PDA

View Full Version : Windows vista?



JOHNRAMBO84
01-23-2007, 11:21 AM
so i heard wv coming out next week.the thing is i dont know what this means, what does it do, will it make my games look better, or what, fill me in fellas! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

TgD Thunderbolt56
01-23-2007, 11:25 AM
It will do nothing for your games until you have a really fast processor and a DX10 compiant video card. Either way, it IS the future and brings some interestingly good (and bad) things to the table.

I wouldn't be concerned about getting it for at least another year.

TB

flox
01-23-2007, 11:27 AM
I installed and ran Vista Release Candidate 1 for a while-- my games ran about the same (maybe slightly slower). I couldn't run this game however, because there are no Vista drivers for my Saitek stick.

AWL_Spinner
01-23-2007, 11:41 AM
If you have a spare half hour, read this, a real eye-opener:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/%7Epgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html)

Current (last updated today), and incorporating responses to some counters by Microsoft.

Vaguely relevant to gamers because of all the processor cycles being used up with this garbage, not to mention the impact to video and sound card manufacturers.

Cheers, Spinner

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Deedsundone
01-23-2007, 12:13 PM
How about a gaming OS,just stuff enough to run your games.

anarchy52
01-23-2007, 12:41 PM
Vista final runs fine, subjectively OS feels very responsive (much more then XP IMHO).

No, you do not need DX10 graphics card (I have X800 Pro)

No, you do not need 4Gigs of RAM. Some people are terrified of amount of RAM that Vista allocates, but that is in fact a good thing. RAM that is free is a waste of RAM, Vista uses very aggressive caching in RAM therefore enhancing the responsiveness and reducing load times for apps.

There are some minor annoyances (turn off the security popups), but for me two main problems are:
- lack of Vista drivers (media center fails to recognize my Falcon II as TV tuner)
- no support for OpenGL - you can run Il-2 only in DirectX which sucks big time.

Heavy_Weather
01-23-2007, 12:43 PM
what do you guys think, 500 dollars at the cheapest? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

anarchy52
01-23-2007, 12:45 PM
Originally posted by Deedsundone:
How about a gaming OS,just stuff enough to run your games.

there was a khm...streamlined 2003 server install floating around, but I'm not sure about the legal issues (even if you do have 2003 license). Very lean, almost spectacular performance, but...

You can do your own gaming OS install, using nlite to customize the installation, removing services that are not needed etc. and installing it on a different partition. But I hate having to reboot to my "gaming" install if I want to play a game...

VW-IceFire
01-23-2007, 04:02 PM
Unless your a guru, I wouldn't make the jump right now. There will be some pain over the next several months as everyone adjusts to Vista and the drivers start to roll out, problems are solved, holes patched, and so forth. If you've got a newish computer then Vista should be as good or better.

I've been testing RC1 at work with a Core 2 Duo laptop with GMA950 onboard. It works well...its very smooth indeed. But drivers are a pain for now.

han freak solo
01-23-2007, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by Deedsundone:
How about a gaming OS,just stuff enough to run your games.

Muahahahaha!!!!!
http://www.saruyama-gamesoft.com/xb.parts/xbox.jpg

lateral-g
01-25-2007, 07:31 AM
Here's a link to a good article on Vista:
http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/23/countdown_to_windows_vista/

-G-

GerritJ9
01-28-2007, 04:18 PM
After reading the bit about Vista's DRM, I have decided not to buy Vista but stick to W2000 Pro. It is a very stable OS, isn't a resource hog, is cheaper than XP and has no activation requirements. Best of all, SH3 and IL2FBPF run happily on it. Microsoft's extended support runs until June or July 2010. After that, maybe it will be time to look at XP Pro.

