Vista - Vista Install Experience

My test system is a Dell 2.4 GHz with 1GB RAM and lots of disk.

Thus far I have installed Vista 6 times. The first four were 5308 and the
last two 5384 builds. Half of those installs were either DOA or quick
working in some key way within the first day. The same DVD was used in each
case.

My first 5384 lost all the menus within the first few reboots. Could not
get them back. Reinstalled a second time. That install went OK, but
performance was roughly only 10% of XP performance of same PC. Performance
was much much worse than in 5308. Am now doing the third 5384 install to
see what occurs there.

Same system has 95/98/ME/2000/XP/2003 installed in various partitions. All
of these installed without issues and all run at similar peformance rates.
9.x are generally slower and NT kernels faster. Same hardware in each case
(basic PC plus a modem and RAID card).

Ed

Third install of 5384 is currently running at a more normal performance
rate. Used same DVD as last time. Have no clue as to the reason.

Ed

--
Thanks... Ed Dixon
"Ed Dixon" <eddixon@mtnsys.com> wrote in message
news:eJxO%23xmgGHA.1856@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> My test system is a Dell 2.4 GHz with 1GB RAM and lots of disk.
>
> Thus far I have installed Vista 6 times. The first four were 5308 and
> the last two 5384 builds. Half of those installs were either DOA or quick
> working in some key way within the first day. The same DVD was used in
> each case.
>
> My first 5384 lost all the menus within the first few reboots. Could not
> get them back. Reinstalled a second time. That install went OK, but
> performance was roughly only 10% of XP performance of same PC.
> Performance was much much worse than in 5308. Am now doing the third 5384
> install to see what occurs there.
>
> Same system has 95/98/ME/2000/XP/2003 installed in various partitions.
> All of these installed without issues and all run at similar peformance
> rates. 9.x are generally slower and NT kernels faster. Same hardware in
> each case (basic PC plus a modem and RAID card).
>
> Ed
>
>

Although performance was much better, install 7 lasted less than a day
before most of the desktop disappeared as well as virtually all menus.

Install #8.

Ed


"Ed Dixon" <eddixon@mtnsys.com> wrote in message
news:eJxO%23xmgGHA.1856@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> My test system is a Dell 2.4 GHz with 1GB RAM and lots of disk.
>
> Thus far I have installed Vista 6 times. The first four were 5308 and
> the last two 5384 builds. Half of those installs were either DOA or quick
> working in some key way within the first day. The same DVD was used in
> each case.
>
> My first 5384 lost all the menus within the first few reboots. Could not
> get them back. Reinstalled a second time. That install went OK, but
> performance was roughly only 10% of XP performance of same PC.
> Performance was much much worse than in 5308. Am now doing the third 5384
> install to see what occurs there.
>
> Same system has 95/98/ME/2000/XP/2003 installed in various partitions.
> All of these installed without issues and all run at similar peformance
> rates. 9.x are generally slower and NT kernels faster. Same hardware in
> each case (basic PC plus a modem and RAID card).
>
> Ed
>
>