CHA BOY

Vista is such a silly feature porker I think you should call it Bloat Float Wiper -- or something equally/more humorously depreciating of what a silly parade float of features Windows has become in the latest Vista 'incarnation'...

Indeed. They're so similar you can swap their activation components.

Somehow that didn't work for me

Installed 64Bit ultimate version without a serial - can't wait for Nlite to support Vista - so much to trim down

Edited November 15, 200619 yr by -.-PhanTom-.-

cant wait to get my hands on an nlite-ed vista x64 version... -

there is sooo mutch to rip out,

and you know what (if you use the rc2 key (takes a litlle extra modifications),

youl have just a bit longer than 30day's te test vista

in the end (i at least) will deside whether to buy vista, also based on the question if ill be-able to nlite' it enought...

Can you two please filter yourself from pirate talk

You shouldn't have the RTM already...if you do I don't want to know, just tell me it's RC version or something.

nLiteVE ......nLitePE .....nLite3k ....nLite II....

(Vista Edition-Premium Edition)

Can hardly wait for it! focus on crap-ware (Accessibility Option, for example!!) first!

nLite 2.0 is what I suggest. nLiter is also very cool!

To the person who asked: pronto means ready in italian

nVista

I like nVista also...

Looks like nVidia oO

How about deMister? use it to help clear your view

The Vista license forbids any installation in virtual hardware or emulators.

Its April 1st, right?

Nope, November 15th actually so erm.......

One of these days Microshaft will licence themselves out of

being able to release any of their own software then... yay!!

NO MORE Microsoft software! All their code is stolen from

other companies [cough]STAC DOS[/cough] anyway, why

do you think they charge so much money for their software?

Its to pay off all the multi million dollar lawsuits.

Well, if Vista is nLiteable then I can maybe live with it, but

theres no way I am using Vista untweaked/unmodded.

I still think "nLite VE" would be the best name, the main thing

being not to deviate away from the word "nLite" because it

is FAMOUS now! Everyone knows the name. Its bad news

changing a name I think but hey, its only what I think, why

should that matter.

Heres a tip that shows how bloody sneaky Microsoft are: Install

Vista in VMware, you need to set VMware on 512Mb RAM m'kay,

otherwise it simply will not install. Now, when its installed, power

off VMware and drop the RAM right down to as low as 224Mb and

start it up again. What do you notice? Not only does Vista RUN on

224Mb of RAM but it runs just as smoothly as it does on 512Mb, so

in this case, what possible reason, however flimsy, could M$ use

to justify an OS that refuses to install unless the machine has 512Mb

RAM but then that runs perfectly well on 256Mb RAM, less in fact?

Can anyone answer that question? Like ummm, a Microsoft spokesman?

No because he/she will say the licence forbids you to install on a virtual

system! OMFG! Its not a joke either! Is THAT why its "forbidden" because

people like me will NOTICE things like the hardware RAM SCAM?

I can't wait to be able to strip Vista down! Strip it to within an inch

of its life! B)

well vista RC2 ran like crap on 1GB ram. i hope running nlite through this bloated garbage will help it decrease the ram usage

well vista RC2 ran like crap on 1GB ram. i hope running nlite through this bloated garbage will help it decrease the ram usage

The common mistake most people make is thinking having more RAM

will help. Come on this is Windoze we're talking about - if you have 1Gb

of RAM, Vista will use 800Mb of it. I can guarantee that if you had 2Gb

RAM, Vista would use 1.6Gb of it and if you had 4Gb RAM Vista would

use 3.2Gb of it, because thats how it works, XP is the same.

If you install XP on a machine with 64Mb RAM, it will run, on a wing and

a prayer and theres no "Fast User Switching" possible on 64Mb RAM but

XP will run. So then why is it - if you install XP on a system with 512Mb

RAM it uses more than 90Mb? Because thats the way it works! It doesn't

use 90Mb+ on a system with only 64Mb RAM because thats impossible!

This is what really sucks about Windows, it just rapes your resources at will.

No I am no fan of Linux, I actually think it sucks a lot more than Windows,

but at least Linux runs on something like 32Mb RAM and if you have 4Gb

RAM it STILL runs on the same - 32Mb RAM.

