Vista delayed... DX10? - page 2

104 answers Last reply
  1. Quote:
    Well I pity your stupidity.


    So do you want to explain exactly what problem Vista solves for the average user to make them want to upgrade?

    3D window borders? Yeah. wonderful, Joe Sixpack has just been lining up demanding those, it makes such a huge difference when you're browsing the web or reading email.

    Can you name a single benefit that he'll see from Vista? Or are you just going to insult people?

    Hey, maybe that's Microsoft's new plan: don't actually produce a new operating system that provides anything that will justify the cost, but spend a billion bucks on ads saying 'If you don't buy Vista, you're stupid!'.

    Great idea.
  2. Sigh.

    See this why I can't believe you've actually used it.

    Windows Defender out of the box.

    Owned.

    Proper SMP support.

    Owned again.

    Built-in DVD recording capabilities.

    Owned once again.

    Proper 64bit support.

    Owned yet again.

    Too lazy to type out everything so I'll just provide a link.

    Linkage.
  3. dx9 is, I think, 2 years (or there abouts) old.

    dx10 (according to this fact sheet I found) also adds support for complex primitives, and if my limited graphics knowledges serves me, a primitive is part of the 'wire-frame' that is used to create scenery, models, everything in a 3d world basically, to which you apply a texture which you see in game and currently adds most of the detail. These primitives have to use all straight lines, and the more lines you have to use, the higher the polygon count and the faster a Gcard you need. I believe complex primitives is a move towards being able to use true curved lines, as to make a surface appear curved you have to use lots and lots of small straight lines to make it (although I think there are some 'cheats' that use textures or something to make it look like a curve without making the polygon count sky rocket). Most of this is just guess work, expanding what I do know, so if anyone notices a mistake, just correct me :wink:
  4. Quote:
    So do you want to explain exactly what problem Vista solves for the average user to make them want to upgrade?
    Occasionaly, you have to build from the ground up. And in this case, this will allow for a true 64 Bit Windows OS, which will eventualy be at least applicable to most users, even if it's not "required".

    Idealy, Vista will offer:
    -Increased Stability (not that I've had a problem with XP)
    -Additional GUI functionality and options (Some things have been in other programs, but there is no reason windows can't use them too)
    -Updated features (such as DVD compatability, 3D effects, etc)
    -True 64 bit base support (Like Windows NT was for 32 bit)
    -Other more or less usefull updates.

    Will everyone NEED it? not initialy, but not everyone needed XP over 2000 or 98/ME at the time. But the added features eventualy became more and more usefull (Things like USB plug and play support, better security, NTFS support, etc).

    If you don't like it, don't buy it. But there is a market for it.
  5. About WinXP Home support: M$ modified their roadmap - since Vista was supposed to be out by now, and has been delayed (time and again), now end of support for XP Home will be when Vista comes out. My bad.

    About Vista being componentized (bad word: use 'modular' instead - I'm not a native English speaker):
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/windowsvista/deploy/depenhnc.mspx
    Quote:
    Modularization
    Windows Vista is the first Microsoft Windows operating system built with stronger principles of modular engineering design. Modularization doesn't just mean that users can choose which optional features to install in the image.
    ...and I remember an interview of M$ chief engineer saying 'XP code is so bloated that you can't count on magic glue to make it work anymore' - which prompted Gates to launch a 6 months redesign binge of the system into components based on W2k3's kernel (which is used in XP 64, too).

    Now Vista looks like a Linux distro, with packages. Hurray for M$.

    About what's more in XP over 2k: ... apart from corrected kernel bugs and corrections of 1-2 bad architecture choices, nothing comes to mind as being revolutionary - maybe someone can explain it to me? (Security Center = annoyance, Firewall = nice addon, NoeXecute = 18 months late feature, Luna theme = resources hog)

    Vista being natively 64-bit: how comes it runs on 32-bit systems, too? It shouldn't be able to do so.
  6. Quote:
    nothing comes to mind as being revolutionary


    Why does it have to be revolutionary?

    Quote:
    Vista being natively 64-bit: how comes it runs on 32-bit systems, too? It shouldn't be able to do so.


    :roll:

    Have you really used it?

    Did you even check out my link?
  7. Frankly, an OS that required 5 YEARS of development from a MULTIBILLION $ company and being touted as the best OS of all times should at least look better than a service pack.

    Mac OS X: switch Macs from proprietary to Unix (more stable, better as a server, portable), with a nice, grandmother-friendly, interface (tested; tested Mac OS 8 and 9, too).

    Win2K: switch from a real-time, mono-user, not memory protected batch of OSes (WinNT4 for the latter, Win9x for all) to a 'real' 386 32-bit protected mode OS.

    Linux 2.4 to 2.6 + Xorg 6.x to 7: a real VM, more reactive kernel with integrated security and real-time capabilities, modular (allowing 3D rendered interface) GUI...

    Now, apart from a modular kernel (like Linux or xBSD) with a few tweaks (something you get between 10.x MacOS releases or 2.6.x Linux kernel releases), what exactly do you get from this OS that hasn't been done somewhere else?

    ...

    Mountain giving birth to a mouse.
  8. :lol: You guys have made me a little bit more curious on Vista. Truth be told, we need a new OS. The reason why i'm so anti at this stage is because I would've REALLY liked the Database type file system - but that is dropped along with other features I gather from the web - and a new OS must really lift the bar on how it enhances hardware calls and provide better performance. The DX10 API sounds interesting though...

    I'll also admit that MS has gone to the ends of the earth to enhance home users entertainment value. If it wasn't for them, we'd be stuck with DX9 and XP for a very longer time. By releasing Vista, they raise the bar and set the trend for the next few years.

    SO, I admit that my sceptism was ill placed, and trust that you can value my acknowledgement of your posts.

    Now, can anyone tell me if DX10 can run on XP. With VISTA being delayed to 2007, what will ATi/Nvidia do in the mean time? That's 9 months of no DX10 platform...
  9. Quote:
    should at least look better than a service pack.


    You haven't used it.

    Quote:
    Now, apart from a modular kernel (like Linux or xBSD) with a few tweaks (something you get between 10.x MacOS releases or 2.6.x Linux kernel releases),


    You didn't even check out my link did you? You haven't used it either.

    Quote:
    what exactly do you get from this OS that hasn't been done somewhere else?


    Support for games and applications. Driver support. DX10. Other stuff I'm too lazy to list.
  10. Quote:
    Now, can anyone tell me if DX10 can run on XP.


    No it can't.

    Seriously people get the beta and try it out before bitching. Its actually good!
  11. Quote:
    G80 from NV was right around the corner, with R600 from ATI slated for Fall. Since DX10 is tied to Vista, there is really no point having these GPUs released this year.


