Author Topic: Windows Vista: Why? (Read 23955 times)

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #25 on:** January 16, 2007, 05:31:05 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm
im still using windows 98

We must keep our brotherhood alive.

Windows Vista: THE FULLY DRM-COMPLIANT(INFECTED) OPERATING SYSTEM FOR THE HIGH-DEF AUDIO/VIDEO CONTENT ERA. REMEMBER, YOU WON'T OWN THE THINGS YOU WILL BUY, YOU'LL JUST SIMPLY PAY FOR THE RIGHT TO USE IT.

YES, THIS IS WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO.

segagamer12 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 16, 2007, 09:48:04 AM »

well the version I was running was before the actual release so it could be different by now but it really sucked. It wa on my friends pc so I didnt get much hands on experience with it but I know that a lot of programs he had that worked fine on Xp kept locking up when running vista. We couldnt figure out why so we erasedit and went back to xp pro.

Infernal Monkey · « **Reply #27 on:** January 16, 2007, 01:39:29 PM »

Phew, good thing there hasn't been a PC game worth playing since Shadow Warrior in 1996. :]

Halo 2 on Vista, blol, who cares. It'll probably take off when Blizzard makes a new WoW or something for it though.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #28 on:** January 16, 2007, 02:26:27 PM »

YOU WANT TO WASH WANG?

DO YOU WANT TO WATCH WANG WASH WANG?!

Smoke39 · « **Reply #29 on:** January 16, 2007, 02:57:57 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
Phew, good thing there hasn't been a PC game worth playing since Shadow Warrior in 1996. :]

Shadow Warrior was '97. And there have been games worth playing since it. For example, Dark Forces II and Deus Ex.

MarioAllStar · « **Reply #30 on:** January 16, 2007, 05:03:58 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Professional 666
Windows Vista: THE FULLY DRM-COMPLIANT(INFECTED) OPERATING SYSTEM FOR THE HIGH-DEF AUDIO/VIDEO CONTENT ERA. REMEMBER, YOU WON'T OWN THE THINGS YOU WILL BUY, YOU'LL JUST SIMPLY PAY FOR THE RIGHT TO USE IT.

YES, THIS IS WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO.

This is true. For an extended look at what Vista's DRM will bring, browse through this document. If anyone has a more condensed run-down of it, feel free to share.

Quote
Vista requires that any interface that provides high-quality output degrade the signal quality
that passes through it if premium content is present. This is done through a
"constrictor" that downgrades the signal to a much lower-quality one, then up-
scales it again back to the original spec, but with a significant loss in
quality.

Upgrade to Windows Vista today to make your current hardware obsolete faster!

Ceric · « **Reply #31 on:** January 17, 2007, 03:59:17 AM »

Yeah I'll label all you guys dense for the moment. I don't like the structure that they did the upgrades and everything but I'm not going to complain. People keep complaining that Microsoft doesn't upgrade Windows often enough. Then when the do people complain about them requiring an upgrade.

All you OS X users I am very very surprised that you are complaining. Raise your hand if you are running 10.0. No one... Why not? It's the XP equivalent. Oh wait... Apple REQUIRES you to upgrade to get all the new features... In fact lots of software REQUIRES you to be at what about 10.3-10.4. So you have to pay for those upgrades. In fact simple updates that would be given for free to an XP user, Samba fixes I'm looking at you, in OSX you have to pay for an upgrade.

Now do you know why directX 10 is for Vista only really? It's because its part of the interface. Microsoft has finally moved the graphics processing of the GUI away from the CPU and to the graphics card. SO there are going to be some requirements for that . It has tones of potential. Especially building interfaces. I've seen them demonstrate this to there partners. I've been to different events about it. If you haven't used it don't be so harsh about it. I've used it. I like a lot of the features it bring to the table. The LPU stuff is done the same in OS X and Linux world. They got a little trigger happy in Vista about it but that will be tempered in time. The administration stuff from what I can tell is better. I know that a complete Vista system uses better encryption for communication. Plus there are lots of little things that I like more. I definitely don't agree with all the Gui decisions but the better back-end is worth it among other things.

Don't knock what you haven't tried because its hip. Over OS has its place. Plus don't believe for a second that those prices are what people even loosely affiliated with MS will pay. They'll be much much cheaper.