Snuffy Smith
01-28-2007, 05:15 PM
Wait for Vista Service Pack One. Do not upgrade. There are new processors coming too. In a year or 2, when you need a new computer, get Vista factory installed. XP is stable and compatible with proprietary software. It will take Vista at least a year to get there. Do not get Internet Explorer 7 without checking to see if it is compatable with all the sites that you need to access. If you need to buy a new computer right now, then go ahead and get one with factory installed Vista; it will work fine, and is prettier than XP.

jarink
01-28-2007, 06:36 PM
More on DX10...it will do nothing for you if the game you're running was written for DX10. Vista also includes DX9L, which is almost an emulation mode for DX9 and earlier games.

DX10 will greatly increase gaming performance. Not just because it will require a new graphics card, but because the whole of "Direct X" was re-written to enhance perfomance and leverage new hardware capabilities (like PCI Express and dual-core CPUs).

Unless you like being on the bleeding edge, have money to burn or will need to support PCs with Vista instaleld, I don't see any reason to get it for now...

repoman11
01-28-2007, 07:28 PM
I'm not an early adopter, and this is the only game I play. I may have to switch to Redmond's latest at some point, but I don't know when that will be. This isn't like going from 98 to XP; 98 had many serious defects. XP works very well for me, and I have no burning desire to give Bill Gates more of my money.

VW-IceFire
01-28-2007, 09:25 PM
I would wait.... a while...and see what shakes loose. Microsoft has done some very cool and good things with Vista but they have made a bunch of boneheaded decisions ranging from licenses and what you're allowed to do with their software to being a huge hardware hog (benchmarks are showing degraded performance almost universally across the board - not true with Windows 98 to XP which was far more balanced) to there being few working drivers for gaming hardware (many bugs currently).

There are many articles out there that suggest that Vista is not good for gamers, or media center people, or anyone outside of business. And business is going to have a rough time because you "need" a gamers video card for it to work at its best settings.

I've been working with Vista on a test machine at work. Its got some great ideas but its years too late, requires far too much computer, and I think its going to hurt quite a bit. My hope is that its an unmitigated disaster for Microsoft who will have a more serious change of heart. We need a lean, mean, powerful OS, that is affordable and looks pretty good and isn't encumbered by money grubbing licenses.

I wish there was competition in the OS market like there was in the video card or CPU market. If we had an AMD vs Intel or nVidia VS ATI (AMD) style war. THEN we'd see a proper OS for a reasonable price.

Badsight-
01-28-2007, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by AWL_Spinner:
If you have a spare half hour, read this, a real eye-opener:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/%7Epgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html)

Cheers, Spinner
thats insane

all for money from the inside out

just imagine how awesome it could be if the focus was on the end user instead

typical of humankind isnt it http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Codex1971
01-29-2007, 12:16 AM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
...My hope is that its an unmitigated disaster for Microsoft who will have a more serious change of heart. We need a lean, mean, powerful OS, that is affordable and looks pretty good and isn't encumbered by money grubbing licenses.

Can you say "Mac OS X"?

bazzaah2
01-29-2007, 01:05 AM
Or Ubuntu.

RAF_Loke
01-29-2007, 01:39 AM
Posted Mon January 29 2007 00:05 Hide Post
Or Ubuntu.
Exactly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Joonas_P_K
01-29-2007, 03:23 AM
Can anyone explain what are the main differenses between xp and vista. Becouse I could get Vista bussines edition free or charge (from school), and I just tought is it worth it. Or should I just go and download xp pro from the same place.

GerritJ9
01-29-2007, 03:48 AM
The only problem with Ubuntu and other Linux distributions is that SH3, IL2FBPF and AutoCAD won't run on them- otherwise I would have switched long ago.

AWL_Spinner
01-29-2007, 03:53 AM
Saw a funny story the other day concerning leaked Emails from the Vista development team around the time MacOS Tiger came out.

Essentially there was lots of jealousy that such a thing could be out so far in advance of Vista, and perform so much better than their own product.

bazzaah2
01-29-2007, 04:03 AM
Originally posted by GerritJ9:
The only problem with Ubuntu and other Linux distributions is that SH3, IL2FBPF and AutoCAD won't run on them- otherwise I would have switched long ago.

true but it is easy to set up a partition for Ubuntu with GRUB. I only use windows for gaming.

