Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

my-god-i-hate-ms

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
January 25, 2007 1:59:42 AM

ahh the point is im not spending 400 dollars for a bloody dx upgrade. thats pretty much what vista is to me.

they try to explain in marketing speak why dx10 wont run on anything but vista, its all a bogus load of bs. its just an api, its not like were asking them to port it to linux. they claim to support xp until 2014, well what about directx.

not like there is a big difference between dx9 and 10, yet... im sure there will be eventually, but it basically killed gaming on xp artificially, like carmack bitched about in that interview with game informer.

im real sick of the people who still support them and are like ahh well yea vista is not so good but im sure it will improve. bla bla bla.

its still the nt kernel right? great big deal. glx/beryl is an addon to x that does the same shit, i mean theres binary packages for it. so in 6 years all microsoft actually managed to do was to make a new theme for windows, and rewrote dx apparently and claim that its a vista exclusive arrghhghg

More about : god hate

January 25, 2007 2:36:30 AM

Perhaps it will be cracked... then I won't have to hire the lawyer for the Class action lawsuit I'm planning.
January 25, 2007 3:29:35 AM

"not like there is a big difference between dx9 and 10, yet... i"

Have you even been reading anything about DX10?

THERE IS SUCH A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO!

First and most important is, Stream processors and Geometry Shaders, These did not exist until DX10 and DX10 Graphics card.

Instead of me telling why DX10 and Crysis is going to be the &^*#
Why not let THG guide do it?

What Direct X 10 is all about
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/08/what_direct3d_10...
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
January 25, 2007 3:44:15 AM

Hi,

The folks who made this video share your sentiments.
January 25, 2007 3:49:13 AM

Quote:
so in 6 years all microsoft actually managed to do was to make a new theme for windows, and rewrote dx apparently and claim that its a vista exclusive arrghhghg


Hahaha. Yeah, that's about right.
January 25, 2007 2:54:22 PM

Quote:
"not like there is a big difference between dx9 and 10, yet... i"

Have you even been reading anything about DX10?

THERE IS SUCH A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO!

First and most important is, Stream processors and Geometry Shaders, These did not exist until DX10 and DX10 Graphics card.

Instead of me telling why DX10 and Crysis is going to be the &^*#
Why not let THG guide do it?

What Direct X 10 is all about
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/11/08/what_direct3d_10...


That's debatable.

There isn't a whole lot different about DX10, yet. Sure Crysis looks nice but it's not too different from some DX9 games, yet. When DX10 really gets going that's when we'll see some excellent graphics improvements.
January 25, 2007 3:00:34 PM

Quote:
Hi,

The folks who made this video share your sentiments.
:lol: 
January 25, 2007 3:02:52 PM

I found your post *cough* rant *cough* informative, and completely necessary... :roll:
January 25, 2007 3:34:02 PM

from what ive read, isnt vista a complete overhaul? i dont think its just a rehashed version of xp.

you see, the last time microsoft made a major OS change, i was stuck using a mac and didnt notice. however, im assuming that there were people bitching then about having to go from 2000 to xp, just as there are people bitching about having to go from xp to vista now.

when its all said and done, within a year every enthusiast on this forum will be using windows vista. thats my prediction.
January 25, 2007 4:10:58 PM

In a years time put a poll up to see how many people are running XP vs. Vista. I expect unless MS gets its head out of it DRM filled rear end then you will still see a lot of people running XP. I will be unless something forces me to change (in which case I will dual boot).
January 25, 2007 4:12:35 PM

Buy Ultimate now and then upgrade your machine.
January 25, 2007 4:15:51 PM

if we're lucky windows vista will have half the bugs winxp had. Also, what ever happened to the WINFS ?
January 25, 2007 4:23:14 PM

Quote:
ahh the point is im not spending 400 dollars for a bloody dx upgrade. thats pretty much what vista is to me.

