Windows 7, would you switch?

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by pepsi

The sidebar works fine, your computer must be running on old bulocks. I am enjoying it so far (build 7127) and I already pre-ordered the wompi little thing. The thing that has made me waste hours of research (and still doesn't work) is that it has a little moocher of a pre-installed AAC decoder making it impossible to encode AAC through directshow. Blasted Microsoft bloatwear.

AnimeTheme actually *writes* gadgets for the sidebar... so he's got some insight into it.

What he's probably encountering are new "quirks" in the updated sidebar that are forcing him to rewrite some stuff that SHOULD work fine but doesn't in the new sidebar.

[AnimeTheme]

Originally Posted by Vexx

AnimeTheme actually *writes* gadgets for the sidebar... so he's got some insight into it.

What he's probably encountering are new "quirks" in the updated sidebar that are forcing him to rewrite some stuff that SHOULD work fine but doesn't in the new sidebar.

The Windows 7 sidebar is basically fully "functional". The problem is that the rendering speed is sometimes HORRIBLY SLOW (on Windows 7, some tiny gadget animations can suck up a full core of your CPU dry, while the same things are using ignorable CPU power on Vista).

With the help of a patient Windows 7 (RTM) user, I think I have already solved the majority part of the Windows 7 sidebar slowdown problem.

As expected, the major cause of slowdown is the g:background object. The problem becomes very obvious if:

1) The gadget/background is big.
2) The background image is stretched
3) The gadget updates the screen fast (more than a few times per second).

Accidentally, I have found out a nice workaround: set the opacity of g:background as 0 (even if your background is already a dummy transparent one, you still have to do it to avoid the slowdown bug). This will render the g:background object practically useless, but you can simply move its task over to the g:image object. So now, basically you just load a dummy bg as g:backgorund, set its opacity as 0 (the most important part), and move everything else to g:image or conventional IMG.

Note that even if you apply this fix, the overall rendering performance of Windows 7 sidebar is still slower than the Vista version, though it is already much better than before. There are simply some underlying performance issues on the sidebar.exe itself which can't be overcome by users. We can only hope that Microsoft will release an actual fix on this (if they ever will).

I hope my experiences can help any gadget writers here.

[npal]

Sidebar slowdown problems? O_o

As in WHERE? I don't remember having a problem with Win 7 gadgets. If anything, the four gadgets I run feel better in 7 than they did in Vista, so I'm not sure which gadgets have this performance issue. From my personal experience so far, I see nothing wrong with them, if anything, I think the current Win 7 sidebar implementation is better than its Vista counterpart.

[AnimeTheme]

Originally Posted by npal

Sidebar slowdown problems? O_o

As in WHERE? I don't remember having a problem with Win 7 gadgets. If anything, the four gadgets I run feel better in 7 than they did in Vista, so I'm not sure which gadgets have this performance issue. From my personal experience so far, I see nothing wrong with them, if anything, I think the current Win 7 sidebar implementation is better than its Vista counterpart.

If you want to experience the slowdown, download the old version of my "System Animator" gadget.

http://www.animetheme.com/sidebar/at...ator_v3530.zip

On the settings panel, "Folder for animation images" part, select "Demo 07 - MacFace 01" and leave the other settings at default, or select "Demo 08 - CaramellDansen Animation: Popotan" and choose "Fixed value (100%)" as the activity monitored. Run like 6 instances of System Animator gadget under the same settings. On Windows 7, you will probably notice some significant CPU usage on the sidebar.exe process, while it is almost ignorable (0-1%) on Vista.

[npal]

Well, that does sound nice but I have to ask...

1) WHY should I run 6 instances of that?

Secondly, there is indeed a huge CPU usage with running 6 of them. However why should I consider it the sidebar.exe 's fault and not like this : "Microsoft made some changes in sidebar.exe for some reasons which made your gadget incompatible with it and in need of a fix" , a scenario that happens with MANY programs every time a new OS is rolled out?

[AnimeTheme]

Originally Posted by npal

Well, that does sound nice but I have to ask...

1) WHY should I run 6 instances of that?

Secondly, there is indeed a huge CPU usage with running 6 of them. However why should I consider it the sidebar.exe 's fault and not like this : "Microsoft made some changes in sidebar.exe for some reasons which made your gadget incompatible with it and in need of a fix" , a scenario that happens with MANY programs every time a new OS is rolled out?

Because this is the simplest way to reproduce the problem and make it easily observable. Seriously, I can give a single piece of animation that can suck up a full core of your CPU dry if you think running 6 is stupid.

