When is the next update pack?

rhysryan · Post by **rhysryan** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:51 am

I really like this product but I have noticed a few problems. Sometimes the audio gets slightly out of sync with the video. And when using titles (by adding a title clip), I get a message about being out of range. The worst one is when I cut clips, sometimes the clip after the cut gets split automatically and the program crashes.

I purchased v8 to utilize the HD features but am hoping that an update is coming soon that will fix some of the problems I'm experiencing.

htchien · Post by **htchien** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:21 pm

Service Pack 1 for MSP 8:

http://www.ulead.com/tech/msp/msp_ftp.htm

Hope this helps.

H.T.

rhysryan · Post by **rhysryan** » Mon Jan 15, 2007 4:06 pm

Which was over 6 months ago, I think they are due for another one.

Blackspeed · Post by **Blackspeed** » Thu Jan 25, 2007 5:29 pm

I hope the Vista Update comes soon.

Devil · Post by **Devil** » Fri Jan 26, 2007 10:21 am

Quite apart from MSP not working under Vista, I do not recommend using Vista for video work, at this stage. Why?
1. it is a memory hog, which means that most applications make increased use of virtual memory. My guess is that, if you need 1-2 Gb of RAM under XP, you would need to add another 2 Gb to get equivalent performance.

2. no drivers are available for popular sound and graphics cards or other peripherals.

3. most software is a botched XP version and not written specifically for Vista.

4. Vista itself is such bloatware that it runs slower.

I have been running the Vista RCs for several months and I can assure you that I have given it a very thorough test run, comparing it with XP. Having done so, I will tell you in as straightforward a way as possible that I have zero intention of installing the release version, even though I can get it (officially) very cheap. I've already uninstalled the RC.

Amalthia · Post by **Amalthia** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:22 pm

Devil wrote:Quite apart from MSP not working under Vista, I do not recommend using Vista for video work, at this stage. Why?
1. it is a memory hog, which means that most applications make increased use of virtual memory. My guess is that, if you need 1-2 Gb of RAM under XP, you would need to add another 2 Gb to get equivalent performance.

2. no drivers are available for popular sound and graphics cards or other peripherals.

3. most software is a botched XP version and not written specifically for Vista.

4. Vista itself is such bloatware that it runs slower.

thanks for posting this information. I kind of already figured out that Vista is going to be even worse than XP in using up system resources and after seeing the changes in the Ulead Video Studio 10 program because of Vista limitations. I'm not at all happy at the prospect of someday having to upgrade my current operating system for Vista.

Devil · Post by **Devil** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:02 am

Hopefully, in a year or so, most of the issues will have been sorted out, provided the computer has sufficient horsepower.

hofmae · Post by **hofmae** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 1:04 pm

1. it is a memory hog, which means that most applications make increased use of virtual memory. My guess is that, if you need 1-2 Gb of RAM under XP, you would need to add another 2 Gb to get equivalent performance,

- Thats just wrong im working with Vista and Premiere 2 and its much faster on my system, maybe strange, but thats it.

2. no drivers are available for popular sound and graphics cards or other peripherals.

- Tell me which "popular" sound and graphic-cards doesn't have vista drivers, i don't know any popular ones...

3. most software is a botched XP version and not written specifically for Vista.

- Thats true, but all the programs i've tested (except MSP

are working reat on Vista

4. Vista itself is such bloatware that it runs slower.

- That is something i don't get... Everyone is sayiing that Vista slows everything down, its just no true...

WesleyS · Post by **WesleyS** » Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:47 pm

Again,

I agree 100% with Hofmae: My Vista works perfect, except MSP8.

WesleyS

neonbob · Post by **neonbob** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 4:16 am

Vista is NOT slower AT ALL. In fact, in some cases it's even faster. Vista (unlike XP) was written specifically to handle dual cores, quad cores... etc in a MUCH more efficient manner than XP. XP was never really intended for the large heavy duty dual cores that are running today and it was instead PATCHED to try and live up to the demands of these cpu's.

It does chew up a bit more memory and that's why they suggest you use 2 gig instead of one. But you CAN turn off the added features that take the extra memory if you choose.

The ONLY problem with vista to this point from an operational perspective is that there is still problems getting the right drivers.

sjj1805 · Post by **sjj1805** » Sat Mar 03, 2007 4:21 am

The issue of speed will vary dependant upon your individual computer system. If you have a fairly new computer with powerful processor(s) and adequate RAM then you may find that Vista will run faster than XP.

Conversely if your computer is a few years old and has not been equipped with extra RAM, plus a number of other factors such as how many running processes you have in the background then that machine could grind to a snails pace.

For some, Vista will be quicker, for others Vista will be slower.

Alludo USER to USER Web Board

When is the next update pack?

When is the next update pack?

I know about that one...