    Why?

    With the possible exception of Halo 2, it's not as though any DX10 _games_ would have been released this year, and it will be years before any games actually require true DX10 chips.

    I'm sure both will run DX9 games faster than current chips, so what's the problem?

    Totally off topic but my real name is Mark Gilbertson..........spooky.

    I really can't see this being a problem form ATI and nvidia as they seem to release new chips every 6 months so there is at least one more generation to come until vista shows its head.
  12. I guess I should get the beta then... :D
  13. I admit not having used it. I will however also precise having read the Wikipedia article you linked to. I've read a lot of interviews from long before it was named Vista. I've read tests of beta 1 and beta 2, and looked at a bunch of screen caps. I've installed the latest public build of IE7. I've read a bunch of MS articles and non-MS articles from guys knowing more about this OS stuff than I do, and compared articles with articles from authors of all horizons.

    On my part, I've tinkered with Win2K/XP services and registry, and compared with functionalities touted in Vista; then functionalities touted in Vista absent from XP, but present in other OSes. I've experimented with stripped down versions of XP, with the 64-bit version, with 'stock' installs, with volume versions (my previous job as a comp technician helped), I've hacked at its features, crashed more than one machine by disabling this or that service, examined it almost DLL by DLL, tortured it and put it to boil.

    Then I switched to Linux - and did the same.

    I'm left with nothing really new. A bunch of bugfixes touted as 'features', mainly.

    As for 'application support', well, winXP doesn't support pre-NT applications that easily. Then, most XP apps are programmed by morons who decided that all their clients will be running it as full-fledged administrators - even something as inane as a local database front-end. I wonder which legacy applications will be supported in Vista. The subset may be even lower than what CXoffice in Linux/BSD can run.

    Let's talk about Windows Graphics Foundation or DirectX10 or whatever. There was this nice little thing that Microsoft helped design, which is called OpenGL - and no, OpenGL isn't 3D only. It can be used to design GUIs, or render existing ones, it displays real-time video quite nicely, supports advanced shader techniques, is supported by most vendors quite well and can scale down gracefully. Heck, there's even a free software renderer available!

    Why not use that? It's well known, stable, current, it IS a standard, and is not much more different from DirectX9 than DX10 will be from DX9.

    I'm not saying that Vista doesn't run well, I'm saying it's nothing extraordinary over what is available now and what it should have been, considering how much we'll have to spend on it and how much MS made us wait for it.
  14. Yay! We turned one! :)

    The way I see it is this: (not directed to anyone in particular, I'm just using the you-passive)

    Vista is coming out. You can either get it or stick to your XP or whatever you're using.

    If you don't get Vista, you miss out in DX10 games and a few nice things. But you'll still manage just like you used to. Others have the opportunity to upgrade and get a few nice things, why would that bother you? You should be happy for them. :P

    The other choics is to get Vista. Spend a few hundred bucks on it and get some of the new features. If you spend even more money, you'll get a DX10 card and enjoy the eye candy. It's nothing you absolutely have to have, so you can choose not to upgrade your hardware and still run Vista if you like.

    Even if Vista and DX10 weren't coming out and you didn't get a new graphics card, you'd miss out on the max settgings on newest games. DX10 isn't changing that. You can still run the DX9 versions of the games.

    So, in short, what is Vista & DX10 offering? The possibility to have all the stuff in Action_Man's link. It's not taking anything away from anyone. Be happy for those, who use this opportunity to make their computers a little bit better. ;)
  15. Turned, hell no! Nudged, yes... :lol: Just kidding.

    Oh well, it will come out, and I'll will buy it. Tech junkies like myself can kick and scream as much as we want to, in the end we submit to defeat. My sceptism leads me to learn, and be educated. Respect the open mindedness though...

    Now, how long will it take me to download the beta with dialup? Or should I rather just wait for the release? :lol: :lol: :lol:
  16. Quote:
    Now, how long will it take me to download the beta with dialup? Or should I rather just wait for the release? :lol: :lol: :lol:
    You'll probably get it a few days before hand that way.

    I should download it and try it out, just to toy with it. I'm kind of leary of beta's, but I think I can keep it seperate from my other system by using a spare HD I have floating around. Shame i'd have to burn it to a DVD though.
  17. Quote:

    Can you name a single benefit that he'll see from Vista? Or are you just going to insult people?


    They'll be able to install Windows Updates for security fixes, long after Windows XP is not supported anymore.

    Vista is more likely to take advantage of the in the hardware, and could end up being the first OS from Microsoft people end up 'supporting'.

    Microsoft suggesting people move to (Registered) ECC as there is going to be so much memory in future systems.... a fine suggestion from MS IMHO.

    Thats the spin I'd put on it if I was a sales person. (Reliable, Supported until 2012 give or take, Games get more resources [XNA may help there], Better overall stability, etc).


    http://www.microsoft.com/xna - Might have something to do with it.
  18. Quote:
    I'm left with nothing really new. A bunch of bugfixes touted as 'features', mainly.


    :roll:

    Quote:
    As for 'application support', well, winXP doesn't support pre-NT applications that easily.


    Its called progress.

    Quote:
    Why not use that?


    Because DX10 is better. Read up on it.

    Quote:
    I'm saying it's nothing extraordinary over what is available now


    Why does it have to be?

    Quote:
    considering how much we'll have to spend on it


    No-ones forcing you to update to it.

    Quote:
    how much MS made us wait for it.


    So?
  19. If you like to spend 300$/€ on bugfixes for a product you already paid for, fine. That's your cash.

    If you want to pay premium price for 'features' that others have been enjoying - sometimes for free - then that's fine too.

    If for you progress means leaving the old behind - eventhough said 'old' stuff should still work as intended - and pay some more for those same features ported to a new OS, fine.

    If for you progress means waiting for 5 years to pay for something that already existed, fine.

    When I saw Vista, I decided to witch to Linux. The more I learnt about Vista, the more I thought: 'what the hell?! I already have that! and that! And bugfixes! For free! With real honest to goodness user support! For free! And I can even contribute back!

    So, please do - rush to Vista's eye-candy (it's all it has to offer), wait 2 years after it's out to see Vista 2 that'll fix bugs (you'll have to pay premium price for it), I'll keep my 3D OpenGL desktop with Aqua-like theme. I'll just enjoy Linux' modular design, secure architecture, latest tech support, thousands of apps and games, and maximum optimization of my existing hardware, plus real-world user support.

    For free.
  20. Now you're just being a troll.

    Linux will never make it on the desktop, its a niche and only good for servers.

    Quote:
    thousands of apps and games


    Compared to millions on windows.

    Quote:
    and maximum optimization of my existing hardware


    Yeah sure.

    Quote:
    plus real-world user support.


