AT&T Tech Support 360
- Related Stories
-
FAQ: Getting a handle on Windows Vista
November 29, 2006 -
Microsoft boxes up Vista
February 26, 2006 -
Microsoft opens window for new Vista test
February 22, 2006
Microsoft is building into the new operating system a tool that will rate a PC based on how well it is running and on how much it can take advantage of Vista's capabilities.
The "Windows Performance Rating," which can be seen in the latest test version of the operating system, evaluates components such as the processor, the memory, the hard drive and graphics cards to come up with an overall score.
The rating appears in a large blue circle and can be seen in multiple places in the operating system, though Microsoft has said little about what exactly the rating signifies. The main rating is on a scale of 1 to 5, but individual components are also given a "sub rating" on some other, unspecified range.
"The idea behind the Windows Performance Rating is to help average consumers easily understand their Windows Vista PC's overall performance, and to simplify the process of determining whether certain software applications will run smoothly based on their system components," Microsoft said in a statement provided to CNET News.com.
Computer makers and retailers would then be able to use that as a tool to help explain, in general terms, the capabilities of a particular machine. Software makers would also be able to specify the type of PC needed to run their software.
A Sony Vaio laptop on display at last week's Intel Developer Forum, for example, scored an overall rating of 3. The PC had an Intel processor and 1GB of memory, which earned sub-ratings of 5.6 and 5.5 respectively. A desktop on the IDF show floor with Intel's Pentium D 940 processor and 2GB of unspecified memory also received a 3, with the processor rated at 5.6 and the memory at 5.5.
Microsoft declined to provide details of its rating methodology, noting that it is still working on the grading system.
"This capability is still under development, so the current experience with the Windows Performance Rating may not be indicative of the final experience," Microsoft said. The company promised that the feature would continue to be enhanced in future test versions.
Vista's performance ratings will be primarily useful to customers before they make a purchase, said Roger Kay, the president of market analysis firm Endpoint Technologies Associates.
The ratings could be a tool for salespeople in retail outlets, for example, to demonstrate how well systems would run Vista and related applications, Kay said. But if the buyer doesn't find out about the rating until they get their PC home and start playing around with it, it's harder to understand the benefits, he said.
Set scale?
An open question is whether the system rating is a fixed score or whether it might change over time, as hardware advances. There are challenges whichever route Microsoft takes. If adjustments are made, then the rating for a particular setup will decline, and consumers may feel their PC is losing steam. On the other hand, if the ratings don't evolve, improving technology could eventually lead all machines to score a 5.
As for systems slowing down, that's an issue that Microsoft is already trying to tackle. In the past, machines actually have lost significant performance as more software loads at startup, hard disks become fragmented and other features "gunk" up the works. With Vista, though, Microsoft has added several features that aim to keep the PC from bogging down over time.
It is unclear how large a factor these ratings will be for PC makers as they plan their Vista lineup.
Sam Bhavnani, an analyst at Current Analysis, said that, provided the rating system can be easily understood, it could give computer makers a new way to tout the performance of machines.
"It would make it easier for them to advertise their systems as 'good,' 'better,' 'best,'" Bhavnani said. It would mean the prospective buyer wouldn't have to compare the memory, hard drive and other components on their own.
A Hewlett-Packard representative praised the idea behind the system, saying, "Anything that simplifies the technology for the consumer is a positive thing, and that's obviously the goal."
However, HP said it was too soon to say just how the ratings will factor into how it markets and sells its PCs.
See more CNET content tagged:
rating,
Microsoft Windows Vista,
computer company,
memory,
Microsoft Corp.
Hey... my system scored an 8.5527 on your 1-10 performance scale... That's pretty close to 9... do you think I can run Glass? I know it says I need 9, but I'm really close... don't you think?
I like 1 to 5 better anyhow.
Fewer steps between "good" and "bad" means simpler and more appropriate summary analysis.
Seriously...
This concept is a stupid idea on so many levels. And not just because it's from Microsoft. It would be equally stupid if applied to Linux or OS X.
You can't characterize the performance/value of any complex machine with just one number. Especially a machine used for many functions, where the standards of excellence are rapidly changing.
Doesn't matter if that machine is a car, or a building, or a computer.
I suspect this idea got hatched by some big-shot in MS marketing. Then some poor tech-flunkies were told to "make it so". This is going to fail so bad, it's not even funny.
one hand.. (no alien in the group). Just wondering if the same
program can be used to count software rating: turn off the graphics
use text only rates for 5max, get rid of some spam check at
background gets improved rating...etc.etc. would be nice to know
how fast we really can run the computation without the overhead ...
Love to know why microsoft application is sooooo slow, like ppt..
disable all the stuff that usually "hang" CPU would be nice...
useful when one's in the process of purchasing a computer from
a retailer or choosing software. I think the author is missing the
point about the benefits of having this rating system on a
computer that has already beeen purchased. If you have an
existing system and can rate how well it runs Vista with a sub-
rating for each component, you will know whether your system
can utilize a system's features well enough to run all of the
features or have the need to turn some of them off. After turning
off certain features (or on), you can run the check again and
have a performance comparison (benchmark) for the different
settings. Also, you can analyse the bottlenecks in your system's
performance and determine what component of your system
needs to be upgraded to improve the overall system
performance. I wish my current system would tell me where the
weak link was on the hardware level, so I could either choose to
improve it, if it is a big bottleneck in an otherwise quicker
computer, or leave the system as-is, if the components are fairly
well matched.
either. I'm fine with XP its secure as its ever going to be on my
current machine. I don't see whats the hassle in upgrading
either. Don't get me wrong I'm curious to see how it looks
upclose and personal but really if I have to shell out more cash
to buy another machine to run this, why should I? Its just
another version of Windows and it runs the same appz. What
for?