(Also I hate to tell you this but 2k's support cycle was suppose to end with ME's did.)

PS- Where up to what OS 10.4 So if you upgraded each time there was an upgrade and lets say that it was $129 like it is today. Then you be paying 4x$129 which is $516. If you mention deals those exist in Windows land to.

Also methinking I read somewhere that in the newer Apple computers there is a hardware piece that is for DRM purposes.

Arbok · « **Reply #32 on:** January 17, 2007, 03:04:52 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Infernal Monkey
Halo 2 on Vista, blol, who cares. It'll probably take off when Blizzard makes a new WoW or something for it though.

When will that be, though?

Blizzard used to have a reputation for trying to support lower end setups, but WoW is the only game from them I have skipped over, due to the charges to play it, so I'm not sure if that motto still applies.

segagamer12 · « **Reply #33 on:** January 17, 2007, 04:58:27 PM »

ceric I HAVE tried it, I hated windows 98 with a passion, I hated ME and I just barely started to get into Linux. Now I admit that I didnt get much time on it BUT I will say that the bad experience was worse for me than it was when I had ME. SO FAR XP has been the best version out there. I knwo you were talking to mac supporters but not everyone who dislikes vista has a mac. I dont complain they dont upgrade enough Ithik they upgrade too often. Infact I think XP is perfect and theres just no reasons to change anything.

As far as the Direct X 10, well your defense is kinda one sides, YES it makes sense to makeit a part of Vista, BUT it doesnt make sense to NOT allow Xp users to use it.

AnywaysI dont even care about that much as I dont game on my PC much anyways.

Wait what was I saying again... I took to long to think.

Oh yeah um you can like it if you want thats fine, but um like just cuz you like it doesnt mean everyoen has to. I have tried it I DONT like it, so far. Maybe after getting to know it Ill change my mind. I didnt like XP at first so yeah I say give it a shot, but if everything in XP works fine as it is why upgrade? I know for MS standpints its really all aboutmoney, but they always pusha new OS and always charge for it but never try and FORCE it on you.

ANyways yeah whatever the point originally was I forgot so carry on. yes I been acting wierd lately sue me.

segagamer12 · « **Reply #34 on:** January 18, 2007, 08:38:48 PM »

Ok so since I am getting a copy of vista tomarrow I am going to go a head and give it a shot. I will checkit out and report what I find. I didnt have much time on it before but I might as well take time now.

Sir_Stabbalot · « **Reply #35 on:** January 19, 2007, 03:00:19 AM »

Gameplay Only Get Worse with Vista

There goes any chance of me getting Vista until there's some major improvements done. To summarize, a lot of games showed a decrease, and there's something with how Vista implements OpenGL that made Doom 3 run piss poor on a high-end system with a Radeon 1950 XTX.

Kairon · « **Reply #36 on:** January 19, 2007, 06:00:35 AM »

As a gameplayer, I want BETTER GAMES, not another $200 purchase for incremental upgrades so that I can see slightly higher rezzed textures.

Vista is... it's like... it's like a GC 2.

~Carmine "Cai" M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

Ian Sane · « **Reply #37 on:** January 19, 2007, 06:47:41 AM »

"There goes any chance of me getting Vista until there's some major improvements done. To summarize, a lot of games showed a decrease, and there's something with how Vista implements OpenGL that made Doom 3 run piss poor on a high-end system with a Radeon 1950 XTX."

So I guess MS saw how well received XP's problems with older games was and decided it was important to continue in that direction. Looking at this and the Xbox 360 I question if MS has any idea what backwards compatibility is supposed to be.

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #38 on:** January 19, 2007, 06:53:49 AM »

BC means having to upgrade some more to get everything running properly. That way, MS and its technology partners get more out of your wallet.

Ceric · « **Reply #39 on:** January 19, 2007, 07:58:46 AM »

I rather like to know if that was because of the drivers implementation, new way of doing drivers so there still a learning curve, or Vista itself. I'll read the article and see if the tried Nvidia's stuff as well.

Oh earlier. I just don't like when people knock what they haven't tried. I actually liked ME. I found a way to make it rock solid and it treated me well.