    That doesn't exist in the windows world.

    Quote:
    If for you progress means leaving the old behind


    That is progress!

    Quote:
    If for you progress means waiting for 5 years to pay for something that already existed, fine.


    Wait theres games on linux? There's applications on linux? There's good driver support?

    :roll: :roll: :roll:
  21. Yo, Action Man. I think you said that we should d/l the Beta b4 we start bitching. No offense, but I can't find the actual "link" for it. I scoured their site, just telling me some stuff about the Feb CTP. Is it still only open for Developers, etc? Also, what happen to that new hard drive type thing? That instead of NTFS/FAT we'd get something new... Why did it get dropped? Was expecting that alot... A few friends of mine have tried Vista out, computer-loving-people, and they have said it was pretty good. Bring it! And for anyone who is talking about Vista just being a new GUI, are there not some Shell extension programs that'll give you a totally new GUI? I used one once, but it left a HUGE memory footprint, nearly 40,000k of memory usage in Processes...Think it was Aston Shell...Not really related, but hey

    ~Ibrahim~
  22. You have to be part of their MSDN thing or some crap. (I get it through my work)

    If you're up for the illegal way you can hit the torrent sites.
  23. No, I'm not being a troll - I tried many OSes, and while Linux is my OS of choice for now, I'd gladly go for MacOS X if it was available on PC - or Macs weren't so expensive. Because that is indeed an OS that innovated, that actually broadened its application and hardware support range, and that got better with time.

    And it's actually nice to look at and to use.

    Linux never on the desktop, niche market stranded in servers: tell that to those administrations that actually use it on the desktop, or to the guys who are supporting the $100 laptop, or to all those running SuSE, Ubuntu or another 'easy install' partitions. And yes, I'm using Linux on the desktop. I will admit to it not being widespread yet, it may never get there, but it is used by several million people. If a product is made good by the number of its users, then smoking is good for health.

    Bill Gates actually scoffed at the $100 laptop, saying that people in those countries would be better off with a Windows CE cell phone (cost apiece: $600 check here).
    Meaning, a computer is only worth what its interface looks like, not what you can use it for?

    Call me a troll if you want, but I stand my point: Vista is a non-innovative collection of bugfixes wrapped in candy paper reverting to 1970's design practices - which have proven their efficiency.

    At least they fixed bugs, increased standards support in IE and put security on par with UNIX.
  24. Quote:
    Linux never on the desktop, niche market stranded in servers: tell that to those administrations that actually use it on the desktop, or to the guys who are supporting the $100 laptop, or to all those running SuSE, Ubuntu or another 'easy install' partitions.


    Ok I'll tell less then 1% of the market.

    Quote:
    it may never get there


    You got that right.

    Quote:
    If a product is made good by the number of its users, then smoking is good for health.


    Smoking has been proven to be bad for your health, crap analogy at best.

    Quote:
    Bill Gates actually scoffed at the $100 laptop, saying that people in those countries would be better off with a Windows CE cell phone (cost apiece: $600 check here).
    Meaning, a computer is only worth what its interface looks like, not what you can use it for?


    Who cares?

    Quote:
    Vista is a non-innovative collection of bugfixes wrapped in candy paper reverting to 1970's design practices - which have proven their efficiency.


    You've never used it and you don't work at MS. So I stand by the troll comment.
  25. Quote:
    Ok I'll tell less then 1% of the market.


    That was its share in 2002 - now it's closer (if not over) 2%.

    Quote:
    You got that right.


    IIS may overthrow Apache, too.

    Quote:
    Smoking has been proven to be bad for your health, crap analogy at best.


    and Windows has been proven infected by 70 000 virii and several thousand unfixed bugs.

    Quote:
    Who cares?


    You don't care about what the software running on your computer actually does?

    Quote:
    You've never used it and you don't work at MS. So I stand by the troll comment.


    Easy to call someone who doesn't share your opinion a troll. So far you've insulted me - several times, haven't refuted my arguments with more than a shoulder shrug, and misinterpreted my comments. To spell it out to you in plain letters: I'm saying that Vista is what XP should have been when it came out, and that getting it is essentially paying for bugfixes.
  26. Quote:
    Too lazy to type out everything so I'll just provide a link.


    Translation: Vista offers nothing that Joe Sixpack actually wants.

    I mean, honestly: look at your list and tell me there's a single thing there that should make me go 'Wow, I must have that' in the same way that Windows 3.1 to 95 did?

    If Microsoft's marketing program for Vista is going to be 'XP sucks, buy Vista or you're stupid!', then they've come to the end of the line. Right now the only reason I have for not buying a Mac next time rather than a PC is that much of the software I use doesn't run on it: that's a huge step back for Microsoft, from leading the market to trailing.

    BTW, did you see that blog linked to from Slashdot yesterday where even Microsoft programmers were saying that Vista is a buggy, bloated hog which is nowhere near releasable and even they can't think of a reason to want it when their relatives ask them about it?

    Guess not.
  27. Quote:
    That was its share in 2002 - now it's closer (if not over) 2%.


    Woh woh woh!

    Quote:
    IIS may overthrow Apache, too.


    Not in this lifetime.

    Quote:
    and Windows has been proven infected by 70 000 virii and several thousand unfixed bugs.


    Smoking is done by choice.
    Virii can be easily be avoided. It also doesn't affect my health.

    Quote:
    You don't care about what the software running on your computer actually does?


    It has nothing to do with it.

    Quote:
    Easy to call someone who doesn't share your opinion a troll.


    Its also easy to criticise a product you haven't used either. :wink:

    Quote:
    haven't refuted my arguments with more than a shoulder shrug,


    Pfft, I've shot down all your p!ss poor arguements.

    Quote:
    To spell it out to you in plain letters: I'm saying that Vista is what XP should have been when it came out


    Cry about it.

    Quote:
    and that getting it is essentially paying for bugfixes.


    You haven't used it or read about it. DX 10 alone makes it more then bugfixes. Which once agains confirms your troll status.

    Quote:
    Translation: Vista offers nothing that Joe Sixpack actually wants.


    I already highlighted several things users would like and so did other people.

    Quote:
    If Microsoft's marketing program for Vista is going to be 'XP sucks, buy Vista or you're stupid!'


    :roll:

    Quote:
    Right now the only reason I have for not buying a Mac next time rather than a PC is that much of the software I use doesn't run on it


    Yeah that's a crap reason. Damn you Microsoft with your application and driver support!

    Quote:
    that's a huge step back for Microsoft, from leading the market to trailing.


    They still lead.

    Quote:
    Slashdot


    That says enough.

    Quote:
    yesterday where even Microsoft programmers were saying that Vista is a buggy, bloated hog which is nowhere near releasable and even they can't think of a reason to want it when their relatives ask them about it?


    mmhmm.