Maybe Windows Live can give me a reason... but it seems like its
all hot air on the part of the "MS Marketing Machine."
Besides why would I want to do that, when I can get a brand new
machine from Apple running the original OS X for my money.
Atleast I have two machines doing different tasks. That seems
more lucrative than buying another Windows machine. Vista is
such a sham.. my belief is, is that its not secure as its touted.
Look at XP when it was released it was suppose to be more
secure.. was it? Granted it is more secure now.. but it wasnt
when it first came out.
Until Windows Live can establish itself as a good online service..
truly there is no reason to buy Vista..
Unless well, your bored.
I've got customers running a 20th century OS (Windows 2K) on 20th Century hardware (P4 128 meg ram) and things are just dandy. Now all of a sudden, a mere 4 years later, they need 8 times the resources to do the same things? How is this progress?
keep it simple stupid, make it right the first time out of the gate, make it trouble-free on an on-going basis because we simply don't have the time to all get under the hood of your cars let alone understand alla these weird names you apply to alla the stuff there and in five years call us when you have a better quality mousetrap to update this machine.
Yesterday's monopolies are today's bankrupt laughing stocks. Get a grip and break alla the rules by rethinking the basic premise:
>K.I.S.S. cause you bore and confuse us.
>We don't want 700 New Once A Year Models of one fundamentally simple S.K.U. cause your so-called MBA-nonsense *product differentiation* is transparent marketing jive.
>Think of our needs first and derive all the rest top down from there or else we guarantee we shall rebel against you.
>Minimize the bloody fine print which your attornies painstakingly write (and which we pay our hard earned dollars for) in order to warrant the same old thing different day: *We guarantee nothing and you are screwed. Sorry but that's life.*
>Deal directly with us and not thru intermediaries who reconfigure your technology to bloat your product with no added value whatever (actually, a great deal of harm) and are not of the slightest interest to us. Us is the folks who ultimately pay your revenues. Do it all or forget it, we ain't interested.
Google knows all of the above and is putting together the ultimate solution. They will build the product all-inclusive, at a reasonable allin price and the buyers will come.
Short MSFT because it is endgame
Long GOOG because it does it right from the getgo or not at all
Just my view on this forest for the trees. It's time for something completely different by the only party who can put all of this together in one package that will work at 7th Sigma quality and inexpesnive price.
Google has put all of these jokers out of business though they haven't seen it yet. By *jokers* I mean Microsoft at the fore and those who have created a no added-value industry around Microsoft's illogic basic premise of business.
Pls don't flame me. I will accept C|NET's bet that this op-ed post will prove correct when they reprint it in 25 years' time verbatim. It's my view that C|NET bless their souls are shrewd enough journalists to not accept this bet.
Microsoft - you bore the hell outta us, so we have decided Google will put you out of business if this American technolgy is to survive let alone thrive.
[end of rant]
I think it should be "you need to go spend another grand on a new notebook with better graphics capabilities."
Will the common user of the current era buy it?
Mr. Win 95 still running his 486 and using AOL dial-up won't.
He's fine being stuck in the past with that machine, Office 97,
and not burning CDs.
Mr. Win 98 still running his early Celeron. He's got some USB
devices, and has updated his computer pretty well. He's happy
running Office 2000 and making an occasional CD.
Mr. Win ME . . . they can't figure out why only AIM and Yahoo!
Chat works well, but overall, they don't care about anything too
much, just online, online, online.
Mr. Celeron XP, the majority of current computer users thanks to
Wal-Mart and Target . . . a Vista programmer told me it can't run
on these machines . . . that's rude. They use iTunes, they steal
movies via P2P, they emulate, they burn DVDs and CDs like the
DIckens, so forth and so on, yet they do it all on 128 MB of RAM
and lack a video card with any RAM to speak of. They don't care
about anything except, like the ME user, online online online.
Mr. Geek . . . he will get Vista to work on hardware it's not
supposed to. Amazing. 1% of 1% of 1% of 1% of sales. And he'll
crack Vista to boot.
So, who's Microsoft shooting for? PCs sales, in reality, are
declining (comparison of numbers since 1993) because most do
what the average user wants: Office, chat, porn sites, P2P, and
MP3s.
That is, other than Windows ME users. I can count the number of ME users that I know with no hands. That's right, none. Thank God!
And while you've got a point with your user breakdown, it's beginning to dawn on the bulk of users that PCs can be great for TV viewing/recording, too, when they're properly equipped. XP Media Center Edition is pretty good for this, but Vista SHOULD be better. That's going to drive a LOT of upgrade business on its own.
Oh no! The older the get, the faster the booted!
I assume you have some knowledge on installing Vista, etc. so the
fault has to lie in the hardware.
In fact, this isn't an open question. It is clear that a scale whose metrics changed over time while the ratings remained static would not be useful to manufacturers of hardware or software or to the users.
The top end of the scale will continue to grow as hardware capabilities increase. This means that if a software manufacturer prints a box stating your PC must have a "3" rating in order to run the application, this will still be true in future years even as hardware advances. Perhaps your old "3" system will still be available for accounting, word processing and web browsing while you'll need a "7" system to run the latest immersive 3D gaming experience.
To read accurate, insider information about Vista's memory management, visit my forum at
http://thevistaforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=171
- vista new system tool
-
by rayjay19692
July 10, 2006 5:54 PM PDT
- It still only see the system board graphics, not my 256MB graphic adapter, and does not see my 250GB External wd Hard drive. So it still needs to be updated but at least they are trying. Just hope they don't ship the finished product before it has been thoroughly tested and most of bugs taken out, not like windows millenetium, like i recommended and almost lost my job doing so. keep testing till you get it right.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 44 Comments >>ray