Your arguments might be valid but the $400 price is wrong. Try $100 for Home Basic, $119 for Home Premium, $150 for Business and $200 for Ultimate. All of them give you DX10 and the most expensive is half of what you're claiming it costs.
January 25, 2007 4:30:23 PM

Quote:
In a years time put a poll up to see how many people are running XP vs. Vista. I expect unless MS gets its head out of it DRM filled rear end then you will still see a lot of people running XP. I will be unless something forces me to change (in which case I will dual boot).

Don't worry... Bill Gates & Co. is going to twist your arm and have you running Vista when they want you running Vista... doesn't really have anything to do with what you want or when you want it.
January 25, 2007 4:46:13 PM

I think the reality of it is that Vista is much more complex than XP and therefore will likely have much more trouble with bugs. For example the DRM subsystem they have made adds resource overhead. It greatly increases the chances of having driver issues thanks to the content industry's demands.

I imagine a new car model with so many security systems that it's faster to walk to your destination than provide samples of blood,breath,urine,retina,finger print, etc...etc...
But at least it will still be there when you get back... :lol: 
January 25, 2007 4:54:59 PM

Don't worry about it, kid. Your parents will get you Vista for Christmas.
January 25, 2007 5:00:54 PM

rodney_ws:
Quote:
Don't worry... Bill Gates & Co. is going to twist your arm and have you running Vista when they want you running Vista... doesn't really have anything to do with what you want or when you want it.


Not me my friend, I've already switched to Linux for personal computing. But in the work place I'm afraid I'm a prisoner as you've described....
But I've planted seeds and who knows maybe Vista will help them grow.

:lol: 
January 25, 2007 5:03:50 PM

word to all of you that agree with the original poster. For all of the rest of you that think Vista will pwn you are ALL newbs. The only think microsoft has gotten better at is breaking it off in our rears and getting more people to take it with a grin. Although I will have to say that ME was probably its biggest scam to date, however, 98SE might actually be though it is debatable. Think about what he said and he's right. 400 for ultimate and the only thing that is different? Thats right DX10 oh yeah and nicer looking icons LMFAO. Its pathetic that we have to pay for that shit. I want to get it for the simple point that I want the new dx but I'm waiting a long time for that price to come down which it probably won't considering that for the longest time, the majority of its life, XP prices remained constant for retail. Microsoft is the worlds largest crook and we call it business. My radical views on business are not accepted by most but thats ok, I'm not posting for support. I just think that America in general has gotten way out of hand and has forgotten the point of business and I can assure you it wasn't, "lets see how much money I can trick this guy into giving me". It was to provide a good or service for a reasonable price because you couldn't get it anywhere else. Now we can, but we have seemed to have become accustomed to getting screwed and we are much more tolerant of it. People are lazy including myself and don't want to switch because there is so much to life outside of computers and the other stuff is such a pain in the butt to get working. Linux is impossible to get everything to work with and OSX is like the idiot OS and you really can't do very much. All companies when they get to a certain point start to compromise their morals and it becomes all about the money. Thats all this little upgrade to Vista is about. Microsoft's coffers are getting low so its time to do a little butt humping. Bend over consumers!
January 25, 2007 5:06:01 PM

Quote:
are you sure about that. why would you need the ultimate edition to support multi cores when even xp home supports them. AFAIK microsoft hasn't changed that. they wouldn't dare.

i have a funny feeling(hope im not wrong) that you are a silly noob who doesn't understand the difference about multi cores and multi sockets just like those who say you need xp pro to use anything other than single cores.

Yes, he's confused about cores and sockets. Non-Ultimate versions are supposed to support infinite cores... just one socket... and because Intel's current quad-core offerings sit in a single socket, they'll work just fine.

However, because of the way AMD handles quad-core (2 physical chips), that type of setup would require XP Professional or Vista Ultimate... that's of course assuming I have a firm grasp on this topic this time around :) 
January 25, 2007 5:08:03 PM

Man you said it. People caught wind over the years and the piracy rate was through the roof with XP and yet microsoft is still the richest company in history LMFAO Thats unbelievable. They are just getting way tooooooooooo greedy.
January 25, 2007 5:12:09 PM

Quote:
ahh the point is im not spending 400 dollars for a bloody dx upgrade. thats pretty much what vista is to me.