    Have you used it either?

    Guess not.

    Damn linux and mac fanboys.
  28. Mac sux sux sux sux sux sux sux!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    oh ya and wincrap is junk as well!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    F@ck Microcrap
  29. What if I download a beta of Vista, install it, test it, and still say that it's not worth the hype, the price and the wait?

    I'll get the image today, install it on a spare HD with Vista-able hardware and get back to you sometimes - that'll require a day or two.

    I downloaded and tried Kororaa LiveCD with Xgl yesterday: I had a 3D desktop running in under an hour (from loading the torrent to moving around squiggly windows playing DivX files and/or playing Flash animations). Not bad for a 0.1 version (GNU/Linux distro version 0.1 > MS beta 1?).

    Edit: too bad, it looks like one has to pay to test a Microsoft beta. I can't get it, I can't test it, all I have is word of mouth, so it scores a zero (0) on all marks.

    So, for now:
    Most intuitive desktop: Mac OS X - test bench: n00b 82 yo granny
    Most advanced 3D desktop: Xgl/Gnome - test bench: Sempron, FX5200 system (minimum Vista Aero-capable system)
    Most secure architecture: UNIX/POSIX (Don't Use Root Account!)
    Most available technology preview: GNU/Linux Kororaa (1 hour download/CD burn/CD boot)
    Most impressive Win system: WinXP Pro x64 (that one is actually available as a 180 day trial version - nice, stable, fast, supports many 'legacy' applications).
  30. Quote:
    What if I download a beta of Vista, install it, test it, and still say that it's not worth the hype, the price and the wait?


    Well you'd still be a fanboy since you didn't provide reasons. :wink:

    Quote:
    all I have is word of mouth


    You were so willing to take other peoples before. :wink:
  31. Alright; I got my hands on the very laest build of Vista I could : 5342 (dated 17/03/2006). I installed it on my system, on a 100 GB SATA2 disk partition, with 1 Gb of RAM, an Athlon X2 3800+, and an Nvidia Geforce6600 with 256 Mb DDR on PCI-Express bus (Asus mobo). The system rates 3 because of the graphics card (GF6 = 3.4, 256 Mb RAM = 3.5).

    First impression: takes ages to install, but nothing's new here.
    Second impression: display is sluggish. Since it was supposed to run on DX9 hardware and that my card is more or less 20 times faster than an FX 5200 (minimum for Aero Glass), I find it hard to swallow. Transparency effects are useless, you can't read what's behind the window - misses the point of transparency.
    Third impression: I start WMP 11 to read an MPEG-1 file (nothing fancy here): display is jittery, and my system swaps like mad (I'm reading the MPEG file from an external USB HD). The system eats up 600 Mb of RAM, so there should be 400 Mb still available, but it still swaps.
    Fourth test: using alt-tab. Now, in XP, provided you installed the Powertoys, you had a thumbnail view of the window. Here, it shows everything at once, but then it could have used trilinear filtering instead of bilinear - it's fuzzy.
    Fifth test: browing through files. While classifying things may help somewhat in expansive systems, copying files from one drive to the other has become incredibly difficult - you'll need to rely on wizards to copy one JPEG picture from your USB key to your hard disk?!
    Sixth test: reverting to Windows Classic themes, and starting over: I couldn't believe my eyes, but the system actually stayed SLUGGISH!

    So now, Action_man, I have tested:
    - Linux 2.6 + Xgl + Gnome on a Sempron64 2600+, 512 Mb DDR, starting from a liveCD, with a Nvidia FX 5200 - 128 Mb.
    - Windows Vista Beta2 build 5342 on an Athlon X2 3800+, 1 Gb DDR, starting from a 100 Gb SATA2 drive, with an Nvidia Geforce 6600 - 256 Mb.
    The second system could be rated as being AT LEAST twice as fast as the first.
    On the first system, I had transparent windows (transparency was user set, for each window independantly), 3D desktop (actually I had 4 'normal' Gnome dsktops on the faces of a cube), nice window effect (jelly-like, even while playing video), nearly flawless playback ability (only a bit of movie lag when turning the cube fast), on top of a very classic Linux distro.
    On the second system, I had swap, useless eye-candy (the effects made making out the content difficult and didn't help seeing what was underneath the window), bad playback, several hours to install the system (which destroyed my MBR), confusing layout... meaning, nothing really attractive. I won't mention the display errors, they were too numerous to mention.

    Thus, I can now, in a well informed manner after having tried many systems including the very latest build, say the following:

    Microsoft Windows Vista is a resources hog that is confusing to use, that doesn't bring anything new in way of user experience, that still has errors and shortcomings unbecoming a second beta, and which is, after several years of development, vastly inferior to its established competition (MacOS X is nicer and smoother to use) or to projects developed in only a few months time on existing projects (Xgl over Xorg 7).
    It brings forth an improved security system, which is however not enforced correctly (while it tells you the first account you create is an administrator one, it doesn't make you create a limited account to use at first - you have to do it yourself, and for that you need to navigate several layers of menus and submenus). It also brings forth a new graphics foundation, better than the previous one, but which is still less efficient than existing solutions, which Microsoft helped develop (OpenGL)!!!

    While all I wanted when I tested Kororaa's 3D desktop was install it on my HD, the first thing I'll do after posting this is eradicate Vista from my computer. One wasted DVD.

    So, do I need to elaborate?
  32. Quote:
    Alright; I got my hands on the very laest build of Vista I could : 5342 (dated 17/03/2006). I installed it on my system, on a 100 GB SATA2 disk partition, with 1 Gb of RAM, an Athlon X2 3800+, and an Nvidia Geforce6600 with 256 Mb DDR on PCI-Express bus (Asus mobo). The system rates 3 because of the graphics card (GF6 = 3.4, 256 Mb RAM = 3.5).

    First impression: takes ages to install, but nothing's new here.
    Second impression: display is sluggish. Since it was supposed to run on DX9 hardware and that my card is more or less 20 times faster than an FX 5200 (minimum for Aero Glass), I find it hard to swallow. Transparency effects are useless, you can't read what's behind the window - misses the point of transparency.
    Third impression: I start WMP 11 to read an MPEG-1 file (nothing fancy here): display is jittery, and my system swaps like mad (I'm reading the MPEG file from an external USB HD). The system eats up 600 Mb of RAM, so there should be 400 Mb still available, but it still swaps.
    Fourth test: using alt-tab. Now, in XP, provided you installed the Powertoys, you had a thumbnail view of the window. Here, it shows everything at once, but then it could have used trilinear filtering instead of bilinear - it's fuzzy.
    Fifth test: browing through files. While classifying things may help somewhat in expansive systems, copying files from one drive to the other has become incredibly difficult - you'll need to rely on wizards to copy one JPEG picture from your USB key to your hard disk?!
    Sixth test: reverting to Windows Classic themes, and starting over: I couldn't believe my eyes, but the system actually stayed SLUGGISH!

