Will Premiere run on Windows Vista? - Page 2 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Cross-Platform Post Production Solutions > Adobe Creative Suite

Adobe Creative Suite
All about the world of Adobe Premiere and its associated plug-ins.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 14th, 2007, 12:24 PM   #16
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Posts: 37
Not Going Back to XP...

Here's a balanced Vista review, showing both the good and bad. They give it an overall score of 9/10, noting important improvements over XP. On the downside, there's a 10% drop in overall system performance due to early, generic/non-optimized device drivers, but gains in the user interface, security and stability outweigh this slight drop, which as they reviewer notes, is not noticeable for users with strong hardware:

http://www.bit-tech.net/bits/2007/01..._review/7.html

As for Mac OSX comparisons, much of Vista is old news, but it's not old for long-suffering XP users...
__________________
www.sonatasys.com
video production, multimedia post and web integration
Trenton Scott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2007, 06:29 PM   #17
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bend, Oregon
Posts: 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco Wagner
I've given it plenty of time through all the betas and final code = still crap.
Me not being a major in computer science, I'm curious what specifically do you fell that the final code of vista is lacking?
__________________
http://wildlookout.com
Wes Coughlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2007, 08:34 PM   #18
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Saint Cloud, Florida
Posts: 1,043
Well driver support first off (but that is not Vista code). It has been months since the RTM came out and most OEMs and other manufacturers had plenty of time to get a stable Vista driver off the shelf. Creative and Nvidia still lack in that area as history dictates. MS didn't make it ANY better by delaying and constantly changing what the final product would actually become. It is totally different from what they promised it would be. They essentially rushed it out the door in time for OEMs to advertise x-mas specials, when it should have been held for another month or five. MANY beta and RTM testers were complaining and suggesting refinements ĖMS didnít listen. If you look on theregister.com and theinquirer.net, among other sites, you will see that (1) gamers are having issues with Vista. (2) Security folk are having issues/nightmares with Vista. (3)Some companies are outright recommending NOT getting Vista until SP1. (4)They burned XP64bit basically; whoís going to right media based drivers for an ďoutdated OSĒ now? Nvidia can barely get out Vista divers that donít BSOD your box. But alas, these are not OS code issues.

The coding in Vista lacks in that all they did was add/steal a few features you can already get for XP or native in OSX. It is NOT built from the ground up as they would like to have you believe, a friend who is an analyst said she was still spotting Win3.11 code in some areas that 3rd party anti-virus companies actually remove/edit from kernel or near kernel level. Vista made this much harder for those people too, but it could be a necessary Ďevilí. By definition the Security Center is malware! I got Vista running pretty quick and stable on my machine recently (it ate 358MB more ram at startup but hey). The only problem was the extent of crap I had to go through that ordinary people havenít a clue about Ėand my hardware is less than a year old. XP wasnít nearly this bad when it was new and shinyÖ

It is nowhere near being implemented at my work, a military funded LARGE company. I think our release date is historic too, a full year longer than when XP was rolled out -2009ish est.. We have a link on our intranet home page that lists what Vista is incompatible with that we use (everyday hardware and software like any large co. would use). The list got too long and we had to simply switch to not supported for the status as we have hundreds that work from home that went out and bought Vista.
Hey Iím all for a new OS with new cool stuff, but this is REEEEDICULOUS. Itís like a really good looking pizza that came out of the oven too soon and still has raw dough inside, lol. Iíll cross my fingers and hope that they work the bugs out over the next year, as always. Iím just glad I donít have to pay for any of the versions of Vista, Iíd not be happy shelling out the cash for Ultimate. I failed to mention the DRM infection, the EULA that is written by aliens, and the lack of anything worth a costly hardware upgrade for most.
__________________
www.facebook.com/projectspecto
Marco Wagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2007, 08:43 PM   #19
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Patterson La.
Posts: 207
Well if you want to try your Adobe purchase on a OS that Adobe dosnt support ....feel free
99$ bucks vs. a proven workflow...do the math
Salah Baker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2007, 08:46 PM   #20
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Saint Cloud, Florida
Posts: 1,043
Very true.
__________________
www.facebook.com/projectspecto
Marco Wagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2007, 11:59 PM   #21
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bend, Oregon
Posts: 206
--Marco--

When talking about driver support, is it mostly just for the x64 version of vista that is causing the problems? or are there x86 driver problems as well?

And I'm 100% with you about Microsoft taking ideas(even maybe code ideas) from OS X, as in the 5 years of development vista has very few--if any original features. But for me (not apart of a huge military founded server crazy setup), vista seems to run smoother and better then XP. and its prettier.
__________________
http://wildlookout.com
Wes Coughlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 10:45 AM   #22
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Saint Cloud, Florida
Posts: 1,043
It seems that way as many are reporting being able to use some XP drivers for 32bit Vista. I don't know exact numbers though.