Your arguments might be valid but the $400 price is wrong. Try $100 for Home Basic, $119 for Home Premium, $150 for Business and $200 for Ultimate. All of them give you DX10 and the most expensive is half of what you're claiming it costs.

No my friend you are wrong that is for the OEM versions of all of that which if you ask me $50 is over priced. You can't change machines you have to activate within 30 days or its void plus everytime you do a hardware change you have to report it to microsoft within 3 days. Its rediculous. It was the same with XP but now that microsoft has crossed the line of no return it will now likely be enforced by MGA nagware.
January 25, 2007 5:16:34 PM

sounds about right to me
January 25, 2007 5:19:44 PM

VISTA tries to do what Macs have been doing for years, but without much success. who cares about 3D icons and hardware hogging stacked and zoomed 3D windows when it's still the same monopolistic crap riddled with security and performance flaws? the only reason M$ will "sell" millions of units of this bloatware is because it will be prepackaged on new computers (some 40+ million in the US alone)

there are already simple activation cracks available online that defeat VISTA's true purpose - copyright protection

I would not be surprised to see a DX10 module for XP - DX9 supports all flavors back to 98
a b U Graphics card
January 25, 2007 5:34:43 PM

Vista will slow your machine down.
More people will be turning to Linux in order to get decent performance out of their machine.
January 25, 2007 5:43:45 PM

Firstly the upgrade isn't $400.... you cna get by with home prium easily unless you need to be aprt of a domain. And the upgrade cost for that is more around $149...

Secondly... "just an api"... take the word just out. An API is a method for using resources. If those resources are not available having the API is worthless.... Its easy to say "well they could add it", but its not necissarily that easy, nor will there be a large demand for it outside of gamers. Unless you have actual experience coding (and I don't mean "hello world") I advise you not to make over-generalizations. With millions of lines of code in XP it may well be too tricky for them to get right through a patch (I don't particularlly have confidence anyone at MS knows what the code is doing).
January 25, 2007 5:47:51 PM

Quote:
Hi,

The folks who made this video share your sentiments.


ROFL You must have shares in youtube :wink: You seem to be answering posts with vids lately.
January 25, 2007 5:49:58 PM

Quote:
Hi,

The folks who made this video share your sentiments.


ROFL You must have shares in youtube :wink: You seem to be answering posts with vids lately.
You mean shares in GOOG.
January 25, 2007 5:59:49 PM

Quote:
ahh the point is im not spending 400 dollars for a bloody dx upgrade. thats pretty much what vista is to me.

Your arguments might be valid but the $400 price is wrong. Try $100 for Home Basic, $119 for Home Premium, $150 for Business and $200 for Ultimate. All of them give you DX10 and the most expensive is half of what you're claiming it costs.

No my friend you are wrong that is for the OEM versions of all of that.

No my acquaintance, you are wrong. Those are upgrade prices. 400 is the full version of Ultimate. Who among you doesn't already have a valid Windows XP license? Why in the world would you buy a full version when the upgrade is half the price and you already meet the requirements to use it? And why in the world would you repeatedly post the same point ("M$ Pista suxorz my buttsorz!") when you don't have valid one?

Perhaps you need mpjesse's advice again:

Quote:
The folks who made this video share your sentiments.


(BTW, I changed the link to a higher quality version. :wink:) 
January 25, 2007 8:42:04 PM

Well let's break this down a little...

Quote:
ahh the point is im not spending 400 dollars for a bloody dx upgrade. thats pretty much what vista is to me.

The upgrade is roughly half the price. Well, unless you were upgrading from a pirated XP. Or unless you're an OCD nutcase like me who likes to have un-tethered licenses whenever possible. Or maybe you're not referring to US currency?