    So now, Action_man, I have tested:
    - Linux 2.6 + Xgl + Gnome on a Sempron64 2600+, 512 Mb DDR, starting from a liveCD, with a Nvidia FX 5200 - 128 Mb.
    - Windows Vista Beta2 build 5342 on an Athlon X2 3800+, 1 Gb DDR, starting from a 100 Gb SATA2 drive, with an Nvidia Geforce 6600 - 256 Mb.
    The second system could be rated as being AT LEAST twice as fast as the first.
    On the first system, I had transparent windows (transparency was user set, for each window independantly), 3D desktop (actually I had 4 'normal' Gnome dsktops on the faces of a cube), nice window effect (jelly-like, even while playing video), nearly flawless playback ability (only a bit of movie lag when turning the cube fast), on top of a very classic Linux distro.
    On the second system, I had swap, useless eye-candy (the effects made making out the content difficult and didn't help seeing what was underneath the window), bad playback, several hours to install the system (which destroyed my MBR), confusing layout... meaning, nothing really attractive. I won't mention the display errors, they were too numerous to mention.

    Thus, I can now, in a well informed manner after having tried many systems including the very latest build, say the following:

    Microsoft Windows Vista is a resources hog that is confusing to use, that doesn't bring anything new in way of user experience, that still has errors and shortcomings unbecoming a second beta, and which is, after several years of development, vastly inferior to its established competition (MacOS X is nicer and smoother to use) or to projects developed in only a few months time on existing projects (Xgl over Xorg 7).
    It brings forth an improved security system, which is however not enforced correctly (while it tells you the first account you create is an administrator one, it doesn't make you create a limited account to use at first - you have to do it yourself, and for that you need to navigate several layers of menus and submenus). It also brings forth a new graphics foundation, better than the previous one, but which is still less efficient than existing solutions, which Microsoft helped develop (OpenGL)!!!

    While all I wanted when I tested Kororaa's 3D desktop was install it on my HD, the first thing I'll do after posting this is eradicate Vista from my computer. One wasted DVD.

    So, do I need to elaborate?



    Yes one thing you need to realize it is a BETA program so it will not be the performance monster you try to tweak your pitifill computer as. lookup the definition of BETA and get back to us.
  33. How the F did you get it to install. I got the 5342 build via bittorent and you know what ... I'm not goin to type my problems again.

    Read this thread I posted

    Problems Installing Vista Build 5342

    All rig specs are in sig.

    Edit: You know what I have to say about Mac OS X, F it. I'm not retarded I like all those options and tweaks. I can barely figure out how to connect to wifi on OS X LOL. Also wth is with no right click on laptops? Ok ill stop ranting.
  34. Quote:
    Second impression: display is sluggish.


    Tends to happen Nvidia cards. My x800XT has ran every version very nicely whilst my 6800 Ultra runs every version like ass.

    Quote:
    misses the point of transparency.


    Can be disabled.

    Quote:
    Sixth test: reverting to Windows Classic themes, and starting over: I couldn't believe my eyes, but the system actually stayed SLUGGISH!


    Well I've used a radeon 9250 on classic and it was acceptable.

    Quote:
    Microsoft Windows Vista is a resources hog


    *cough* beta *cough*

    Quote:
    that is confusing to use


    For the stupid, maybe.

    Quote:
    that doesn't bring anything new in way of user experience,


    Of course, since it microsoft. :roll:

    Quote:
    (MacOS X is nicer and smoother to use)


    Oh of course. :roll:

    Quote:
    It also brings forth a new graphics foundation, better than the previous one, but which is still less efficient than existing solutions, which Microsoft helped develop (OpenGL)!!!


    DX > OpenGL. OpenGL is practically dead.

    Quote:
    I had swap


    *cough* beta *cough*

    Quote:
    useless eye-candy


    Which can be disabled.

    Quote:
    I won't mention the display errors, they were too numerous to mention.


    Thats Nvidia for you.

    You'll have to do better than that.
  35. Let's say it is a bug with Nvidia cards - ok, could be. I don't have an Ati card available, however it seems strange that one of the two main GPU makers would present buggy products. Had I been trying it on a Matrox card, maybe I could understand. Nvidia, is another thing.

    If you can disable transparency, then one 'nice' feature of Vista disappears - o the other hand, I had no trouble at all with Linux' transparency: fast, user-adjusted, and useful. You lose on that one.

    A radeon 9250 on classic: 'acceptable' ? Well, I expected better than that. Actually, I remember a release candidate for Win98 working smoothly on an S3 Trio 64, their quality standard has gone down.

    I may understand debugging code bloating a system by as much as 30% - that would still make Vista take up 400 Mb of RAM once finalized. That's a bit too much still. 'Beta' can't excuse everything.

    I call 'click through 5 menus and sub-menus to find a file on a USB key' a bit too much. I was always told that two clicks is one too many, so 5?! Maybe you've learnt useability from a nice manual entitled 'GUIs the American way: the more, the better'?

    Yes, there was nothing new on the user experience: most Explorer 'additions' already existed in other OSes (KDE has a very nice disk monitoring applet), the rest was a slightly brushed up Luna theme (with yet more submenu layers added), and an abundance of tabs. Now tabs are a good idea - one which MS got hammered with from little upstarts Opera and Firefox. So, yes, nothing new, more ripoffs - Microsoft indeed.

    Even MS can't refute the fact that Apple's GUIs are better: they spend their time copying them.

    OpenGL dead? Damn, then I guess Halo - the movie - will have to be delayed. I mean, Microsoft's big blockbuster movie, adapted from its blockbuster vid game, has most of its effects rendered on Linux rigs - which don't run DX10. Too bad. If OpenGL is dead, why isn't the movie being rendered on Win2003 clusters with DirectX9.0C November 2005 edition?

    Well, if the system swapped so much with 400 Mb of RAM still available, then the memory manager needs to be thrown out and replaced. Maybe with XP's... For a second beta, it's getting heavy.

    As for the display errors, well, I'm not so sure they were nvidia's: most were font-related. May have something to do with MS's new font renderer...

    Oh, it's still beta. Silly me.

