Another reason not to move to Vista..

[Zico]

Beta Direct X10 libraries for XP etc... No longer will you have to upgrade your OS and video card(s) to play the latest games.


http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/2007...is-blog-i.html

[Daniel]

Errrrrrrrrr...... DX10 is a hardware thing in that hardware needs to support it. A DX9 card will do DX10 just as well as a DX8 card will do DX9 (ie not very well!) Sure they can perhaps fudge it a bit but DirectX10 gaming requires a lot of power and older cards just don't have the horsepower to do it. Then there's the fact that graphics cards will be used for physics in games and that means DX9 cards are just not powerful enough.

DirectX10 is one of those funny things that people seem to oppose for no reason whatsoever. It's better than DirectX9 and due to the nature of the beast you just can't have it be backwards compatible with old hardware because you end up with a very halfbaked idea. In laymans terms it's like taking a Mk1 Escort to a WRC event today. Sure it was fast in it's day and it's nice to be nostalgic. But if you want to play with the big boys you have to build a WRCar and it has to be built on a modern base, with modern materials and to todays specifications. By the same token if you want to build a PC and play games you need to have modern (not necessarily new) hardware or the results are just mediocre.

At the end of the day no one forces you go buy Vista or buy a DX10 card and why oppose change simply because it's going to cost money? No one complains when a car manufacturer releases a car that's better than a previous model, in fact people quite like it when that's done. It's called progress.

On another note we just bought 2 gigs of RAM for an upcoming PC that I'm going to build. Should be muchos muchos powerful :) I built a near on identical system to what I'm aiming to have in a month or so for a workmate and it runs Vista just fine and he's happy with his PC and swears never to use XP again unless he's at work.

[A.F.F.]

I have had absolutely no problem with Vista. And I'm nowhere near the nerd-level Daniel is. :) It's just that easy and steady to use. I don't know why people whine about it?

[Daniel]

I have had absolutely no problem with Vista. And I'm nowhere near the nerd-level Daniel is. :) It's just that easy and steady to use. I don't know why people whine about it?

It's jealousy AFF. I'm running Vista now with a rather average PC and it runs just fine. A little slow at times but it is almost 2 years old and was hardly state of the art when purchased so that's to be expected :)

[janneppi]

The only reason for me to go Vista at some point is the games, until i buy a machine that would run the up comming games and when they take away the XP compatibily it would be futile for me to change.

Daniel, it isn't jealousy, Vista is hyped up to be Jesus's older sister with massive boobies, when in real life XP works just fine. :)

[Zico]

Im not Jealous.. If I liked Vista I'd have it but I like XP, Im familiar with it.. and having a flashy interface isnt important to me but Yep, as Janneppi says gaming with DX10 is the only reason I would get Vista.

What you are saying about DX10 being hardwired is of course true, What this guy is trying to do is enable varying degrees of features/shaders to match the grunt of a given graphics card. Cant see Billy Gates being too chuffed with them for taking away the only reason many have upgraded to Vista for... DX10 exclusivness.

[A.F.F.]

Im not Jealous.. If I liked Vista I'd have it but I like XP, Im familiar with it...

That's what i was most conserned but Vista IS like XP. Very much alike. It's just better at some points. And yes, it is flashy :D

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I had Vista for 4 days and I thought that the appearance of the desktop was brilliant and would have loved to use all the extra features on it. But it was a headache to work because we couldn't install the internet or half of our software.

I've spoken to a computer programming nerd who says that the number bugs in Vista is unbelievable. Maybe in a year Vista will work well, but I don't want to be Microsoft's guinea pig.

[Daniel]

I had Vista for 4 days and I thought that the appearance of the desktop was brilliant and would have loved to use all the extra features on it. But it was a headache to work because we couldn't install the internet or half of our software.

