Comments on: Vista's PC-rating tool gets a revamp

Microsoft responds to complaints that the tool could do better at rating how well a PC harnesses the Windows update's new features.

[Kostagh]

On operating systems and such...

Hellooo!
Reality Check!!!!
Excuse me... But isn't Windows (Vista included) supposed to be an OPERATING SYSTEM?! That is a software that "puts together" the computing system and ensures operation of input and output periferals, disk operation and launch of programs?!
So... if the programs using it don't need more resources why should the OPERATING SYSTEM need more?!
It's like you would need a bigger and better car each time you buy a new steering wheel and gearbox lever or a new dashboard!
Aren't things a little out of control?!
Hello? Microsoft? Anyone listening?!

[Kostagh]

On operating systems and such...

Hellooo!
Reality Check!!!!
Excuse me... But isn't Windows (Vista included) supposed to be an OPERATING SYSTEM?! That is a software that "puts together" the computing system and ensures operation of input and output periferals, disk operation and launch of programs?!
So... if the programs using it don't need more resources why should the OPERATING SYSTEM need more?!
It's like you would need a bigger and better car each time you buy a new steering wheel and gearbox lever or a new dashboard!
Aren't things a little out of control?!
Hello? Microsoft? Anyone listening?!

[bluemist9999]

Good idea but needs to go farther

I think it's good to simplify user's decision making, given the vast number of permutations of graphics cards, processors, hard drive speed and space, memory space, etc.

However, what I'd like to see is the tool allow the user to choose how important various uses are (i.e. Email/web-browsing, gaming, HDTV recording, data mining) and then determine the performance numbers based on the user's priorities.

I know that would be an insane amount of permutations, but I think it would help people better gauge what they need than a one-size-fits-all score.

[bluemist9999]

Good idea but needs to go farther

I think it's good to simplify user's decision making, given the vast number of permutations of graphics cards, processors, hard drive speed and space, memory space, etc.

However, what I'd like to see is the tool allow the user to choose how important various uses are (i.e. Email/web-browsing, gaming, HDTV recording, data mining) and then determine the performance numbers based on the user's priorities.

I know that would be an insane amount of permutations, but I think it would help people better gauge what they need than a one-size-fits-all score.

[darker_zero]

To think that no one realizes that WHEN the technology is "invented" or even more affordable Vista is much less of a hassle and is not this memory hungry graphics monster that everyone makes it out to be. I chose to build my PC from an Acer X1200 w/ Vista x86 (32bit). The X1200 is not a blow you out of the water computer, it can barely produce the results it was built for... Home Theater.

I used the Rating System as the weapon of my choice to determine which upgrade would produce the best results for a gaming platform and general multimedia use from budget components, I did however splurge here and there, eventually buying a used graphics card.

I have managed to produce a "Base Score" of 5.5. This is because I didn't replace the hard drive or disk drive, they both sufficed easily. All other scores are 5.9. I am NOT bragging, I am simply pointing out that SHOULD someone feel that they would like to upgrade their PC, they may do so w/o a degree in computers or related applications. Plus, should a person not care about how windows animates it is possible to simply turn things off, such as Windows Aero. I did that once before I began my upgrades and did raise the Base Score 0.3 points almost in all areas.

BTW, the program did not need to be developed, for any reason. It is just simply "convenient". Let's all try to remember that.