    That's still a lot of bugs for an advanced second beta. But then, MS' products usually get out of beta around the 3rd service pack. Maybe by then it'll manage to surpass the smoothness and few resources use of a first edition 0.1 Linux livecd developed in 2 months time by a few enthusiasts in their spare time...
  36. Quote:
    blah blah blah blah


    I agree with must of the things you've said in this thread, however, I can't shake the remarkable urge to kill you.
  37. Quote:
    Let's say it is a bug with Nvidia cards - ok, could be. I don't have an Ati card available, however it seems strange that one of the two main GPU makers would present buggy products. Had I been trying it on a Matrox card, maybe I could understand. Nvidia, is another thing.


    Nvidias driver suck. Probably a combination of that and DX9L.

    Quote:
    If you can disable transparency, then one 'nice' feature of Vista disappears - o the other hand, I had no trouble at all with Linux' transparency: fast, user-adjusted, and useful. You lose on that one.


    Wait. Its a nice feature but you bitch about it? *confused*

    Quote:
    A radeon 9250 on classic: 'acceptable' ? Well, I expected better than that.


    Like? It to run aero? It'd probably be decent with integrated graphics, I still haven't tried it yet.

    Quote:
    Actually, I remember a release candidate for Win98 working smoothly on an S3 Trio 64, their quality standard has gone down.


    You can run Win98 nicely on anything. Same with XP (except for one effect)

    Quote:
    I may understand debugging code bloating a system by as much as 30% - that would still make Vista take up 400 Mb of RAM once finalized.


    Only took up 400mb on mine. 512mb is minimum.

    Quote:
    OpenGL dead? Damn, then I guess Halo - the movie - will have to be delayed. I mean, Microsoft's big blockbuster movie, adapted from its blockbuster vid game, has most of its effects rendered on Linux rigs - which don't run DX10. Too bad. If OpenGL is dead, why isn't the movie being rendered on Win2003 clusters with DirectX9.0C November 2005 edition?


    You need some reading lessons. I said PRACTICALLY dead.

    DX10 isn't out and I don't think its finished either. :wink: :roll:

    Quote:
    Even MS can't refute the fact that Apple's GUIs are better: they spend their time copying them.


    What, pointless eye candy? Macs suck anyway.

    Quote:
    That's still a lot of bugs for an advanced second beta


    Not really, they've only had like two feature complete versions.

    Quote:
    But then, MS' products usually get out of beta around the 3rd service pack.


    :roll:

    Quote:
    Maybe by then it'll manage to surpass the smoothness and few resources use of a first edition 0.1 Linux livecd developed in 2 months time by a few enthusiasts in their spare time...


    :roll:

    You need to try harder.

    Quote:
    I agree with must of the things you've said in this thread, however, I can't shake the remarkable urge to kill you.


    I get that a lot. :P
  38. nvidia drivers suck: that's the first time EVER I've seen something like that; considering the resources they spend on them and the trouble I have with my bro's Ati 9500 (he wouldn't let me test Vista on it, and I didn't push the matter much) and its drivers, I'd say that if Nvidia's drivers suck, then Ati's drivers are written by illiterate monkeys: they just don't work!

    Well Vista's transparency is eye candy: you can't read what's in the window behind (which would help nicely) - in Xgl linux, you can! And it's fast! So it's useful, nice looking, and adjustable. In Vista, it's slow, nice looking, and either on or off. So yes, I bitch about it.

    You should run Vista on standard systems (it's not like the ones I used are particularly sub-par, they are conforming to the minimum requirements, and then some, to run Aero!), and while Win98 did ran on then standard systems (S3Trio64 was pretty much a standard), so did its release candidate 0. Well, Vista's beta 2 doesn't. Not even close.

    400 Mb on yours? Well, How did you do that? I was testing the standard install, so if you shut down some services, well, you'd get that - but then you're disabling Vista's add-ons. 600 Mb used up on first (and second, and third) boot, that's a bit too much.

    And Vista is PRACTICALLY out. Looks like it'll take a few more years for OpenGL to 'die', as you said. If I can remember Microsoft saying that DirectX would replace OpenGL completely by 1999... heh.. haha... bwahaha... WAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!

    Back to the subject: what is the industry going to support? DirectX 10, that works only on a particular platform and completely changes every 2years or so, or OpenGL, which works on pretty much anything that can do 3D (even cell phones) and allows a single code base to run on Windows, Mac, Linux, Solaris, from embedded systems to workstations, and that can deal with 2D, 3D, client-server architecture, and robust enough to be extended without needing a complete rewrite every 2 years?

    Two feature complete PUBLIC versions. If they don't issue internal development builds more often, I wonder how they can test their stuff.

    Let's track SPs: NT4, most softwares require SP4 or later; Win2k, SP3 changed several subsystems on top of the usual bugfixes - and actually made the system stable (I stopped getting BSODs on it right then); Office2000: able to complete a long Word document by SP3 (since SP2 wa so buggy you can't find it anymore), not before. WinXP: Well, extensive OS reworking done by SP2, but considering how often it was delayed, it can be called SP3. So, MS products are actually finalized by their 3rd SP.

    You haven't tried Kororaa, which requires the DIFFICULT task of DOWNLOADING a 450 Mb ISO, burn it on a CD, boot from it - no install needed, and compare. 1 hour time, all included, even reading the small help file that awaits you on the desktop, and you allow yourself to compare. So, I'll just answer you this, in your own words in a reversed situation:

    fanboy.

    Well, you called me stupid, a fanboy and a troll. Since I actually tested both products on top of getting intelligence and advices from other parties, I wonder what that makes of you.

    I really hope you're just pulling my leg and don't actually hold Vista as the Graal. Otherwise I fear for your sanity - except if you have the excuse of being a Microsoft official.
  39. Quote:
    considering the resources they spend on them


    And considering how often they come out.

    Quote:
    they just don't work!


    BS. ATI drivers > Nvidia drivers. They're just awful.

    Quote:
    Well Vista's transparency is eye candy: you can't read what's in the window behind (which would help nicely) - in Xgl linux, you can! And it's fast! So it's useful, nice looking, and adjustable. In Vista, it's slow, nice looking, and either on or off. So yes, I bitch about it.


    Meh, I'm sure they'll update it. And its not like its useful.

    Quote:
    400 Mb on yours? Well, How did you do that?


    Default install.

    Quote:
    And Vista is PRACTICALLY out.


    I didn't realise january/feburary (whichever it is) was so close.

    Quote:
    If I can remember Microsoft saying that DirectX would replace OpenGL completely by 1999... heh.. haha... bwahaha... WAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!


    Everyone makes crap predictions.

    Quote:
    Back to the subject: what is the industry going to support? DirectX 10, that works only on a particular platform and completely changes every 2years or so, or OpenGL, which works on pretty much anything that can do 3D (even cell phones) and allows a single code base to run on Windows, Mac, Linux, Solaris, from embedded systems to workstations, and that can deal with 2D, 3D, client-server architecture, and robust enough to be extended without needing a complete rewrite every 2 years?