I've spoken to a computer programming nerd who says that the number bugs in Vista is unbelievable. Maybe in a year Vista will work well, but I don't want to be Microsoft's guinea pig.
Vista wasn't the problem. I told you in the thread you posted that Thompson are the problem. Email them and they'll send you a driver disk out.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Too late now ;)

[Daniel]

That's what i was most conserned but Vista IS like XP. Very much alike. It's just better at some points. And yes, it is flashy :D
As AFF says. Vista is like XP. It's not the dramatic change from Windows 3.1 to Windows 98. If you want to live in the past you can run 3.1 or 95 or 98 or ME or 2000 or XP. But Vista is here. You do NOT need a a £3000 PC to run it or anything. Any decent PC such as any NON-Dell or PC World PC will run it well. My PC back in Australia is over 3 years old now and ran Vista like an absolute dream.

I've never come out and said "Buy Vista for your current PC" instead my advice is to buy Vista for your next PC. If you're in the same situation as Janneppi all Vista will do is give you a great big headache and that's pointless.

Zico. Vista's interface isn't just about being flashy. It's about being more productive and making it easier and more intuitive. With Aeroglass you can see the contents of a window just by hovering over it on the taskbar. Then there's the Windowskey+Tabbing which means instead of alt tabbing icons you can see the contents of the window (rendered live) and click on the window that you want to select it rather than having to alt-tab 10 million times to get where you want to.

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista.asp

Have a read through and you'll see that the good points outweigh the bad points.

My last point is a funny one. Not one person on this forum has a choice. If they want to buy a computer at the moment they will get Vista unless they make a conscious effort to buy XP and for what? To find out in 2 years that new programs won't work or that they'll have reduced functionality? To have a less secure operating system (wooooohooo!!!! I love my PC being hacked)? To have a less usable PC? Give me a legitimate reason why you'd want to get a PC with XP brand new right now.......

[veeten]

Give me a legitimate reason why you'd want to get a PC with XP brand new right now.......

... ahem. :p

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2116087,00.asp

[Daniel]

I'll sell you my 98se disc and code. Want to move to 98se? :mark:

[airshifter]

At least with 98 you'd have better luck finding the proper drivers. It's not as if most fixes came from Microsoft support.

I've got DOS software that multitasks as well if not better than any version of Windows I've owned, and it does so without needing mass resources.

We just purchased a new computer for our daughter, and I made sure NOT to get Vista. If you want to be the second wave of beta tester for Microsoft, go right ahead. 98 was really nothing than 95 with most of the fixes finally done, and even then it took them a second edition to get it right. :laugh:

[Brown, Jon Brow]

I'll stick with what I know thanks ;)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/Windows_1.0.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9c/Windows1screen.png

[Erki]

Then there's the Windowskey+Tabbing which means instead of alt tabbing icons you can see the contents of the window (rendered live) and click on the window that you want to select it rather than having to alt-tab 10 million times to get where you want to.

You don't have to Alt+Tab click by click, if you hold the Tab down, it moves faster. ;) It's beyond me that you have to click on that thing to open it. Wasn't Alt+Tab supposed to be a keyboard shortcut? That much about productivity. :dozey:

No way do I want to mess with drivers and stuff, I want a computer that actually works and does the thing without being WindowsUpdated and driverupdated and what not every week. :)

[Daniel]

At least with 98 you'd have better luck finding the proper drivers. It's not as if most fixes came from Microsoft support.

I've got DOS software that multitasks as well if not better than any version of Windows I've owned, and it does so without needing mass resources.

Yes. I've had lots of problems with drivers for Vista. I'll list the system specs of both PC's I've run Vista on and tell you what's worked and what hasn't

PC in Australia
P4 2.8Ghz
Asus P4C800E-Deluxe - Drivers automatically downloaded from Microsoft
nVidia 6600GT 256 - Drivers automatically downloaded from Microsoft
Some random firewire card that I lost the drivers for - Drivers automatically downloaded from Microsoft (**** typing that out each time)
DLink wireless card - DADM
Creative Audigy 2 Value - didn't work but drivers are available now
Which is not really a problem as I use a Logitech USB 350 Headset - Guess what! DADM!!!!!!
Onboard sound - DADM!!!!
Logitech webcam - Drivers weren't available when I tried as Vista was still in Beta but now there ARE drivers for it.