Quote:
they try to explain in marketing speak why dx10 wont run on anything but vista, its all a bogus load of bs. its just an api, its not like were asking them to port it to linux.

Well yeah, it's just an API. But DirectX is a Microsoft product, right? Is there a DirectX API native in OS-X or Linux? No. So unless or until someone makes a third-party API package, either commercial or open source, then MS' FUD is more or less on mark.

The new API supports the new archictures. While I'm sure a DX10 API could map new commands to older architecture with some help, the performance won't be there. Or so I have to presume ;-).

Then you have to wonder about the performance of third party DX packages. Folks worrying about whether they're getting 140fps or 150fps in some FPS game (even though your eye can't discern the difference and display scan rates won't reveal the improvement) will certainly be concerned.

Quote:
all microsoft actually managed to do was to make a new theme for windows, and rewrote dx apparently and claim that its a vista exclusive arrghhghg

This just tells me you haven't been paying attention.

I'm going to completely bypass all the stuff that VARs, IT architects and CIOs look for in terms of supportability, managability, etc. for a moment.

First example, how come Dragon Naturally Speaking recently started appearing on bargain shelves? Easy, it's because speech recognition is built into Vista now. I haven't tried it yet so I'm not sure if it's as good (however good you think DNS may have been), but it's there. Good, DNS needed the competition, it was getting stale.

Search mechanisms have improved vastly. Honestly, I don't understand why these tools weren't available ten years ago. I thought when OS/2 came up with Extended Attributes that someone would think of leveraging the bits. Sheesh.

Windows' traditionally lame backup mechanisms are finally serious and usable.

They've tried to make home networking idiot-proof. I'm convinced this will cause people like me - who make money from people who are afraid of simple things like activating a cellphone - to discover an entirely new category of idiots. But I'm a cynical bastard.

Vista includes a lot of performance features geared toward some tech that is Not Quite Here Yet. Things like hybrid HDs are a little too young still, but the capability is promising. Maybe they knew it won't be usable for two more years but felt like adding it to Vista to make the package more impressive. Anybody's guess.

And they took another major step toward preventing Internet Explorer and Windows itself from being the Typhoid Mary of the Internet. I'll reserve judgement for a few months, waiting to see what the malware authors can accomplish and how many users will shoot themselves in the foot by turning off the annoying prompts.

It's not like I had to dig through gigabytes of Google'd pages to find this crap, it's two clicks away on MS' site. Well, at least without the skeptical editorializing. Click more, find more.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no MS fan, even though it's providing me a fine living at the moment, and my favorite clip in the world is in South Park the Movie where Windows crashes during his presentation and he shoots Bill Gates. But since I'm doing this stuff for a living I think it's helpful to show you a more balanced point of view. Well, skeptically balanced anyway.

And thanks, Microsoft, for helping drive millions more nails into the coffin of Fair Use. F*** you all where you breathe, you and your weak-knee'd limp-wristed pathetic sanction-magnets you've hired as lawyers.

I just had to say that.

Sabenfox, if I had to guess, WinFS was probably just too much of a performance pig for the current state of hardware. Although that has never stopped the Flight Simulator team. And I'm in no hurry to have a SQL -based engine running a file system, thanks. What a scary thought.

Gahleon, darn socialist! :lol:  Yeah, a fine line between capitalism and thievery. It's all interpretation, eh. By the way, let me remind you all that there's a hell of a lot more to Microsoft than Windows.

nhobu, I could care less about activation cracks - those are for pirates - but show me some cracks that can put fair use back into the hands of the masses and you'll have my attention.

And to anyone who makes even the vaguest reference to copy-catting GUI elements, let me point out that everyone steals from everyone else. Apple swiped from PARC, MS swiped from Apple, they both swiped from Sun, etc. etc. etc. Big deal. Emulation is the sincerest form of flattery, and beats letting the product become stale.

-Brad
January 25, 2007 9:40:52 PM

Quote:
The upgrade is roughly half the price. Well, unless you were upgrading from a pirated XP. Or unless you're an OCD nutcase like me who likes to have un-tethered licenses whenever possible. Or maybe you're not referring to US currency?


ugh well 200 dollars for the new directx. come on man.