It also seems, IMHO, like AMD and Intel are killing 64bit dev. with multi-cores. I read an article somewhere where the author made a good point -why are we throwing two, four, and eight+ cores at an OS that can barely properly cope with one (see DEC ALPHA). We should be writing better code such instead of just putting more engines in the car. Now don't get me wrong I LOVE my dual core -but I wonder how quick my editor would run if it were 64bit on a 64bit OS with my 64bit single core vs. my dual core running everying 32bit...
__________________
www.facebook.com/projectspecto
Marco Wagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 11:16 AM   #23
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hillsborough, NC, USA
Posts: 968
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco Wagner
Nvidia can barely get out Vista divers that donít BSOD your box.
Strange. My nVidia drivers work just fine on my Vista Ultimate RTM. The feature set of the configuration tools, on the other hand, is lame compared to the XP versions. But, the hardware drivers work. I've been using Vista RTM everyday for hours since November - not a single BSOD.

Quote:
The coding in Vista lacks in that all they did was add/steal a few features you can already get for XP or native in OSX.
"They stole this, they stole that." WTF? Apple have "stolen" from Microsoft, too. And they have both "stolen" from Xerox and Sinclair (seriously! - Sinclair QL - January 1984 - true pre-emptive multitasking 32-bit OS - about 6 years ahead of Microsoft and more than a decade ahead of Apple.)

Quote:
It is NOT built from the ground up as they would like to have you believe, a friend who is an analyst said she was still spotting Win3.11 code in some areas that 3rd party anti-virus companies actually remove/edit from kernel or near kernel level.
Much of Vista *IS* built from the ground up. The GUI is tightly integrated with the Direct3D pipeline. That's a major change. The audio layer is COMPLETELY NEW. There are a host of other new frameworks as well - all of which you can learn about at Microsoft's web site.

Quote:
It is nowhere near being implemented at my work, a military funded LARGE company.
Why's that remarkable? In a VERY LARGE company that I have worked for (>100,000 employees), we used NT4.0 until about 4 years ago. By-passed 2K and implemented XP in 2004. SP2 finally came along in mid-2006.

Clearly, you don't like Vista. Fine. Don't buy it. But enough of the emotive nonsense. Plenty of people do (and will) like it. It was the same when 95 came out. And XP.
John Miller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 11:26 AM   #24
Major Player
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hillsborough, NC, USA
Posts: 968
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco Wagner
why are we throwing two, four, and eight+ cores at an OS that can barely properly cope with one.
Huh? Microsoft's NT-based OSes have been "properly coping" with multiple CPUs for more than 15 years....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco Wagner
We should be writing better code such instead of just putting more engines in the car.
Why? Porting legacy 32-bit apps to native 64-bit can be a time-consuming and expensive business. For many ISVs, it just isn't worth the investment. However, with 64-bit CPUs becoming de rigeur, *new* applications should be written to be able to be compiled for native 32-bit and native 64-bit platforms. But, compared to just a few years ago, it's more cost-effective to add hardware.
John Miller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 11:59 AM   #25
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Saint Cloud, Florida
Posts: 1,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by John F Miller
Strange. My nVidia drivers work just fine on my Vista Ultimate RTM. The feature set of the configuration tools, on the other hand, is lame compared to the XP versions. But, the hardware drivers work. I've been using Vista RTM everyday for hours since November - not a single BSOD.
Are you a gamer because I highly doubt that if you are...Nvidia drivers for Vista were beta at that time. OR you have a magically perfect machine with all the latest (last month) "vista ready" hardware and you write your own drivers?


Quote:
Originally Posted by John F Miller
"They stole this, they stole that." WTF? Apple have "stolen" from Microsoft, too. And they have both "stolen" from Xerox and Sinclair (seriously! - Sinclair QL - January 1984 - true pre-emptive multitasking 32-bit OS - about 6 years ahead of Microsoft and more than a decade ahead of Apple.)
Can't argue with that one, everyone's a thief.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John F Miller
Why's that remarkable? In a VERY LARGE company that I have worked for (>100,000 employees), we used NT4.0 until about 4 years ago. By-passed 2K and implemented XP in 2004. SP2 finally came along in mid-2006.
Your point? or are you just reinforcing mine?