PC here in the UK
Amd 64 3000+
MSI Nforce4 board DADM
X300 DADM
Canon MP500 printer DADM
PCI USB card DADM
Some random cheap camera which is about 5 years old which served as a webcam - doesn't work


I could go on but the only thing that doesn't work is a really crappy webcam. Everything else works just fine. People go on about Vista being a resource hog. While rather true there is a reason. When the RAM is empty it's doing absolutely nothing for the performance of your PC. You could have 8 gigs of ram and if it's only using 512mb then what's the point of having 8. If you have 8 gigs of ram then your OS should use as much of it as possible to make things run as quickly as possible!!!!! If you're so confident that Vista is bad in regards to drivers if your daughters PC was built within the last year I'll give you 10 dollars for every part of it that doesn't work and you give me $5 for every bit that does work. I'll come out ahead for sure.

What's amusing about this is that this same argument has gone on every single time Microsoft have released a new operating system. Granted when they released ME and people criticised it the people were right but it still doesn't matter. Vista > XP > 98SE > 98 > 95 and so on......

I reckon if this forum is still around when Windows 7/Vienna comes out them I'm sure there'll be a similar thread saying how Vista is good enough and why should we switch to something newer that's going to consume more resources.

[airshifter]

Windows (all versions) need more resources because they are resource pigs. The DOS software I has would execute properly things that Windows couldn't.

The DOS software recognized only 1 MEGAbyte of RAM. The Windows 98 could use all 256 megs, and still choke.

I'd rather have 100% of my hardware working, rather than spending more money, and more time to get 80% of it to work.

[Daniel]

Windows (all versions) need more resources because they are resource pigs. The DOS software I has would execute properly things that Windows couldn't.

The DOS software recognized only 1 MEGAbyte of RAM. The Windows 98 could use all 256 megs, and still choke.

I'd rather have 100% of my hardware working, rather than spending more money, and more time to get 80% of it to work.
The last time I checked all but one thing on those two PC's doesn't work. It's far from 20%.........

To compare DOS to XP or 98 or Vista is just silly. Multitasking is one thing you could never accuse DOS of :laugh:

[Daniel]

An article on what DX10 will do for games

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/487/1/

A video of the first DX10 game to come out Age of Conan :mark:
ftp://ftp.funcom.com/media/Age_of_Conan/videos/24jan07/conan_dx10_tease_720p.wmv

[Roamy]

piece of **** software
that microsoft make
every time it ****ing breaks
I need many gyros
just to get by the virus
oh oh piece of **** software

[Mark]

The DOS software recognized only 1 MEGAbyte of RAM.

Actually 640k, you had to modifiy config.sys on bootup to load extra drivers so the OS could see the other 384k, which was vital for a lot of games. Unfortunately there were two ways to use the memory, EMS and XMS and the drivers wouldn't run together, so you quite often had to reboot the machine after changing the drivers to use certain programs.

[tinchote]

Actually 640k, you had to modifiy config.sys on bootup to load extra drivers so the OS could see the other 384k, which was vital for a lot of games. Unfortunately there were two ways to use the memory, EMS and XMS and the drivers wouldn't run together, so you quite often had to reboot the machine after changing the drivers to use certain programs.

Not to mention other "tiny details" as lack of drivers, very limited screen resolution, no security scheme, etc., etc. It would be very interested to see what needs to be done to watch a DVD on a DOS-based computer.

[Daniel]

It would be very interested to see what needs to be done to watch a DVD on a DOS-based computer.

Throwing that PC out the window would be a good start....

[Mark]

Considering a DVD player need only set you back £15, then that would be a good choice :laugh:

[airshifter]

The last time I checked all but one thing on those two PC's doesn't work. It's far from 20%.........