Quote:
The new API supports the new archictures. While I'm sure a DX10 API could map new commands to older architecture with some help, the performance won't be there. Or so I have to presume


no actually the new architectures were made to support directx 10 specs.

the point is that there is no reason not to have dx10 on xp, except to force people to upgrade. 200 dollars for directx.

Quote:
First example, how come Dragon Naturally Speaking recently started appearing on bargain shelves? Easy, it's because speech recognition is built into Vista now. I haven't tried it yet so I'm not sure if it's as good (however good you think DNS may have been), but it's there. Good, DNS needed the competition, it was getting stale.


i dont use speech recognition software, in fact i dont know anyone who does. this is not a benefit to me or most people, or at least not a feature that people have been clamoring for.

Quote:
Search mechanisms have improved vastly. Honestly, I don't understand why these tools weren't available ten years ago. I thought when OS/2 came up with Extended Attributes that someone would think of leveraging the bits. Sheesh.


the regular search feature works just fine for me. i figured when windows came with a pictures folder and a music folder and a video folder everyone would be competent enough to download, upload, unzip whatever, files into the appropriate folder i guess not. but yet again, this is a feature i dont need. not worth 200 dollars or even 20 dollars to me. 2 dollars maybe.

and the whole copy catting thing who cares, the point is power users arent going to use the aero interface anyway, so what is the incentive for a power user to upgrade... directx. for 200 dollars.
January 25, 2007 10:04:28 PM

Quote:
no actually the new architectures were made to support directx 10 specs.

Chicken, egg, omelette, whatever.

Which reminds me, I find it interesting that after so much bitching about NetBurst that folks are running out and buying GPUs that are even worse. But I digress...

Quote:
power users arent going to use the aero interface anyway, so what is the incentive for a power user to upgrade... directx. for 200 dollars.

I haven't even tried Aero yet so I can't offer any opinions about what "power users" might prefer, but I think you're confusing power users and gamers.

And as for your insistence on ignoring absolutely every other change and improvement and harping "DirectX 10 for $200", well, let's go with that. Considering what gamers have been known to spend just for some LEDs, anodized aluminum and for heavens sakes, graphics cards like the X1950 XTX - two of them, even - that $200 may just be a drop in the bucket relatively speaking.

Personally, I'm interested to see what DX10 will bring. I have a copy of FS-X sitting on a shelf waiting to be installed. This is a piece of software that is horribly CPU bound, to the point that spending a thousand dollars on graphics equipment doesn't make a statistically relevant difference. If I read things right, DX10 has the potential to start offloading some of that CPU work and make it all look better too. Or so I hope!

And considering the wad I blew this month on the parts my new rig (post in the homebuilt forum will be made shortly), I gotta news flash for you, $200 IS a drop in the bucket.

-Brad
January 25, 2007 10:15:44 PM

Quote:
Considering what gamers have been known to spend just for some LEDs, anodized aluminum and for heavens sakes, graphics cards like the X1950 XTX - two of them, even - that $200 may just be a drop in the bucket relatively speaking.


My sentiments exactly. If you're an enthusiast spending $500-1000+ a year staying up to date with new graphics cards, Corsair RAM, etc., upgrading to Vista is an insignificant liability on your wallet.
January 25, 2007 10:16:02 PM

I accidentally dropped a Makita Drill in a bucket once... and it cost $400 bucks.. :wink:
January 25, 2007 10:27:47 PM

Quote:
ugh well 200 dollars for the new directx. come on man.

It's $100 for Home Basic

Quote:
the point is that there is no reason not to have dx10 on xp, except to force people to upgrade. 200 dollars for directx.

$100

Quote:
and the whole copy catting thing who cares, the point is power users arent going to use the aero interface anyway, so what is the incentive for a power user to upgrade... directx. for 200 dollars.