Quote:
Originally Posted by John F Miller
Clearly, you don't like Vista. Fine. Don't buy it. But enough of the emotive nonsense. Plenty of people do (and will) like it. It was the same when 95 came out. And XP.
No, I like Vista it's just pointless to rush out and get it for people that are not tech savvy or not enthusiasts. I get it free, don't have to buy it, and wouldn't. "Plenty of people do (and will) like it. " You sound like a MS nazi there :-)

Will Premiere run on Vista? YES. How well is determined by many factors, including your knowledge of computers. Is Premiere Pro 1.x - 2.x supported on Vista, heck no! If you load Premiere on Vista and everything works without a hitch -you're in good shape. If you believe all the hype and the 9/10 reviews -you need to understand that many of those reviewers were sent brand new kick butt laptops or rigs with Vista on them, free. OF COURSE they are not going to bash it -you'll never be sent preview product again. Read the real stuff, the gamers are the ones that drive this industry -not those writing word docs and browsing the web all day. Read the stuff from the security people pulling their hair out. Read the reviews of the poor schmoe that bought VistaHE thinking it can upgrade from XP Pro (as it says on the box) then get's home and finds out NOT without research and trickery. Read the incredibly small writing on the back of the box.... XP, 2000, even 95 were NOT this bad.
__________________
www.facebook.com/projectspecto
Marco Wagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 12:01 PM   #26
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Saint Cloud, Florida
Posts: 1,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by John F Miller
Why? Porting legacy 32-bit apps to native 64-bit can be a time-consuming and expensive business. For many ISVs, it just isn't worth the investment. However, with 64-bit CPUs becoming de rigeur, *new* applications should be written to be able to be compiled for native 32-bit and native 64-bit platforms. But, compared to just a few years ago, it's more cost-effective to add hardware.

We've had 64bit CPUs for decades and 64bit PC CPUs for 4 years now...Where's the software?
__________________
www.facebook.com/projectspecto
Marco Wagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 15th, 2007, 03:35 PM   #27
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland, Oregon, USA
Posts: 37
Time To Upgrade...

Hey, if your computer is lagging with Vista, well, that's a perfect reason to buy/build your new powerhouse machine; I used that reasonable excuse several years ago to upgrade my MB/CPUs when I moved to XP. Well, at least my wife accepted the excuse!

;->

Many will use this Vista event as an opportunity to shoot the old horse for a faster breed...

Also, for Vista software compatibility I used this resource:

http://www.iexbeta.com/wiki/index.ph...atibility_List

Another favorable review from a rich media source:

http://digitalproducer.digitalmedian....jsp?id=100045

He supplies a key reason to upgrade to Vista:

"I was able to run my systems longer between restarts, experienced fewer crashes and generally found it more informative than its predecessor."

My Vista experience has been the same-- FAR fewer hangs, crashes, slow starts and neverending shutdowns, etc.

Regarding Vista/nVid driver support, I had no problems installing the Quadro FX 4400 Vista driver. As indicated earlier, this new driver lacks some of the configuration bells in the XP driver, but it's solid and I'm running 2560 x 1600 while editing PPro projects on my 30" Apple display. Life is SO MUCH better working with Vista's new UI, and I see absolutely no reason, no reason whatsoever to go back to XP...
__________________
www.sonatasys.com
video production, multimedia post and web integration

Last edited by Trenton Scott; February 15th, 2007 at 04:08 PM.
Trenton Scott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 16th, 2007, 06:13 PM   #28
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Saint Cloud, Florida
Posts: 1,043
I love that answer, great reason to upgraded, lol. My wife buys that one too.
__________________
www.facebook.com/projectspecto
Marco Wagner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2007, 02:24 AM   #29
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Sweden, Stockholm
Posts: 469
I tried vista as an early adopter around 16-November-2006, it was horrible! Two reasons:

1. Almost no drivers where available at that time
2. My motherboard an OEM sh*t AMD board really didn't like Vista(or anything else for that matter)

Re-installed Visa Ultimate a week ago - and now I runs perfectly. I have a new MB(MSI K8N well proven AMD platform). I actually feel like I have a more response from my programs now, for instance PPro doesn't stall when building "peak files".

Vista uses more system resources, which is good... a resource never used, is a resource not needed... I'm glad that Vista uses my internal memory as file and system cache. When memory is needed, Vista releases it.

I won't be going back to XP - the old experience :-)

// Lazze
Lars Siden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 25th, 2007, 12:47 PM   #30
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Saint Cloud, Florida
Posts: 1,043
Switched to 64bit XP Pro

Just installed XP Pro 64bit along side my XP Pro 32bit editor. It is based off of Server 2003 SP1 code. So far everything runs smooth and fast. I had to get a 64bit antivirus, but other than that all my hardware, games, and essential software work great. Exiting from BF2142 or BF2 used to take a couple seconds to unload from memory and page file, but now it's like turning off a light switch. Boot time is FAST. Rebooting is FAST. I'll let you later know if my editor (XP Pro 32bit) runs Premiere Pro 2.0 faster or slower in a same file render test.
__________________
www.facebook.com/projectspecto
Marco Wagner is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Cross-Platform Post Production Solutions > Adobe Creative Suite

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:43 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network