No I don't expect anyone to upgrade. In all actuality if I'm not administrating you I really don't care. Every big rewrite OS has its problem. Lord... OSX had its problems at the beginning but they ironed them out, well mostly...sometimes they came back. I don't expect Vista to be perfect. I expect it to be competent and I don't think it will have the level of polish that current XP has until SP1.

segagamer12 · « **Reply #40 on:** January 19, 2007, 09:46:21 AM »

Is vista any better than Linux? I have been toying with the idea of doing a dual OS like Xp allows, with Linux and vista just to compare them. But I dont want to mess anything up on my PC So I might hold off till I can get my DVD writer working properly.

Nephilim · « **Reply #41 on:** January 21, 2007, 02:41:43 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Gameplay Only Get Worse with Vista

There goes any chance of me getting Vista until there's some major improvements done. To summarize, a lot of games showed a decrease, and there's something with how Vista implements OpenGL that made Doom 3 run piss poor on a high-end system with a Radeon 1950 XTX.

You loose performance by also running it emulated on linux, so really xp for gaming is still the only way to go

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #42 on:** January 22, 2007, 05:36:41 AM »

EMM386 ftw

Sir_Stabbalot · « **Reply #43 on:** January 22, 2007, 10:17:25 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: DeadlyD
Quote
Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Gameplay Only Get Worse with Vista

There goes any chance of me getting Vista until there's some major improvements done. To summarize, a lot of games showed a decrease, and there's something with how Vista implements OpenGL that made Doom 3 run piss poor on a high-end system with a Radeon 1950 XTX.

You loose performance by also running it emulated on linux, so really xp for gaming is still the only way to go

Or running a dual-boot of Linux and Windows 2000.

Ceric · « **Reply #44 on:** January 24, 2007, 08:15:36 AM »

lol. I just got done with running the compatibility wizard for Vista on my work machine, I do IT I know for a fact that we got it 12/2/2003, besides harddrive space its fully capable of running Windows Vista with Aero and all that. They do recommend upping the Ram a little though, to a Gig. Go 3 year old general business machine...

Jin-X · « **Reply #45 on:** January 24, 2007, 12:56:28 PM »

Cnet review of Vista Ultimate

It got a 7.8, here are their conclusions:

Quote
Conclusion
Perhaps we're spoiled, but after more than five years of development, there's a definite "Is that all?" feeling about Windows Vista. Like cramming an info-dump into a book report the night before it's due, there certainly are a lot of individual features within the operating system, but the real value lies in their execution--how the user experiences (or doesn't experience) these--and like the info-dump, we came away shaking our heads, disappointed. Compared with Mac OS X 10.4, Windows Vista feels clunky and not very intuitive, almost as though it's still based on DOS (or at least the internal logic that made up DOS). Despite the addition of a system-wide, built-in search, and various efforts to break away from staidly old directory trees, you still need to drill down one level to even access the search. And there are far too many dependencies on Microsoft products; this is not a very objective operating system, as preference is always given to Microsoft products (of which there are many), from MSN search to RSS feeds only from Internet Explorer. But is Windows Vista a bad operating system? No. It's just a disappointment for PC users who hoped that Microsoft would deliver something truly exciting to finally leapfrog ahead of Apple. They failed. But stick around; this is just Windows Vista 1.0. Windows Vista Service Pack 1 is due out sometime before the end of the year. Windows Vista SP1 promises to fix what's known to be wrong within Windows Vista and should offer a few concrete reasons to switch.

Hooray XP 1.5!!!

IceCold · « **Reply #46 on:** January 24, 2007, 04:23:04 PM »

NinGurl69 *huggles · « **Reply #47 on:** January 24, 2007, 05:29:44 PM »

DIRECTORY TREES ARE AWESOME.

COMMAND LINES > RIBBONS

BranDonk Kong · « **Reply #48 on:** January 24, 2007, 05:36:18 PM »

Why? Because it's free if you order a new computer from just about anywhere until the end of March.

Ceric · « **Reply #49 on:** January 25, 2007, 04:33:10 AM »

Apple Gives Preference to Apple Products when it can in its operating system as well. So did the BeOS people. So do Linux Distros. Etc. Etc. I can't be surprised about that. But there is a relatively, compared from doing it from scratch, good API to let your program use the built-in search and the RSS stuff.

Also I agree. Even in Windows Word Command line is still the best if you know what your doing.

News:

Author Topic: Windows Vista: Why? (Read 23955 times)