I don't know which power users you're talking about. The ones I know do use Aero. If you don't want Aero get Home Basic. For the last time, $100.
Anonymous
January 25, 2007 10:36:12 PM

Quote:
computer in my sig its fine.... until I upgrade this computer Q1-2008 for a quad-core.. Then Im gonna need the ultimate version which is the only version that supports multi-cores.... and we all know


No it is the only one that supports Multi-socket
Anonymous
January 25, 2007 10:39:42 PM

Quote:
Vista will slow your machine down.
More people will be turning to Linux in order to get decent performance out of their machine.



Ummmmm games ?
January 25, 2007 10:50:04 PM

Quote:
My radical views on business are not accepted by most but thats ok,quote]

might have something to do with the fact your one of those leet kiddies that say noob in a conversation like it doesnt make you look like a idiot.


btw to the guy who said ultimate was the only one that would be able to use multi core your way off. its multi socket not multi core. Any version of vista is able to use a multi core cpu but as far as i know only one is able to do multi sockets. (i heard two would but doesnt really matter enough for me to look it up)
January 25, 2007 10:51:46 PM

I've been hearing the $400 price argument for months because that's what Microsoft announced as the top price. But now that we know about the upgrade and OEM prices one would think the critics would at least take them into consideration, but nooooo... They continue with the same rant, over and over, $400 till their face turns blue. I imagine they'll call Newegg and complain that they can't charge $100 because that would force them to change the script of their favorite bitch session. I dislike Microsoft as much as anyone but this is ridiculous.
January 25, 2007 10:56:19 PM

Quote:
Vista will slow your machine down.
More people will be turning to Linux in order to get decent performance out of their machine.


:roll:

I realise there are alot of versions of linux but the more populer (you can buy it in a store) that the average user is gunna buy is slower then windows and vastly more bloted. EVERY new OS no matter what its made for slows your computer down more then the last. Seriously that argument is retarded. so once again

:roll:
January 25, 2007 11:51:34 PM

Quote:
from what ive read, isnt vista a complete overhaul? i dont think its just a rehashed version of xp.

you see, the last time microsoft made a major OS change, i was stuck using a mac and didnt notice. however, im assuming that there were people bitching then about having to go from 2000 to xp, just as there are people bitching about having to go from xp to vista now.

when its all said and done, within a year every enthusiast on this forum will be using windows vista. thats my prediction.

yeah a mayor rebuild to screw us and buy super hardware to tolerate their overprotective crap and lots of DRM protective bull...
imagine having to load a 800 MB data file of microsoft protection driver, just to try to watch your favorite .avi file.

and to that guy who b1tched about gaming on linux and no other api than directX, try opengl ¬_¬
a b U Graphics card
January 26, 2007 12:25:58 AM

My god I am gonna vent too.

MS has the new version of Explorer 7 set to download and install if you have your auto-update turned on. One day, I turn on my PC, and *POOF* I have IE 7. Huh?

Then they write an article that states something like "42 bazillion people upgraded to IE 7 in 2006" like everyone really WANTED to because it's soooooo waaaaayyyyyyyy much better than anything else...

Okay, sorry, I'm done.
January 26, 2007 12:34:48 AM

Quote:
My god I am gonna vent too.

MS has the new version of Explorer 7 set to download and install if you have your auto-update turned on. One day, I turn on my PC, and *POOF* I have IE 7. Huh?

Then they write an article that states something like "42 bazillion people upgraded to IE 7 in 2006" like everyone really WANTED to because it's soooooo waaaaayyyyyyyy much better than anything else...

Okay, sorry, I'm done.


Nicely put
January 26, 2007 12:39:30 AM

Quote:
My god I am gonna vent too.

MS has the new version of Explorer 7 set to download and install if you have your auto-update turned on. One day, I turn on my PC, and *POOF* I have IE 7. Huh?

Then they write an article that states something like "42 bazillion people upgraded to IE 7 in 2006" like everyone really WANTED to because it's soooooo waaaaayyyyyyyy much better than anything else...