To compare DOS to XP or 98 or Vista is just silly. Multitasking is one thing you could never accuse DOS of :laugh:

If you think DOS programs couldn't multi task, you obviously don't know much about DOS, or how Windows originally came into play as nothing more than a GUI for DOS.

And the last I checked, I managed at that time to be able to use 100% of my devices, not less. Considering that fact that the additional output device paid my bills for quite a number of years, I'm very certain it managed to multi task, as I did it daily.

You might convince others that a flashy interface with much greater hardware requirements makes them more productive, but I doubt you'll convice those that know better.

There was a valid reason the configuration process was known by many as "Plug and Pray". :laugh:

[Daniel]

If you think DOS programs couldn't multi task, you obviously don't know much about DOS, or how Windows originally came into play as nothing more than a GUI for DOS.

And the last I checked, I managed at that time to be able to use 100% of my devices, not less. Considering that fact that the additional output device paid my bills for quite a number of years, I'm very certain it managed to multi task, as I did it daily.

You might convince others that a flashy interface with much greater hardware requirements makes them more productive, but I doubt you'll convice those that know better.

There was a valid reason the configuration process was known by many as "Plug and Pray". :laugh:
You can't blame Microsoft for all of the problems with modern computers. Driver support is down to manufacturers at the end of the day and the computer is only as good as it's hardware. Put "8800 Vista support" into google and tell me what comes up.

If you want to install DOS 6.2 on your brand new PC then good for you. Most other people will use Windows and it'll do the job.

[airshifter]

Driver support is a combination of adequate notice, and need for the driver, by the software developer. Given an ever changing field, they will lack support for software.

I've never claimed I would install DOS on any new system, or even on an old system. But to think that anyone not choosing to buy the newest Windows when they have a proven record of bugs, constant updates, security issues, and driver updates and support is wrong for not wanting to deal with those issues isn't very accurate. On top of that they now took away features that previous versions had, unless you want to spend more money.

As if a backup feature isn't needed in a world of mass storage, personal and business financial data on computers, and ever increasing use by need rather than just for fun.

The majority of people that upgrade or change over to Vista quickly will do so just for the new interface, having never explored the capabilities of previous versions enough to find out what they can do. I discovered many years ago that both computers and software were capable of more than most people could ever do on the human side of multi tasking.

[Mark]

Drivers are always a pain in the bum. I remember a situation a couple of years ago, when XP had been out for ages, that I bought a wireless card, but all that was available was Windows2000 drivers, which didn't work. The manufacturers had moved on to new products and couldn't be bothered writing XP drivers. I had to send it back in the end.

How many hardware items will never get vista drivers?

[ST205GT4]

Give me a legitimate reason why you'd want to get a PC with XP brand new right now.......

I've got one Daniel :) I'm about to begin consulting by myself and the software in the industry that I'm consulting on currently does not run with Vista. I can't wait around for however long it will take the numerous vendors to get that software working on Vista as it will cost me serious money, so I will be consciously ticking the "with XP" option on the Dell laptop I'm about to buy for work.

[Daniel]

Drivers are always a pain in the bum. I remember a situation a couple of years ago, when XP had been out for ages, that I bought a wireless card, but all that was available was Windows2000 drivers, which didn't work. The manufacturers had moved on to new products and couldn't be bothered writing XP drivers. I had to send it back in the end.

How many hardware items will never get vista drivers?
As I've said. If you've bought anything in the last couple of years it should be supported. Don't buy cheng shee wo fat dum choo moo brand products and 99% of the time support for Vista will already be there or will be coming fairly soon.

