 AM |
|
Like #7, I have Ultimate on one, and Business on another. I find nothing worthwhile about Ultimate. The only media stuff I use is in Media Player. If i wasn't on a domain, I'd say Home Premium is good enough.
That being said, I'm about ready to yank Vista and reinstall XP. It's just not ready yet. I had to turn off UAC. I don't like the new file explorer, because it has bugs. (Create New Folder, and you have to hit refresh to see it so you can rename it.) The main feature I like is the ability to user switch while on a domain. That's the compelling feature. Everything else just isn't ready yet. |
| #9 By 3 (86.1.34.106) at 6/14/2007 10:40:55 AM |
| #5 Well on my new system I did just that, went with Home Premium, couldn't be bothered with the other guff that comes with it. |
| #10 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 6/14/2007 11:21:13 AM |
|
I have to disagree with lketchum here, too. Yes, the Ultimate Extras aren't the only defining feature of Ultimate. Here's the problem I have with it (and what I posted on Josh's blog as well)--Microsoft needs a way of boosting revenue, and how can they do it with Windows? It's pretty much saturated already, so they can only increase the cost. If they stick with one or two SKUs, they'll never hear the end of it if they increase the cost (even if it only keeps up with inflation, I think!). So... someone had the bright idea of "premium" SKUs. When Ultimate was announced, not only did it include the features present in other versions, it included Ultimate Extras--something exclusive to Ultimate. Nothing else is exclusive to Ultimate--the rest of the features are found in other versions, just not all of them in the same version.
Now, that's all fine, but with Ultimate, those exclusives were future promises, not already shipping product. I think they've essentially collected their money in advance for those promised features, and now they don't care so much about delivering. It's great to say to shareholders "we're having great sales of premium SKUs," but hey, that's only the buyer's part of the bargain. Microsoft has to own up to theirs with Ultimate. |
| #11 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 6/14/2007 3:33:42 PM |
| #10, Good points. I now have to agree that Microsoft will have to do more to differentiate Vista Ultimate. Thanks for the perspective. L |
| #12 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 6/15/2007 8:07:51 AM |
|
That's a very good question someone wrote up there.
"If I knew then what I know now, would I have still purchased Vista Ultimate". I've thought about this quite a bit. And I have to say my answer is............. No. I just can't help but feel a bit suckered on this deal. If I knew then what I know now, I would have purchased Premium instead. The only thing I would really miss is the backup program. While simple (frustratingly simple in ways), it does indeed keep the machine backed up in a non-intrusive way. I'm also with #7. If my HD were to fail, or the system irrepairably crash where I would have to rebuild, I really would have to thing long and hard about reinstalling Vista instead of XP. This decision would be based solely on: 1. The hardware I have that isn't fully functional on Vista (doesn't matter who's fault it is) 2. Slow file/network performance. I've got 3TB of server space at home and it's a pain in the ass to get to it quickly. And that's it. I don't have any problems with stability or overall performance. Those two items above are enough to make me consider shelving it for a while though. TL. BTW... Has anyone else ended up with a "Hit Ctrl-Alt-Delete To Log In" screen instead of the usual password screen since installing tuesday's updates? Where can that be turned off? |
| #13 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 6/15/2007 8:53:00 AM |
|
#12, TL, you may have tried this already, so if you have, pardon the recommendation:
Open a command line as an admin in Vista. Enter the following command: netsh interface tcp set global autotuninglevel=highlyrestricted Reboot the computer. If you ever want to set it back to Vista's default, enter the following command and reboot: netsh interface tcp set global autotuninglevel=normal ***Some network devices and interfaces do not fully support auto frame tuning, which is native to Windows Vista and Windows Server 2003 with SP/1 |
| #14 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 6/15/2007 9:01:05 AM |
|
In addition to the above [which I would try first] and if people have specific issues as listed below, follow the guidance provided:
The copy process may stop responding when you try to copy files from a server on a network to a Windows Vista-based computer http://support.microsoft.com/kb/931770 When you copy large files to or from earlier operating systems, the copy operation may be slower than expected on some Windows Vista-based computers http://support.microsoft.com/kb/932170 If you'd like more information about "TCP Extensions for High Performance" - please reference RFC-1323, which supercedes, RFC's 1072 and 1185. See, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1323.txt Again, if this is all old news, please excuse the recommendations. Note also, some network security software running client side, can greatly slow network throughput. Panda's Network Secure agent, for example and many consumer products like McAfee have been observed to cause NW and I/O slowdowns. |
| #15 By 48398 (130.13.158.88) at 6/15/2007 9:40:27 AM |
|
I've been using Ultimate x64 since November and so far my only complaint is the lack of the repair install feature. That's a BIG one in my book. Almost had to break my 3 year no-reload record. This post was edited by Crand2 on Friday, June 15, 2007 at 09:40. |
| #16 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 6/15/2007 1:24:29 PM |
|
What exactly does that do IK ?
Also, my server does indeed run Server 2003 SP1 enterprise. TL |
| #17 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 6/15/2007 1:25:30 PM |
|
Thanks for the idea's IK!
