Talk:Windows Vista I/O technologies

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to Microsoft on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MicrosoftWikipedia:WikiProject MicrosoftTemplate:WikiProject MicrosoftMicrosoft articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Microsoft Windows: Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Microsoft Windows, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Microsoft Windows on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Microsoft WindowsWikipedia:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsTemplate:WikiProject Microsoft WindowsMicrosoft Windows articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Cwolfsheep 19:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Driver optimisation[edit]

They would have seen a lot better improvements, if the I/O could re-arrange the top 5 requests in to an efficient drive read pattern otherwise known as Shortest Seek Time First (SSTF), as to reduce head seek distance/time. Seb-Gibbs (talk) 15:18, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Windows 7 SuperFetch working quite differently from Vista's[edit]

First impression is that Vista tended to load previously used programs on boot, utilizing the 8 GB I bought better. In Windows 7 it doesn't appear to be doing that and programs start up from disk instead of memory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.112.172.94 (talk) 11:46, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Windows ReadyBoost[edit]

It appears that ReadyBoost was forgotten (or integrated with SuperFetch). There are probably several sources of information for it, but the one I just came across is here. --Kamasutra 09:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Windows ReadyDrive[edit]

A reference to http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc162480.aspx is needed in order to support several statements in the ReadyDrive section. -- Robbie Mosaic (Decheng) Fan, August 31, 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.170.24.176 (talk) 22:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction[edit]

I think the introduction should be more informative. will change soon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaning (talk • contribs) 08:40, 31 July 2006
- a definition of I/O wouldn't do any harm.

USB Faster than RAM[edit]

I believe that the initial comments that were on this forum shed light on some of the improvements and new technologies utilized by Windows Vista (superfetch). I will paste the old discussion below:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

YO YO YO YO, I heard the mad notes about the vista superfetch. gun shots to microsoft. But straight up how is usb flash mem (yo) faster than harddrive spinners? I busted out the numbers yo, and quickly concludidized that flash mem (yo) shat the comparison. Big ups to my man cc, tony, and the russian monkeys. I would like an answer, still. WHAT WHAT! Straight goods !!!

That's what I initially thought, and after some research, I found that while that is true for large reads, it evidently does not hold true for small random files due to a hard drive's seek time. -- Comthought 19:05, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Really yo, Comthought you are da bomb, thankz for the low down on the hype superfetch speed increasation that can be realized. I am totally going to busted a nut (word is bond crazy shots), when vista comes out, if it isn't the shit I am gonna snap, word is bond. Forgot to give shout outs to my man GQE and Sir Ishwmael.

On a finale note, in da mad words of Master G

"you just been hit by the Capricorn King, I rocked you gentle, I rocked mean, I rocked you in and I rocked you out, You made me scream but I made you shout"

TTSJ 4 LYFE

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I remember reading this on microsoft's website when they said that Windows can retreive data faster from USB sticks than it can from RAM. I think this needs to be checked. WinSrev 12:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If so then that's some incredibly slow RAM. The claim is that USB drives can read/write faster than a hard drive. It is supposed to supplement RAM if needed, but certainly not replace it. --Kamasutra 21:18, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page Design[edit]

I think ReadyBoost, SuperFetch, and Transactional NTFS should have their own pages, and the Vista IO page should just show brief summaries Phaldo 18:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eventually, they (probably) will. Until someone writes significantly about them, this is enough. --soum ^talk 08:02, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SuperFetch[edit]

The text is copied verbatim from [1]. -raylu^T 18:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Needs work[edit]

I'm hacking out this newly-added sentence because it clearly needs some work, however accurate or otherwise it might prove.

His article contains fundamental misunderstandings, ignoring, for example, that SuperFetch does not cache writes, and Microsoft has stated that flash will last more than ten years in operation [2]
— Anonymous editor [3]

For what it's worth, I've skimmed that link and can find nothing helpful in the short time available…maybe someone with a better eye can find something. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 13:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Offline files[edit]

There is an offline files section in this article as well as the Management features new to Windows Vista article. Both contain different information. Would it be better to merge them or maybe synchronize them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.181.53 (talk) 20:20, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I synched the two, but how is Offline files a "Management feature"? My vote would be to remove the section from the mgmt article. --soum ^talk 08:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SuperFetch[edit]

After months of almost continuous disk access, I have turned off superfetch. I think I have my sanity back. And my PC is more respsonsive. This may explain why the oword "intended" is used in the article so much. Rich Farmbrough, 08:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Folder redirection and roaming user profiles[edit]

This section also needs info on changes made to folder redirection and roaming user profiles in Windows Vista. Anyone want to help? - xpclient ^Talk 14:09, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:SuperFetch (TV series) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 21:18, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]