[Daniel]

I've got one Daniel :) I'm about to begin consulting by myself and the software in the industry that I'm consulting on currently does not run with Vista. I can't wait around for however long it will take the numerous vendors to get that software working on Vista as it will cost me serious money, so I will be consciously ticking the "with XP" option on the Dell laptop I'm about to buy for work.
Fair enough :) The company I'm working for here in the UK doesn’t use Vista yet and probably won’t do so for the next 2 or so years for this very reason and I can’t really fault their decision. What I was talking about was typical users on this forum who occasionally play a game or two, watch a DVD, burn movies to DVD and browse the forum. All things that Vista does just fine. Just out of curiosity have you tried your software on a Vista system or on Vista in application compatibility mode? The one thing that irritates me somewhat is that out PC gets left on pretty much 24/7 and when Vista goes to sleep sometimes the NIC on the PC doesn’t wake up with it and requires a reset but otherwise it works really well.

[veeten]

Fair enough :) The company I'm working for here in the UK doesn’t use Vista yet and probably won’t do so for the next 2 or so years for this very reason and I can’t really fault their decision. What I was talking about was typical users on this forum who occasionally play a game or two, watch a DVD, burn movies to DVD and browse the forum. All things that Vista does just fine.

Then again, so does XP. The issue here is that most folks here just don't see the rush to buy & install Vista when their present OS works just fine, and with fewer issues I might add. :)

In the private enterprise world, new purchases & upgrades have to be justified in their output so that the cost/benifit analysis proves positive for the whole company.

For the individual user it's left to 'to each his own', as not every user is either a gamer, videographer, or a telecommuter. Average computer users, while they like the looks of Vista, aren't moving in droves to purchase it, especially those that have Dell, Gateway/eMachines, HP/Compaq and other pre-installed OS units. OEM purchasers & D-I-Y'ers are a different story, and even those numbers aren't snatching them off the shelves.

As for Hardware, Drivers, and Application Software, XP has a greater library than Vista at present without having to backwards engineer it to fit. You have a better chance, at present, to use older video, audio, and other peripherals with XP than trying to make them work with Vista.



Just out of curiosity have you tried your software on a Vista system or on Vista in application compatibility mode? The one thing that irritates me somewhat is that out PC gets left on pretty much 24/7 and when Vista goes to sleep sometimes the NIC on the PC doesn’t wake up with it and requires a reset but otherwise it works really well.

Compatibility mode has been a staple in XP since the beginning so, once again, why the big push to migrate? :confused: They had such a hard time trying to get folks around the world to move to XP from 98/ME, getting them to move to Vista will take double the time and expense, not to mention the PR justification to by-pass 2000/XP for some users.

[Mark]

To me it seems that there is no "killer app" aspect of Vista which means that XP users must upgrade, the best they can say is a nicer graphical inferface, which is fine but for most people that's "big deal"

[Daniel]

I never said it was a must have upgrade anyway ;) Whereas ME and 98 were woefully unstable, XP is stable and works well for most people so there's no reason to go out and buy it. However there's also no reason to go out and buy a PC and not take Vista with it now unless you're a big company or you're like ST205GT4 and your "killer app" won't run on Vista.

Vista is a lot of little upgrades. Interface, better support for multi-core processors, security and so on :) It's not just a reskinned version of XP as some people say :)

[Dave B]

I'm buying a shiny new laptop next month, and as I expect it to last at least three years minimum I wouldn't consider NOT getting Vista. By the time my laptop reaches the end of its life, XP will be but a distant memory.

I'm just weighing up whether Aero's worth the bother. But then I'll probably get suckered in by the whizzy graphics!

[Daniel]

I'm buying a shiny new laptop next month, and as I expect it to last at least three years minimum I wouldn't consider NOT getting Vista. By the time my laptop reaches the end of its life, XP will be but a distant memory.

I'm just weighing up whether Aero's worth the bother. But then I'll probably get suckered in by the whizzy graphics!
First suggestion would be to turn user account control off :p I’d turn aero on. If you don’t have Aero on it’s not really that much more than what I imagine XP SP3 will be like :mark: If you have any issues or want any help feel free to PM me :wave:

[Dave B]

Cheers bud :up:

[veeten]

:look: Looking for a sweet deal on Vista?...