So when I ran Vista (Beta 2) in VMware, installed on 512Mb RAM (because

it WILL NOT INSTALL on any less than 512Mb RAM) then powered it off and

dropped the RAM to 224Mb it ran just as smooth as it did on 512Mb RAM.

Its an illusion to think its "slow" when you have 1Gb RAM. No, its just using

800Mb as it pleases.

If the Vista version of nLite is the same as the NT one then you will be able

to cut the RAM in half to about 400Mb. Vista has 40 running processes (I think)

I mean come on - FORTY processes? What the hell is that? Why does it run so

many? Get it stripped out - down to maximum 20 processes and about 50%

of the services ripped.

Asking "Do you want a version of nLite that supports Windows Vista?"

is like asking "Do you ever want to breathe/drink water/blink again?"

Does a bear s**t in the woods?

Is the pope a Nazi?

Yes to all

Edited November 16, 200619 yr by LeveL

LeveL, I like your style

One clarification though. It uses certain percentage of the RAM for cache, that's why it seems it takes almost all what you feed it with. But it's actually pretty useful...whatever you run it stays copied in memory for faster access if it wasn't changed on the HDD too. So, 2GB of ram will be filled but for example recopying WinXP installation files takes few seconds if you already did it few minutes ago or even more depending on the usage and changes.

And when that extra RAM is needed the cache is purged, no conspiracy

About processes, that's where the gold is.

I'm currently running Vista x64 RC2 build 5744, and I've gotta say, nuhi's got a lot of work ahead of himself The ONE "feature" of Vista x64 that is already p***ing me off, and really NEEDS to be removed it the "Driver Signature Enforcement." Was it not enough that every time you installed an unsigned driver you were cautioned about the sanity of such a thing? Does microsoft not realize that some programs like DaemonTools, Systool, and Speedfan are written by devs who don't have the time or the money to get their drivers WHQL'd? And there's no easy workaround, the "fix" is to hit F8 and disable it every frickin time you boot.

/rant

There's also a few dozen other things I could seriously do without (wireless/tablet integration, ease of access, etc), but all in all, it runs fairly decent on my A64 3500+...currently using 595MB of my 1gb of ram to run everything, but hey, the more that stays in ram, the less that goes to the page file, and the better the system runs.

BTW, I'm a linux junkie also, I only really use windows to play with the latest Vista Betas (which it looks like there won't be many more) or play games. Saying "Linux sucks" is like saying "cars suck". There's only one version of windows, but many distributions of linux, and you can't judge every linux distro based on your short-lived and short-tempered experience with one distro, which may or may not have been a crappy distro. In fact, there are many crappy distros out there, but only a few really good ones, and every distro is aimed at a different environment, be it desktop, laptop, embedded device, old hardware or new, or even high use servers and clusters. If you actually take the time to read the documentation (which isn't hard to get, just type "man <programname>") and learn how to use it, it works very well, and doesn't have the same crash-happy resource-gobbling attitude of windows. For anyone looking to try an all-around well-designed distro, give ubuntu a shot. There's a LiveCD, so you can try it before you install it, and much of Ubuntu is graphical, so it's rare to need to open the terminal. There's also forums and a wiki to help you if you need it.

I'm currently running Vista x64 RC2 build 5744, and I've gotta say, nuhi's got a lot of work ahead of himself The ONE "feature" of Vista x64 that is already p***ing me off, and really NEEDS to be removed it the "Driver Signature Enforcement." Was it not enough that every time you installed an unsigned driver you were cautioned about the sanity of such a thing? Does microsoft not realize that some programs like DaemonTools, Systool, and Speedfan are written by devs who don't have the time or the money to get their drivers WHQL'd? And there's no easy workaround, the "fix" is to hit F8 and disable it every frickin time you boot.

/rant

Umm, MS has a program that allows Dev's to certify their own drivers for FREE. Above that there is a program where for a small fee, much smaller than before, that MS will test and digitally sign the drivers.

I also believe that only the self certification, which MS leaves up to the Dev's to be honest, is all that is required for x64 Vista due to the kernel restrictions which on Windows IMO is a great thing.

The task at hand for the Dev's is for all of the developers to simply make their drivers x64 vista compliant to within MS's guidelines and then self sign them.