If this is not the sidebar.exe's fault, go ahead and teach me why the exact same thing runs perfectly fine on Vista's sidebar? It's NOT a matter of compatibility. The gadget is fully functional. It's just the speed is VERY SLOW.

I hope you do understand what we are talking about before you want to continue discussing on this issue.

[npal]

Well, since I'm no programmer, whatever I say won't make a difference at this point so you can blame sidebar. Hopefully Vexx manages to understand my point so he can convey it to you in terms you could understand, since he is more knowledgeable on the particular field than me.

[AnimeTheme]

Originally Posted by npal

Well, since I'm no programmer, whatever I say won't make a difference at this point so you can blame sidebar. Hopefully Vexx manages to understand my point so he can convey it to you in terms you could understand, since he is more knowledgeable on the particular field than me.

I do understand what you are talking about. If you are right, it means there should be a "standard" way in Windows 7 for me to fix my codes. However, the fact is, NO such method exists. In fact, Windows 7 is using the exact same gadget API as Vista, along with some new extensions, so there is no such thing as the "some changes in Windows 7 sidebar break my codes" issue. The ONLY way you can (partially) overcome the slowdown problem is to do what I said on my post up there, which is obviously NOT a solution, but merely a workaround/compromise to avoid the problem which can only be caused by some kind of BUG in Windows 7 sidebar.

The most stupid thing is, g:background (the major cause of slowdown) is a key gadget component that is used in almost every single gadget, so it means every gadget is affected to a certain extent. The reason why most users/developers don't notice it is because 99% of the gadgets out there are 1) small, 2) just use a fixed background without ever changing it, and 3) very "static" in nature which rarely update the screen (the "busiest" gadget most people ever use is probably the CPU/RAM meter, which is still 1fps at most. Next is those countless clock gadgets, and unless you use the second hand, it updates just once per minute. For the rest of them, they usually updates irregularly, rarely, or NEVER at all other than perhaps some mouse interactions). And there is at least a few more bugs/problems I can point out that exist in Windows 7 sidebar but not in Vista.

[chikorita157]

I have ordered myself Windows 7 Professional Upgrade 64-bit with the student offer and planning to upgrade my Bootcamp partition which have Windows Vista Business 64-bit installed... Hopefully it should improve since the last time I used the RC build of Windows 7 and planning to do some performance tests... but I highly doubt the boot times and shut down times will compare to Mac OS X Snow Leopard which take less time to boot and shut down...

I will be performing a 3DMark 06 test to see if there was any improvement since the RC build which did a little slower last time... and lastly Audiosurf.

[Vexx]

I'm hoping the commercial release version of Win7 will run on some equipment that apparently lacked drivers for elements of the mobo in the RC candidate. Otherwise, I have to find my Product Code list amongst my many piles of clutter.

[chikorita157]

I'm not to thrilled on how long it took to upgrade from Windows Vista Business to Windows 7. It took nearly 1 hour and 6 minutes to fully have a functional computer... which is unacceptable since Snow Leopard in contrast only took 45 minutes to upgrade... but you have to factor in the reboot times as well...

I will be testing the performance after I fixed the graphics drivers and finished with all the tests.

[aeriolewinters]

and Snow Leopard seems to have a huge appetite apparently...

[Renegade334]

...Which might be the last of Apple's worries, in comparison to the more serious user data deletion issue that has plagued 10.6's release.

[chikorita157]

Originally Posted by Renegade334

...Which might be the last of Apple's worries, in comparison to the more serious user data deletion issue that has plagued 10.6's release.

That only affects users who have the guest account enabled and it's going to be fixed in 10.6.2...

I have been using Mac OS X Snow Leopard for nearly 2 months and I haven't got into any major problems...

Anyways, I have finish compiling the results to all the benchmarks... Windows 7 seems to boot a few seconds faster, but it's still slow compared to Mac OS X and Linux with boot times and shut down times. Windows 7 nearly takes one minute to shut down, which is unacceptable... and I highly doubt it will be fixed in Windows 8.

3DMark06
3DMark06 primarily tests on the DirectX 9.0c capabilities (SM 2.0 and 3.0) and DirectX9.0c is used in most games that are currently out there.

Spoiler for graph:

Windows 7 seem to have a slim lead of 192 3DMarks over Windows vista, about a 3% improvement... Most gamers won't notice this small performance boost, but once improved drivers come out, hopefully this score will be higher.

Geekbench 2
Geekbench tests primarily on CPU and Memory.

Spoiler for graph:

Again, not much a difference in performance for Windows 7 and Vista, but Windows 7 with this benchmark is 19% slower than Mac OS X Snow Leopard, because there are differences in the architecture of the operating system.