    Meh give it time.

    Quote:
    Win2k, SP3 changed several subsystems on top of the usual bugfixes - and actually made the system stable (I stopped getting BSODs on it right then);


    Win2k was solid as with SP2.

    Quote:
    ffice2000: able to complete a long Word document by SP3


    Never used a office SP and I refuse to, unless they don't bring back ctfmon.exe when you install it.

    Quote:
    WinXP: Well, extensive OS reworking done by SP2, but considering how often it was delayed, it can be called SP3. So, MS products are actually finalized by their 3rd SP.


    XP was solid as with SP1.

    Quote:
    You haven't tried Kororaa, which requires the DIFFICULT task of DOWNLOADING a 450 Mb ISO, burn it on a CD, boot from it - no install needed, and compare. 1 hour time, all included, even reading the small help file that awaits you on the desktop, and you allow yourself to compare. So, I'll just answer you this, in your own words in a reversed situation:

    fanboy.


    Why do I need that specific distro when I have suse 10 and Fedora Core 4 installed? :wink:

    Quote:
    I really hope you're just pulling my leg and don't actually hold Vista as the Graal.


    Never said it was. Its a nice evolutionary step up which fixes existing issues and brings many useful features. More so for the enthusiasts then joe sixpack (screw him)
  40. NVIDIA beta drivers come out almost every two weeks; only most stable revisions (those that get the WHQL cert, as a matter of fact) don't change too often.

    Nvidia drivers > Ati drivers - at least I didn't get color corruption, video flipped upside down, bad YUV conversion from a 'release' Nvidia driver (while I certainly did from an Ati 'release' driver).

    You don't find useful to be able to make the active window semi-transparent so that you can keep an eye on a browser window underneath for, say, copying a quote or checking figures while you type a report or something?

    It's strange that for the same install (default install) there would be a 200 Mb difference. It may just be a bug in Vista. 400 Mb is still quite a lot, considering there's no antivirus, no widget loaded.

    Well, since 'select professionals' should get it by october, yes, it's getting quite close. Maybe they are selling those 'select professionals' release candidate versions. MS is the only firm I know that charges its beta-testers premium price for testing its products.

    OpenGL: well, MS said it should be dead by 1999, and it actually is more used now than then - several (high profile) games, on windows still, on MacOS X (new since then), and embedded systems. So, there's even less chance of it dying now. It may happen, alright, it's highly unlikely. At the very least, it can do what DX10 is supposed to do, and it can do it now. Maybe by the time MS release DX25 will we see a drop in the use of OpenGL...

    I still got BSODs with win2k sp2 - I started using it as my main MS system only with SP3 (kept Win98 SE until then). After seeing a page numbering bug (on top of instability) on Off2k, having a colleague loose a 10-days effort on his thesis due to a crash + file system corruption caused by OffXP, I learnt NOT to use a MS Office before its first SP - and to not rely on it before its SP3. I don't care anymore, I switched to OOo 1.1 when it came out. At least it allowed me to type and format my 450 pages thesis without crashing once. XP sp1: right.

    Well then, if you have SuSE installed, have you tried Xgl on it? I was mentioning Kororaa because it is actually quite practical.
  41. Quote:
    NVIDIA beta drivers come out almost every two weeks


    I much prefer WHQL drivers. I also prefer them monthly rather then randomly.

    Quote:
    at least I didn't get color corruption, video flipped upside down, bad YUV conversion from a 'release' Nvidia driver (while I certainly did from an Ati 'release' driver).


    I at least I don't get optimisations that sacrifice IQ. I've also never had any problems on my 9600XT and x800XT.

    Quote:
    You don't find useful to be able to make the active window semi-transparent so that you can keep an eye on a browser window underneath for, say, copying a quote or checking figures while you type a report or something?


    Having a sense of timing and clicking is hard? meh.

    Quote:
    It's strange that for the same install (default install) there would be a 200 Mb difference. It may just be a bug in Vista. 400 Mb is still quite a lot, considering there's no antivirus, no widget loaded.


    Widgets blow. 400mb will most likely go down till around 300 odd.

    Quote:
    Well, since 'select professionals' should get it by october


    Who are select pros?

    Quote:
    MS is the only firm I know that charges its beta-testers premium price for testing its products.


    But they're products don't come out of beta till SP3 :wink:

    Quote:
    several (high profile) games, on windows still


    Sh!tty ID games and that's about it.

    Quote:
    I still got BSODs with win2k sp2


    I used it when it first came out and have used every SP and its only ever gotten a BSOD with hardware errors.

    Quote:
    on Off2k, having a colleague loose a 10-days effort on his thesis due to a crash + file system corruption caused by OffXP, I learnt NOT to use a MS Office before its first SP


    I've used every version with every service pack and they've all been rock solid.

    Quote:
    Well then, if you have SuSE installed, have you tried Xgl on it? I was mentioning Kororaa because it is actually quite practical.


    Nope, didn't get a chance to test suse out (formatted). I'll install it on one of my other comps when I have the time.
  42. Quote:
    I much prefer WHQL drivers. I also prefer them monthly rather then randomly.
    Well, I prefer them when they just work instead of randomly.

    Quote:
    I at least I don't get optimisations that sacrifice IQ. I've also never had any problems on my 9600XT and x800XT.
    Sacrifice IQ: This hasn't been the case since 56.72. Ati cards -provided you can find good drivers- do work well.

    Quote:
    Having a sense of timing and clicking is hard? meh.
    Nope, but just not having to click is even better.

    Quote:
    Widgets blow. 400mb will most likely go down till around 300 odd.
    I'll grant you that - I wonder what made my defautl install inflate to 600Mb, I was using the 32-bit build.

    Quote:
    Who are select pros?
    Dunno, I'm quoting the articles I've seen.

    Quote:
    But they're products don't come out of beta till SP3 :wink:
    Okay, they charge their customers to test their ALPHAs.

    Quote:
    Sh!tty ID games and that's about it.
    Blizzard provides an OpenGL renderer for Warcraft III - I think there's one for WoW too.

    Quote:
    I used it when it first came out and have used every SP and its only ever gotten a BSOD with hardware errors.
    Lucky you.

    Quote:
    I've used every version with every service pack and they've all been rock solid.
    they're rock solid to type a fast one-page memo - they start getting unstable on the 2nd page, and have a 50% chance to crash on page 20+. And yes, I've tried them all on different OSes on different rigs.

    Quote:
    Nope, didn't get a chance to test suse out (formatted). I'll install it on one of my other comps when I have the time.
    Well then, you can test it using Kororaa.
  43. Quote:
    NVIDIA beta drivers come out almost every two weeks


    I much prefer WHQL drivers. I also prefer them monthly rather then randomly.