Ubuntu with Beryl is great and well worth installing. There are a few things that are a bit fiddly than in windows but so much more is so much better.

Codex1971
01-29-2007, 05:28 AM
Re: running windows apps/games on Linux you can use WINE, it has come a long way from it's early inception and is now very stable.

http://www.winehq.com/

As for Mac OS X Tiger...if you think the VISTA dev team were jealous of Tiger, you should see what the the Leopard version will do!

http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/index.html

I must admit I don't like M$ for many of the reasons listed in this thread but have used it exclusivley up until recently. Two of my mates now own Mac and I am dam impressed by its power. There's no need to worry about viruses and spyware, no worries about drivers for this and that, things just work when you want them to. And since iMac and iBooks are now using Intel chips I am seriously thinking of buying and iMac have two OS's on it, the only thing WinXP will do will be for this sim, everything else will be done on the Mac. It will only be a matter of time when more and more game dev teams start porting games over to it.

Blizzard is one company that has always had native support for Mac OS in it titles.

Matz0r
01-29-2007, 05:32 AM
Originally posted by Deedsundone:
How about a gaming OS,just stuff enough to run your games.

ReactOS (http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html)

Not 100% yet, but certainly something very interesting to keep an eye on.

Pirschjaeger
01-29-2007, 06:20 AM
I tried WindowsXP x64Edition.

What I did notice is that moving files from one partition to another was quite a bit faster than WinXP.

I didn't keep it installed for very long though. There was an earthquake in Taiwan and we were without the net for weeks. I wasn't able to d-load the drivers for 64.

A negative point was that after a few hours, clicking on icons became useless. Nothing would open up but this could have had something to do with not having all the drivers. Who knows?

Our net is finally up and running again so I might reinstall 64 in a few weeks.

BTW, my system:

AMD64 3000+Venice
GA-K8N Pro-SLI
2G ram
WinFast PX6800 TDH 256
SoundBlaster Audigy 7.1

tagTaken2
01-29-2007, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by anarchy52:

You can do your own gaming OS install, using nlite to customize the installation, removing services that are not needed etc. and installing it on a different partition. But I hate having to reboot to my "gaming" install if I want to play a game...

FSAutostart does this to some extent... shuts down unnecessary services, defrags ram, and starts up ancillary programs.

sunflower1
01-29-2007, 10:11 AM
Thanks for the link to the Gutmann piece Spinner.

SweetMonkeyLuv
01-29-2007, 01:06 PM
I've flirted with various Linux distros for several years now. Some parts of my home PC farm have even permanently been converted. But something or other has always ended up stopping me from making the switch on my main desktop system. After spending a few months with beta and RC versions of Vista, I am now, more than ever, seriously considering making the switch on that system, too.

The only significant barrier I can think of right now for me to make the switch is this game and the hardware I use to play it. While the game itself will run just fine with WINE, I'm less certain about the compatibility of some of the great community-produced software around it (Lowengrin's DCG, for example). I also need to look into whether or not my hardware and hardware programming utilities would be supported (Saitek X52, CH Pro Pedals, TrackIR 3Pro w/ Vector Expansion).

Vista just doesn't get me excited.


EDIT: Just did some reading on NaturalPoint's support forum. Linux drivers don't exist, and aren't being worked on. Sounds like they toyed around with the notion a couple years ago, and decided it wasn't worth their time to create them. But TIR does work with Vista (at least, the 32bit version).

woofiedog
01-29-2007, 01:24 PM
AWL_Spinner... Thank's for the reading material.

Wow... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Haven't read it all... but will finish later.

Doolittle81
01-29-2007, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by anarchy52:
...
- no support for OpenGL - you can run Il-2 only in DirectX which sucks big time.

