Sandisk CEO: ''Windows Vista not Optimized for SSDs''

[TheGuruStud]

Originally Posted by Mussels

the delete bug has been gone for a long time, it was in a hotfix, and permanently nuked in SP1.

I wish. Vista SP1 is on my buddies PC and I can see myself aging when waiting to copy over anything or deleting a folder with a few files when it takes about 15 secs. I haven't seen one install yet that it's been fixed on.

That's on a pretty fast system and fully defragged with O&O.

That's kinda why I said "consider yourself lucky" earlier lol. It might work for you, but I can find a million more where shit still doesn't work haha.

[Mussels]

Originally Posted by TheGuruStud

I wish. Vista SP1 is on my buddies PC and I can see myself aging when waiting to copy over anything or deleting a folder with a few files when it takes about 15 secs. I haven't seen one install yet that it's been fixed on.

That's on a pretty fast system and fully defragged with O&O.

well i only ever saw that bug on one vista install of mine, and i havent seen it on any of my 3 vista rigs since SP1.

i'd say he has a setup or config problem messing with it... oh and i dont like O&O, its buggy.

[TheGuruStud]

Originally Posted by Mussels

well i only ever saw that bug on one vista install of mine, and i havent seen it on any of my 3 vista rigs since SP1.

i'd say he has a setup or config problem messing with it... oh and i dont like O&O, its buggy.

2nd install and it was with sp1 integrated. I've encountered lots of vista laptops and everything is still RTM from my experience. O&O works great for me I use it on everything.
See, we're getting into the retardation of windows (what works fine on one doesn't on another).

[REVHEAD]

Vista would kill a ssd in 12 month flat haha, I dont think blaming Vista is the right term.

SSD drives only have a very limmited Read and write life roughly 1million writes on a given sector before it dies, I dont know how many a standard harddrive can take but I can be fairly confident its more than 20 times that, the tech is 2 immature and shouldnt be released for desktops untill it has matured more, for laptops I think its good ,but not for your everyday gaming rig.

I personally think they wont be feasable for at ;least another 24 months.

[Mussels]

Originally Posted by REVHEAD

Vista would kill a ssd in 12 month flat haha, I dont think blaming Vista is the right term.

SSD drives only have a very limmited Read and write life roughly 1million writes on a given sector before it dies, I dont know how many a standard harddrive can take but I can be fairly confident its more than 20 times that, the tech is 2 immature and shouldnt be released for desktops untill it has matured more, for laptops I think its good ,but not for your everyday gaming rig.

I personally think they wont be feasable for at ;least another 24 months.

if you read the news here more often, samsung have already developed drives with more read times than a mechanical drive. the tech is maturing fast.

[REVHEAD]

I am sorry for not trolling

[Mussels]

Originally Posted by REVHEAD

I am sorry for not trolling

wait, what?

i was just pointing out that SSD's dont have a limited life as many think, thats one of the first things they've been fixing as newer models come out.

[FatForester]

Originally Posted by TheGuruStud

I bet vista fails at SSD b/c it read/writes to it like a flash drive. Have you ever used a flash drive on vista? It's like using a 3.5 floppy. Actually, a 3.5 floppy is faster. But the interesting thing is that the perf. isn't completely abysmal using FAT, but using NTFS makes it so slow, it's literally useless. It would take an hour to load a multi-GB drive. I even remember trying to load just a few MBs of small files and it took 15 mins. Pathetic.

Are you talking about the progress bar on the top of the explorer window that essentially archives what's on the drive? I use a 750 GB external over USB on my laptop, and I'm not sure what you're talking about. It seems a lot more responsive and faster on Vista than it does on XP to be honest.

As far as the forever long copying, I only experienced that once or twice, but that was last year. They've gone through a lot of fixes, so you might want to give it another shot.

[TheGuruStud]

Originally Posted by FatForester

Are you talking about the progress bar on the top of the explorer window that essentially archives what's on the drive? I use a 750 GB external over USB on my laptop, and I'm not sure what you're talking about. It seems a lot more responsive and faster on Vista than it does on XP to be honest.

As far as the forever long copying, I only experienced that once or twice, but that was last year. They've gone through a lot of fixes, so you might want to give it another shot.

No, I disable its retarded indexing, it's useless. External HDDs don't have the issue, it pretty much only occurs on flash using ntfs. It's whack.