    ATI Linux drivers are ther worst thing I see:

    Monthly? Where? from 12/08/05 to 03/08/06 there are more than a month.

    Fire GL or professional drivers, the same. The only way ATI is better is playing DirectX crap.

    Autodesk have to:Smooth line display is disabled due to performance and stability problems.
    Maya: Shaders using HardwareTexturing-> TextureFilter-> MipmapNearest, MipmapLinear, MipmapBilinear or MipmapTrilinear, will display incorrectly in the Hardware Render Buffer.

    ATI have good drivers for vista beta but have a crap in linux, openGL. If you only focus in Windows you do things faster and worse, better work to customers ( operative systems in the market) than to press releases (Vista).

    If microsoft disables Open GL in Vista they could lose all professional and get one gaming operative crap.
  44. Quote:
    Well, I prefer them when they just work instead of randomly.


    Never had a problem.

    Quote:
    Sacrifice IQ: This hasn't been the case since 56.72. Ati cards -provided you can find good drivers- do work well.


    BS. It still happens.

    Quote:
    Nope, but just not having to click is even better.


    Meh.

    Quote:
    Lucky you.


    Seemed to be the case for most people.

    Quote:
    they're rock solid to type a fast one-page memo - they start getting unstable on the 2nd page, and have a 50% chance to crash on page 20+. And yes, I've tried them all on different OSes on different rigs.


    Again never happened to me or most people. Or anyone at my office either.

    Quote:
    ATI Linux drivers are ther worst thing I see:


    Linux = really small market share so they get the least amount of people. And they're rock solid too.

    Quote:
    Monthly? Where? from 12/08/05 to 03/08/06 there are more than a month.


    For what?

    Quote:
    Fire GL or professional drivers, the same.


    They're done like that for max stability.

    Quote:
    If microsoft disables Open GL in Vista they could lose all professional and get one gaming operative crap.


    Its not disabled.

    Quote:
    ATI have good drivers for vista beta but have a crap in linux, openGL.


    :roll: They're OpenGL and linux drivers are good. I've never had any problems on my two desktops and my notebook.
  45. Started reading this thread hoping to find some actual information and instead all I got from this entire thread is vision forming in my head of large numbers counting down my IQ as read each of Action_Man's posts. :(

    So the general conversation for it at the office water fountain breaks down to three generalized comments that fit any question asked and are totally interchangable without consideration of the subject matter.

    response 1 : your stupid. thier stupid. we're all stupid. anything goes with stupid.

    response 2: if you don't see why its just plain better then <insert response 1>

    Microsoft and the press are touting AERO and the new look and the 3D desktop as one of the main features of Vista. Saying you can just turn it off is the same as me saying my computer runs just fine without the monitor hooked up, but it kind of makes that 32" HD monitor I just bought seem like less of a good thing, my old 19" CRT looked just as good and was just as useful not connected.

    Further more if you want to play the champion of vista then take the time to talk about and explain the OS and changes to it, personal experiences, little things you noted here and there playing in its sandbox etc. Saying you're too lazy to type out the info and then not being to lazy to make post after post on near useless dribble is not the way to make anyone want to have anything to do with vista.
  46. not bad for a newbie...
    but you forgot MS is stupid and evil.
    and slow and bloated, and it takes 8gig just to boot the os after 3 crashes just trying.
    It will be loaded with bugs and a haven for viruses and spyware.
    And finally no software will be written utilizing 64-bit for 3 more years and another 3 years till they are stable.
  47. Quote:
    Microsoft and the press are touting AERO and the new look and the 3D desktop as one of the main features of Vista. Saying you can just turn it off is the same as me saying my computer runs just fine without the monitor hooked up


    Well thats the thing, you can disable things you dont like or want. Damn MS for allowing that! Damn them to hell!

    Quote:
    Further more if you want to play the champion of vista then take the time to talk about and explain the OS and changes to it


    What am I? A salesperson? I'm just saying the typical anti ms crap people post is moronic. So is not using it and criticising it.

    Quote:
    Saying you're too lazy to type out the info


    I provided a link with all the changes made, gez.

    Quote:
    is not the way to make anyone want to have anything to do with vista.


    Again, not a salesperson. The message is; don't criticise something you've never used and generic anti-ms calls are lame.
  48. @Action_man: you have good points. You like Vista and MS softwares, that's your right. You've had the luck of not losing several days of hard work while using non-patched versions of MS stuff, good for you. Vista's latest build runs flawlessly on your system, that's great.

    I have been using and supporting people using MS softwares for years - starting 1993, actually. I usually needed to spend hours every month (if not days when I was doing it professionally) debugging, and trying to recover lost data caused by an MS bug or virus, even with educated users. I reduced said workload greatly when I installed an alternate firewall (Kerio PF), an alternate antivirus (KAV or AVP), an alternate web browser (FF), an alternate office suite (OOo) and an alternate media player (WinAmp + Media Player Classic): people I needed to help out every months were suddenly set for a couple of years. Those who went the Mac way merely required my help finding and installing NeoOffice.

    I've tried Vista on a mainstream, upper mid-range system; let me remind you: X2 3800+ RAM 1Gb HD 100Gb GF6600 256 Mb, clean install, latest drivers. Vista uses at least 600 Mb of RAM by itself and is Damn Slow (tm) - swapping all the time. Disabling this or that effect requires a trip down 4 layers of submenus, copying a file from a USB disk to a HD folder requires 5 clicks (that's 3 too may).

    Now, it very well may be that those faults are caused by Vista still being beta. Still, it indicates a faulty graphics subsystem (DX10), a faulty font rendering subsystem, a faulty VM (kernel), bloated interface code (.Net?), and not useability tested GUI. That's still quite a lot. Compared to a Linux LiveCD version 0.1 (more or less alpha 1) touting a Gnome 3D desktop with pretty much the same functionalities and eye-candy (and actually making it useful), Vista looks bad.

    I won't participate in this thread anymore.
  49. Quote:
    You like Vista and MS softwares, that's your right.


    They have their place like everything else does.

    Quote:
    Those who went the Mac way merely required my help finding and installing NeoOffice.


    Well if they're too stupid they should be on macs.

    Quote:
    You've had the luck of not losing several days of hard work while using non-patched versions of MS stuff, good for you.


    There's many others out there too.

    Quote:
    Still, it indicates a faulty graphics subsystem(DX10)


    It works a treat. You mean DX9.

    Linux has its place and its on servers and workstations. Its not going to make it on the desktop unless they make some changes, which won't happen.
  50. Just for you mitch.

    Yeah I was slow getting around to it.

    Not bad for a clean install though.
Ask a new question

Read More

Graphics Cards GPUs Windows Vista ATI Graphics Product