WHAAAT!!!!???? IL2/FB/PF is known to be designed for OGL and works best with that! What about Oleg's SOW:BofB???? Is that also being designed for OGL???

I am about to buy/build a brand new Rig, from the ground up...totally cutting edge, no cost limit, state-of-the art. I have Windows ME OS on my current system(and it has worked marvelously for me, believe it or not), and I had planned to go directly from ME to the new Vista.

Am I, and every other person moving to Vista ("factory-installed' or upgrading), going to be unable to continue to fly IL2-PF, and more importantly unable to install/fly SOW:BofB at its best???

That is unbelievable! As Oleg's SOW is intended to be a many-years-long, perhaps a decade or more, "series" of FlightSim's/Theaters/etc, it would seem that very soon after SOW:BofB is released, Oleg/UBI will be facing an ever-dwindling market as people will, inevitably (however relcutantly it might be), transition to Vista.

As a business plan, that's idiotic!

VMF-214_HaVoK
01-29-2007, 02:40 PM
Is this going to be one of those 20 pagers discussing Microsoft's overpriced and overhyped new OS? If you dont wait for at least 6 months to purchase it after its release date your insane! IMO of course. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
01-29-2007, 02:53 PM
Originally posted by Joonas_P_K:
Can anyone explain what are the main differenses between xp and vista. Becouse I could get Vista bussines edition free or charge (from school), and I just tought is it worth it. Or should I just go and download xp pro from the same place.
The main differences...well...hard to say because there are tons of little changes. The biggest is that Vista, for the first time in a Windows interface (Linux and MacOS have been doing this for much longer), is using the 3D card to render the interface. This is ultimately good because all of the graphics problems in the Windows XP interface go away because the 3D card is so much more robust than their old software system. The bad part is that to take advantage of it you need a powerful video card to do it. Not an amazing card in terms of gaming performance (everyone here probably has a card that can do it) but a pretty powerful card as far as business is concerned.

There's pros and cons to this system but Vista becomes a big performance hog when you enable this mode. Its better I think...much smoother, nicer to look at, less or no re-draw issues when multitasking, better possibilities (not really taken advantage of) for usability.

There's also some new work being laid that will factor in later as far as DX10 is concerned (I expect a wait of 2-3 years before games seriously start using this technology).

Also there are changes to the way user types interact. No longer do you login as your admin account...you're just a regular user and you can elevate to admin to install something and then return back to normal permissions later. Its a good idea...Unix has had this forever...but again I think it could have been done better or should have been in earlier editions.

Plenty of other things changed for better or worse. Do some reading http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Codex1971
01-29-2007, 03:21 PM
OpenGL will work with Vista, just not natively, you'll need to install OpenGL as a separate API.

Doolittle81
01-29-2007, 03:35 PM
thanks for teh OGL info

x6BL_Brando
01-29-2007, 03:55 PM
That is unbelievable! ... very soon after SOW:BofB is released, Oleg/UBI will be facing an ever-dwindling market as people... transition to Vista...As a business plan, that's idiotic!

Not really. When you consider that Vista is still hardly released - OpenGL is certainly not disappearing - and drivers and so on are either not ready or not stable - I can't see how it's an incorrect business plan. What would be idiotic would be to have ceased development of BoB while Micro$oft get their act together (and nVidia, and AMD/Ati, and Creative, et al) and then release the new opus as DX10 ready. The drift to Vista will be slow, I predict. Less slow in the USA perhaps, or anywhere that people have money to burn, but slow nonetheless.

Better the devil you know as the saying goes - and after reading the linked-to articles in this thread, much better than the mutant monster that's on the way.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif B.