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2122060,00.asp :D

[Daniel]

Meh! Just buy an OEM version and it'll probably be cheaper anyway. Plus if you order it online you can avoid having to deal with incompetent salespeople and till staff :D

[A.F.F.]

Plus if you order it online you can avoid having to deal with incompetent salespeople and till staff :D

Hence, nerds buying from nerds. What a vocal boxing match.

Tell me how can I switch on my java support??? That's really a question. :)

[Xeroid]

I'm in the corporate world of PC support, manage about 200 laptops in my area, Company total units about 20,000 worldwide.
We won't go near Vista for at least two years, as fast as we update our software to run well on a system Bill Gates changes it all and we have to rebuild it all over again.
And a corporate user never buys in the first year, wait till the bugs get ironed out a bit by the 'hacker and fix' method in geekland.
Read any of the tech blogs, Vista is only XP with raisins on top, over hyped, resource hungry if you want any performance.
I'll stick with Ubuntu/Linux at home, you could run it on an old 486 and it would still be faster.

[Daniel]

Hence, nerds buying from nerds. What a vocal boxing match.

Tell me how can I switch on my java support??? That's really a question. :)

This may help AFF :)

http://java.sun.com/javase/6/webnotes/#windowsvista

Xeroid :p I did say before that Vista is not the sort of thing companies can just take on board straight away for compatibility reasons.

I disagree that Vista is as resource hungry as people seem to think. My PC is sitting here with it's crappy 512mb of RAM and currently 81% of that is in use at the moment. Some might say that's a bad thing but here's why it isn't. You've got RAM right? What good is RAM sitting there doing nothing for you 95% of the time you're using your PC? This PC used to be quite slow in XP because XP was trying to use at little amount of RAM as possible. When I start up a game Vista simply clears the RAM as best it can and starts on devoting resources to the game. This seems to be particularly hard for people to understand/stomach when they build a really really powerful PC and the OS actually wants to use some of that power.....

[Dave B]

But then "they" do say that humans only use 10% of their brain. Why should your PC be any different? :p

[Daniel]

Just built a shiney new PC and Vista runs awesomely on it :)

Core 2 Duo E4300
2Gb of Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800
Asus P5B deluxe motherboard

Cost? Just under 300 quid and it absolutely scoots along while running Vista. Reused a lot of parts from the old PC :)

For those who say Vista is a resource hog I should point out that the processor is sitting at between 1% and 10 and I'm only using 33% of my ram.

Lets just say Vista is very responsive even though i've not gone for the biggest and fastest processor out there :cheese:

[nicemms]

Sounds like a good pc. Similar to what i'm wanting to build. Did you have to carefully select vista compatible components then?

[Daniel]

Not really. Most things made within the last year or two should be fine :) If you want any help choosing components just post your budget and I’ll tell you what to get and it should absolutely fly with Vista :)

[nicemms]

I think I know what components to get, since I'm an assistant ICT techncian now, just need to save up the money.

What version of vista to get?

[Daniel]

Tell me what you're going to get and I'll tell you if it's any good ;)

Vista Premium is what I'd reccomend to most people :)

[Spoonbender]

Thanks for advice, think I'll wait for service pack 2 :)

[Daniel]

Why wait for SP2 over SP1? :mark:

[Dave B]

Well I'm now running Vista Home Premium and it's great. I've had no compatibility issues with any existing hardware, and successfully re-downloaded all the software I regularly use.

One happy bunny :D

[Daniel]

Well I'm now running Vista Home Premium and it's great. I've had no compatibility issues with any existing hardware, and successfully re-downloaded all the software I regularly use.

One happy bunny :D
Bah! What would you know? You've actually used Vista :p

[Dave B]

True. Vienna's probably a load of crap though ;)

[Daniel]

Oh I can say without a doubt that it's crap :p I'll never use Vienna. EVER! Vista does all that I need it to do and I bet none of my stuff will work with Vienna.

Bill Gates is just looking for a new way of stealing our money blah blah blah :p