Spoiler for graph:

Windows Vista and 7 seem to have a small avantage with stream and more of an advantage of Integer, but they are still lacking in floating point and memory.

Conclusion
Windows 7 seems to be a improvement on Vista, but not much faster although 7 benefits from lower memory usage. Windows 7 tries hard to be Mac OS X in the interface, but the result is that from users who are used to Windows XP will have a hard time adjusting to the new interface Windows 7 provides. For XP users, Windows 7 may be worth the upgrade but at the same time, Vista won't benefit much from a performance gain proven in the benchmarks, which Windows 7 may not worth the $99/$199 to upgrade (and it's expensive hit to take, but I didn't have to since I only paid $30 for the Professional upgrade)...

I still wish that Windows 7 would get rid of the registry and go back to using flat files to store settings like Linux and Mac OS X does...

Test Machine: Unibody Macbook Pro, Intel Core2 Duo P8600 at 2.4 GHz (3 MB cache, 1022 MHz FSB), 2 GB DDR3 RAM, nVidia Geforce 9600 GT 256 MB vRAM, 500 GB 5400 RPM Western Digital Scorpio Blue.

[Vexx]

I still wish that Windows 7 would get rid of the registry and go back to using flat files to store settings like Linux and Mac OS X does...

That remains my biggest beef with the usability of Windows -- the registry. Using it for the OS? Sure, whatever. Using it for apps and games? Biggest dumbass move in the world. Thanks, you made it an utter mess to back up applications or games.
"Just re-install" sucks your remaining seconds of life away ...

[felix]

Originally Posted by Vexx

That remains my biggest beef with the usability of Windows -- the registry. Using it for the OS? Sure, whatever. Using it for apps and games? Biggest dumbass move in the world.

Its a database form of text files; if it can be screwed up people will find a way. I think you're just playing into the hype of "stupid windows user" (not that programs don't mess it up on a regular basis too).

[chikorita157]

Originally Posted by Vexx

That remains my biggest beef with the usability of Windows -- the registry. Using it for the OS? Sure, whatever. Using it for apps and games? Biggest dumbass move in the world. Thanks, you made it an utter mess to back up applications or games.
"Just re-install" sucks your remaining seconds of life away ...

Windows Registry looks good on paper, but in practice it does not. The registry is the most inefficient design which is very complicated... and the biggest problem is that when you uninstall a program, it can leave registry entries behind that can pile up and impact the system most commonly known as Windows rot, or the gradual degrade of performance.

With Unix based systems like Linux and Mac OS X, they use XML files to store settings and if anything goes wrong, you can just remove the offending setting file. Also, you can have it create itself without any complication and you can easily backup the settings since they are just regular files... On the other hand, the Windows Registry is very complicated with different structures that can be frustrating when you are trying to remove registry entries created by malware and most will end up reinstalling the OS which is very counterproductive... If Windows just get rid of the registry and go use XML files, then it would be alot easier to solve the problem by getting rid of the offending setting file and get rid of setting files created by malware.

Also, XML setting files are alot more human readable than registry entries are since they are just plain text.

[felix]

Originally Posted by chikorita157

Also, XML setting files are alot more human readable than registry entries are since they are just plain text.

XML is a crap standard; god I hate hype. May be human readable, but its hardly something a human would read past 30 lines and more then 3-4 tags (seriously). When you take out the "human readable" part out of the sale pitch it just becomes a very slow (probably overly complicated) format.

Take this simple custom format,

something: lorem ipsum

...now compare to equivalent XML more human readable equivalent:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<document xmlns="http://www.example.org/example">
   <setting>
      <name>something</name>
      <value>lorem ipsum</value>
   </setting>
</document>

My problem with it though is that it takes forever to load, damn interpreters.

[Revenger1589]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyRyjNPZN8c

OK, I seriously need this.

P.S. beware of the last frame.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by chikorita157

With Unix based systems like Linux and Mac OS X, they use XML files to store settings and if anything goes wrong, you can just remove the offending setting file.

I've used Linux for well over a decade now, and I can't think of one major program where the configuration file I've edited is in XML. Most of them are simply key-value pairs in plain text. Compared to the registry, these files are much easier to manage, if you know where to find them (usually in /etc but not always). Apache has some tendency to use tags in configurations, especially for VirtualHost definitions where you'll see things like:

<VirtualHost *:80>
ServerName blahblah.animesuki.com
DirectoryRoot /home/animesuki/blahblah
<Directory "/home/animesuki/blahblah">
Options All
</Directory>
</VirtualHost>

I guess that's vaguely XML-like, but in general Apache configurations use key-value pairs like

Listen 192.168.99.1:80