Comments on: Beta 2: Stable, But Scary http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/ Connecting Ideas Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:52:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Computer Guru http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/#comment-2577 Computer Guru Thu, 29 Jun 2006 19:22:59 +0000 http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191#comment-2577 Hello Tanveer. I'm not sure that's possible: Windows XP boots at 10-15k handles.... and running any programs gets it quite a bit higher - 8k is quite low (like Windows 2000!) Hello Tanveer.

I’m not sure that’s possible: Windows XP boots at 10-15k handles…. and running any programs gets it quite a bit higher – 8k is quite low (like Windows 2000!)

]]> By: Tanveer Badar http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/#comment-2571 Tanveer Badar Thu, 29 Jun 2006 12:34:52 +0000 http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191#comment-2571 I recall installing visual studio 2005 and handle count went to about 46K on my P4 system with 768MB DDR RAM. It went back to about 8K after installation and I was able to use my system without any speed bumps or reboots. I don't know where did you get that limit of 30K handles on a windows xp machine. I haven't ever performed any performance tweaks on that system. I recall installing visual studio 2005 and handle count went to about 46K on my P4 system with 768MB DDR RAM. It went back to about 8K after installation and I was able to use my system without any speed bumps or reboots. I don’t know where did you get that limit of 30K handles on a windows xp machine. I haven’t ever performed any performance tweaks on that system.

]]> By: Windows Vista Build 5456 Released at The NeoSmart Blog http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/#comment-2509 Windows Vista Build 5456 Released at The NeoSmart Blog Tue, 27 Jun 2006 21:20:37 +0000 http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191#comment-2509 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Beta 2: Stable, But Scary [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> [...] Beta 2: Stable, But Scary [...]

]]> By: Computer Guru http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/#comment-2190 Computer Guru Tue, 20 Jun 2006 16:18:05 +0000 http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191#comment-2190 Hello Kris :D You say XP can manage 90k handles with heavy tweaking - do you have any idea how much Linux or Mac (BSD) can? I'm just wondering if it's an architectural inevitability of the x86 processors, or software-engineering error. Hello Kris :D

You say XP can manage 90k handles with heavy tweaking – do you have any idea how much Linux or Mac (BSD) can?

I’m just wondering if it’s an architectural inevitability of the x86 processors, or software-engineering error.

]]> By: Kristan Kenney http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/#comment-2189 Kristan Kenney Tue, 20 Jun 2006 16:15:26 +0000 http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191#comment-2189 Windows Vista's GDI limits have been improved as well allowing for the higher handle number. Windows XP can and will handle it if you do some modifications, as will Windows Server 2003 with Service Pack 1. I like what you said about Windows 2000 - I had an older IBM ThinkPad running Windows 2000 for about 2 1/2 years without any problems or crashes and that laptop even got dropped down a flight of stairs while it was on. Windows XP can prove to be more reliable than Windows 2000 in certain environments, however. Windows Vista’s GDI limits have been improved as well allowing for the higher handle number.

Windows XP can and will handle it if you do some modifications, as will Windows Server 2003 with Service Pack 1.

I like what you said about Windows 2000 – I had an older IBM ThinkPad running Windows 2000 for about 2 1/2 years without any problems or crashes and that laptop even got dropped down a flight of stairs while it was on. Windows XP can prove to be more reliable than Windows 2000 in certain environments, however.

]]> By: digg / software / digg http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/#comment-2136 digg / software / digg Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:05:06 +0000 http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191#comment-2136 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Vista Beta 2: 90k Handles and Still Kicking [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> [...] Vista Beta 2: 90k Handles and Still Kicking [...]

]]> By: Computer Guru http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/#comment-2131 Computer Guru Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:18:30 +0000 http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191#comment-2131 Pardon? Pardon?

]]> By: fg http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/#comment-2129 fg Mon, 19 Jun 2006 12:06:32 +0000 http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191#comment-2129 You're right. You’re right.

]]> By: Windows: Microsoft Beating on a Dead Horse - Neowin.net http://neosmart.net/blog/2006/beta-2-stable-but-scary/#comment-2125 Windows: Microsoft Beating on a Dead Horse - Neowin.net Mon, 19 Jun 2006 07:11:43 +0000 http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191#comment-2125 <!--%kramer-ref-pre%-->[...] Quote - (rm20010 @ Jun 19 2006, 08:00) First point: care to share some links where IT professionals or 'professional' journalists indicate the latest Vista build being a resource hog? (on a personal persepective, sure, it's slower than XP. Sure, the memory usage is quite high - but isn't that due to the fact I have 2 GB instead of <1 GB of RAM? in any case the latest build wasn't the slow choppy OS it used to be for the builds in the past.) Hmmmmm. Perhaps you care to explain this: http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191 [...]<!--%kramer-ref-post%--> [...] Quote – (rm20010 @ Jun 19 2006, 08:00) First point: care to share some links where IT professionals or 'professional' journalists indicate the latest Vista build being a resource hog? (on a personal persepective, sure, it's slower than XP. Sure, the memory usage is quite high – but isn't that due to the fact I have 2 GB instead of <1 GB of RAM? in any case the latest build wasn't the slow choppy OS it used to be for the builds in the past.) Hmmmmm. Perhaps you care to explain this: http://neosmart.net/blog/archives/191 [...]

]]>