TL |
| #18 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 6/15/2007 9:58:24 PM |
|
#16, 17, TL, first, TCP isn't a very good protocol - one has to think of it as a very long pipe that works best when it is full - so filling that pipe and keeping it filled is important, which reveals its biggest problems - there is no really good way to communicate how full the pipe is, or how full it needs to be, or what the flow rate would be if it were full.
So take one PC at one end and some kind of interface at the other - NAS, another PC, etc... As the RFC states, TCP performance depends not upon the transfer rate itself, but rather upon the product of the transfer rate and the round-trip delay. This "bandwidth*delay product" measures the amount of data that would "fill the pipe"; it is the buffer space required at sender and receiver to obtain maximum throughput on the TCP connection over the path, i.e., the amount of unacknowledged data that TCP must handle in order to keep the pipeline full. It is the unacknowledged data that is the killer - dropped packets [per window] devastate TCP performance. This would be like the pipe draining out and having to fill back up again - and that is exactly what is happening to your I/O. Ok... on to Vista... it attempts to compensate for this by tuning the window scale, but the problem is that with spme interfaces, devices and drivers the packet loss can go up dramatically. So the command tells the software that controls the automating window scaling to use a more restricted size - lowering the probability that one will drop packets. It works very simply by lowering what we'll call a factor [for the sake of illustration] - e.g., window size as to window scale, where we're telling the window scale to be smaller. Vista's and W2K3's auto tuning attempts to adjust this on fly - we're just telling it to use a smaller factor to stop the dropping of packets and keep the pipe full. Let me know if this work - even a little and then I can suggest more about how to tune the stack and if you swap out gear - say a Linksys router for a new D-Link with support for MS's Rally technologies, let me know and I'll help you tune it up. |
| #19 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 6/17/2007 12:37:44 PM |
|
Ok, so basically you're talking about the TCP window. Got it :)
It would take one hell of a lot for me to give up my DLink DGL-4300 Router. Probably never happen :) TL |
| #20 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 6/18/2007 9:15:11 AM |
|
#19, Very nice router you have there. D-Link has impressed us and we use their equipment for many home builds. Their newest routers and access points leverage MS Rally technologies that make us of the Link Layer Topology Discovery [LLTD] protocol and MS's "Responder" in Vitsa [also available as a patch for XP] and UPnP-x - it pretty much makes setting up a home wired/wireless network a matter of clicking on the discovered device - something as simple as, "I'm in a home network [where Vista uses a profile for that], and I want to go to the Internet via this device..."
On the 4300, what firmware rev are you running and what QoS filters [if any] have you enabled, or disabled? The 4300 support SPI and Vista users have reported some issues with that router [going back to build 5308], which were more or less resolved in RC2 and later. I say more or less, as some users continued to have issues under Vista, depending upon what router firmware they were running and what settings thay had applied [SPI (on by default) and QoS, ToS, etc..]. |
| #21 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 6/18/2007 10:05:45 AM |
|
Firmware 1.8. I have no issues with it other than the known quirk with IPSec Pass-Thru.
With certain VPN clients (such as CheckPoint SecureClient) you actually have to DISABLE IPSec Pass-Thru. Strange, but true. I have a very high speed Cable Connection and need a router than can handle all the Wan-To-Lan thru-put it provides. This was one of the few that could do it (passing 90+ mbit/sec -Second fastest router ever tested at the time). It also supports 1000 IP connections, about 10 times more than the average router. It has been online with no resets or maintenance for 6 months now, other than the firmware update to 1.8. TL |
| #22 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 6/18/2007 10:19:09 AM |
|
Oh, and I don't use QoS at all. I've got enough bandwidth that it just doesn't matter :)
I can be downloading 10 files and my VOIP is still clear as a bell. TL |
| #23 By 23275 (24.179.4.158) at 6/18/2007 11:12:45 AM |
|
#22, Then, you'd have turned it <QoS> off the the interface(s) in Vista - as it the QoS Packet Scheduler is on by default, and would be seen by the router's SPI [State-full Packet Inspector and favor the packets associated with popular games. It uses packet shaping and applies some intelligence to route such packets over others.
D-Link brands their packet shaping as "GameFuel" - their priority technology. While we love the router, among the first things we teach a customer using this router is how to turn this feature on/off and how to add applications rules to the SPI/GameFuel filter and how to use the firmware update notification utility. As you point out, it is a great router and opposite that hog of an Internet connection you have, it would be ideal. This post was edited by lketchum on Monday, June 18, 2007 at 11:13. |
| #24 By 2960 (24.254.95.224) at 6/18/2007 11:57:13 AM |
|
Yep, have configured the router so :)
I'll look into the Vista settings. Another thing I love about this router is the ability to assign Static IP's to everything on the Network via the MAC address instead of having to go to every device and manually set it up. It's a lot easier to maintain static's in a web page instead of running all over the house and setting 10 devices manually :) TL |
| #25 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 6/18/2007 1:42:06 PM |
|
TL, what kind of connection (speed) do you have??? Did you get in a beta to test channel-bonding or something???
I have been avoiding DLink--I don't know if they had a bad run of hardware for awhile there or what, but everything I bought had some serious reliability issues. I have a Belkin pre-N router now, and though I haven't been a Belkin fan (and though the router is pretty light when it comes to features), it has been rock-solid. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 175 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:25:52 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
