XP64 usefull for me?

Agreed, if there was ANY way I could run with UAC on I would but...

 

Hi, Nice Bike.

One of the great ongoing "religious battles". ;^}

My opinion: If you have multiple hard drives, put the swap file on a
different physical drive - a different spindle. Since a hard drive's heads
are permanently fixed together as a unit, they can't read data from track
100 and swap to track 5000 at the same time; the whole "gang" has to move
from 100 to 5000 - and then back again to continue reading from 100. But if
the swap file is on a second HD, then reading from track 100 on HD0 and
writing to track 5000 on HD1 can be happening simultaneously. Multiply that
by a few thousand read/writes an hour and you should see some speed gains.
But putting the swap file ANYWHERE on the same HD (the same spindle) as the
OS is not likely to gain much speed. So it doesn't help to have the swap
file is in Drive X: if Drive X: is just another partition on the same
physical drive (same spindle, same gang of heads). If you have only a
single physical drive, then any speed gain is going to be minimal, no matter
where you put the swap file.

I'm no gamer and I'm not sure just how they use the drives, but I would
guess that you should try to put the swap file on a physical drive other
than the one that has the game's executable files and data - and still
separate from the systemdrive.

Still one of the best articles on this subject is the one written by MVP
Alex Nichol, who died in 2005. The article was written for WinXP, but the
ideas apply to Vista, too: Virtual Memory in Windows XP;
http://www.aumha.org/win5/a/xpvm.htm (While you are there, be sure to
explore that www.aumha.org website; LOTS of good information there.)

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX

Microsoft Windows MVP
(Running Windows Live Mail beta 2 in Vista Ultimate x64)

 

I've been running with UAC on since before it shipped. I've not yet found a
single thing to change that opinion. I have two things I do to make life
easier - I open a PowerShell window _as administrator_ and keep it open.
(and I have a startup script for PowerShell that turns that window a nice,
dark red background so I always know I'm in it, not the regular PS window)

The other thing I did was create identical drive mappings in that elevated
prompt.

 

How not? I run with it on full time and have for >1year.

One thing I do that helps - I open a powershell window _as admin_ and keep
it open for when I need to run something with elevated privileges. And have
a startup script for it that maps the same drive letters as my regular
environment, and turns the window background dark red so I always know it's
the elevated one.

 

UAC breaks a program I'm unwilling to do without. I've tried several
workarounds but no fix and the author has not yet and probably won't
update the software so... UAC is off and will remain off. The only
alternative is to dump Vista and go back to XP.

 

I'm going to assume you have tried all the obvious workarounds, but they
include:
* Run this program as administrator (from compatibility tab of the icon for
it.)
* Run in compatibility mode for XP SP2
* Initiate from an already elevated prompt (see my comment about keeping an
open PowerShell window. Same is possible for cmd, and even for IE)

I haven't found one that won't respond to at least one of those so far.

 

I have, IE Privacy Keeper. It wipes cookies, history, etc. when IE or
Firefox is closed but allows me to specify cookies I want to keep
such as my local newspaper, etc.

It worked perfectly on RTM but some later update moved cookies from
the folder ...\Cookies to ..\Cookies\Low and IE Privacy Keeper will NOT
recognize that folder nor will UAC allow it to be deleted
sooooooo..... UAC is off and I've written them several times with no
answer.

The last update was 2005 so I think the program is dead but
nothing else works exactly like it does....

 

From my own experience on a desktop system with IDE and SATAII drives, XP
Pro x86 and X64, the answer is nope. You'll get pretty much the same
results in both OSs. I do all my photography now in digital, and I'm often
moving fairly large volumes of files/folders around. Both on this system
and to external LAN hard drives. Moving a few gigs of files simply takes a
little while.
McG.

 

I was hoping to get rid of the swapfile altogether with 4GB of RAM in
the new system I'm going to build. Or is that not possible? Will there
always be a need for a swapfile?

 

You should always have a swap file.

 

yes, you'll always need a swap file.