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
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
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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!
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
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.
Xazax310 
TeddyG602@aol.com 