Okay, sorry, I'm done.


sounds like its your dumb ass fault for actualy leaving that on...... sorry normaly i wouldnt put it so blunt but blaming something thats your fault on someone else is pretty damn stupid.
a b U Graphics card
January 26, 2007 12:53:21 AM

Portland OR,
Lived in Lake Oswego for years.
Lot of really nice people there, what happened to you, someone piss in your Post Toasties this morning? Or were you just born an ass****.
January 26, 2007 1:00:25 AM

well yeah i am a ass but like i said normaly i wouldnt have said anything like that. Just blaming MS for you leaving it on didnt seem right to me.


Im actauly in forest grove now moving to beaverton soon :o 
January 26, 2007 1:15:18 AM

Quote:
My god I am gonna vent too.

MS has the new version of Explorer 7 set to download and install if you have your auto-update turned on. One day, I turn on my PC, and *POOF* I have IE 7. Huh?

Then they write an article that states something like "42 bazillion people upgraded to IE 7 in 2006" like everyone really WANTED to because it's soooooo waaaaayyyyyyyy much better than anything else...

Okay, sorry, I'm done.


Do you run "Typical" installs by any chance?

Anyway, I too have auto-download enabled, but that doesn't auto-install patches. That annoying pop-up tells me they're available. Then I click it, then I click "Custom" instead of leaving it at "Express." That way you can de-select IE7 and have fun with the eighth worst tech product of all time. (Hey look, MS Bob.) :tongue:

(BTW, hey neighbor. I'll be down in Oregon City in a couple weeks. Any good gas pumpers I should know about, or sales-tax free items I should pick up? :wink:) 
a b U Graphics card
January 26, 2007 1:18:53 AM

Well, if take a look at what I actually said, I don't see where I "blamed" anyone for anything?

My point was Micosoft was bragging about the number of people who upgraded to the new IE. What they didn't say in that article was that it is an automatic download that you got if you have that feature turned on. So a very large percentage of people got it automatically, not because they seeked it out purposely and installed it, as MS would like to have you believe. 80% of the people who installed IE7 probably had no idea why or how they got it. Most of them have no idea that you can even turn the auto-update feature off.
Which by the way, if have you have it disabled, and you go download a security update or patch, notice how it seems to turn it's self back on?

Now why you would read more into it than that, and jump in with all the insulting remarks is way beyond me.
a b U Graphics card
January 26, 2007 1:25:04 AM

Yeah, I just let them install. I used to moniter everything, but what the heck. That's not what bothers me at all. I can use IE7, no big deal.
Like I replied to the other guy in Portland, it's not that I care that I got it, it's just the way MS set it up to auto install, and then proceeded to brag about all the people that seemingly just had to have it.
January 26, 2007 1:31:52 AM

No biggie. The only reason I upgraded was because of the zoom feature. I visit Homestarrunner.com a lot. At 1600x1200, flash sucks.

I dl-ed Firefox 2 just as fast...after about a month. :wink:
January 26, 2007 1:53:19 AM

Just a small note to the "power users" who dont want to use aero:

Aero will run faster than than the other interfaces in vista. Vista offloads the Aero workload to your GPU, while the windows classic and basic interfaces are given to the CPU to do.

I ran vista on a celeron 410, 512mb of ram and intel GMA950 integrated graphics without a hitch.. smooth as butter.

As far as DX10 goes, i hear its functionality will be ported back to XP... called DX9L.

Stop whining, Vista will be great after a couple of service packs.

Oh and WINFS is coming, they just delayed it a lot.

Installing Vista is also WAY faster than XP, like 20minutes from boot to finish.

The masses wont be switching to Linux soon, not unless its as easy and compatible as XP/vista (vista is already compatible with MOST hardware certified for XP)

And you dont need Vista Ultimate... although it does come with volume shadow copy... which lets you restore edited files on the fly (one of the best features IMO) all you need is home premium - $239 for the retail version.

<3 skittle
!