Codex1971
01-29-2007, 04:01 PM
http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,2112455...%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html (http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,21124554%5E24169%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html)

DrHerb
01-29-2007, 04:22 PM
I heard rumers that Google wants to release an OS

Joonas_P_K
01-29-2007, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Joonas_P_K:
Can anyone explain what are the main differenses between xp and vista. Becouse I could get Vista bussines edition free or charge (from school), and I just tought is it worth it. Or should I just go and download xp pro from the same place.
The main differences...well...hard to say because there are tons of little changes. The biggest is that Vista, for the first time in a Windows interface (Linux and MacOS have been doing this for much longer), is using the 3D card to render the interface. This is ultimately good because all of the graphics problems in the Windows XP interface go away because the 3D card is so much more robust than their old software system. The bad part is that to take advantage of it you need a powerful video card to do it. Not an amazing card in terms of gaming performance (everyone here probably has a card that can do it) but a pretty powerful card as far as business is concerned.

There's pros and cons to this system but Vista becomes a big performance hog when you enable this mode. Its better I think...much smoother, nicer to look at, less or no re-draw issues when multitasking, better possibilities (not really taken advantage of) for usability.

There's also some new work being laid that will factor in later as far as DX10 is concerned (I expect a wait of 2-3 years before games seriously start using this technology).

Also there are changes to the way user types interact. No longer do you login as your admin account...you're just a regular user and you can elevate to admin to install something and then return back to normal permissions later. Its a good idea...Unix has had this forever...but again I think it could have been done better or should have been in earlier editions.

Plenty of other things changed for better or worse. Do some reading http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So what do you mean by a good videocard, I know that my gaming rig can handle it, but I have another rig that is jused just for basic music, movies internet stuff. And it has Nvidia 6100 integrated card. Could that handle Vista? Any ideas? I ask becouse I lost track of computers years ago, I used to know these things when Voodo5 was the best card there was http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

NonWonderDog
01-29-2007, 04:33 PM
That Vista DRM article is mostly scaremongering, actually. Vista's DRM implementation will NOT restrict ANYTHING you can currently do on XP, and in fact is more lenient when it comes to activation.

You can still rip DVDs, you can still watch pirated movies, you can still warez games for all Vista cares; it doesn't restrict any of that. You can still watch DVDs, you can still listen to Super Audio CDs (without hearing Marcel Marceau http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif), you can still buy songs from iTunes, you can still rip the copy protection out of songs you buy off of iTunes. NOTHING you can currently do on XP is restricted by Vista's DRM.

The ONLY thing Vista's DRM does is restrict HD-DVD and Blu-Ray output to the analog max of 720i instead of the digital max of 1080p if you try to watch it with non-HDMI compliant hardware. This is a requirement of these formats, and has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with Vista. If you tried to watch a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray disc on your Windows XP PC (which is impossible, because no drives exist) it wouldn't play at all. If you tried to watch a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray disc on a non-HDMI compliant home theater system, it would play at the "downgraded" 720i! If you don't own a HD-DVD or Blu-Ray drive (and no one does), you won't even notice a difference.

You still need a HDMI-compliant HDTV to play Blu-Ray discs at full quality with a PlayStation3, by the way.


The benefits over XP are not entirely obvious, though. There's really nothing that stands out except the new interface, and that's still not quite as good as MacOS X. There are a lot of little improvements to just about everything, but nothing's particularly exciting. However, the ability to click on a tab and have that window actually appear on my screen the first time, every time, does sound like an absolutely massive improvement over my current XP install...

But it's not worth the $500 you need for Vista Ultimate--which is the only version that doesn't have horribly crippled network tools (and no group policy editor on Home Premium!?!??). The upgrade versions are always useless, too; you DON'T want to install a new version of Windows over your old one. The inability to reformat and reinstall makes the upgrades useless. I'll have to look for an OEM version somewhere, but I don't know if there will even be OEM versions of Ultimate.

VW-IceFire
01-29-2007, 05:56 PM
Originally posted by Joonas_P_K:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Joonas_P_K:
Can anyone explain what are the main differenses between xp and vista. Becouse I could get Vista bussines edition free or charge (from school), and I just tought is it worth it. Or should I just go and download xp pro from the same place.
The main differences...well...hard to say because there are tons of little changes. The biggest is that Vista, for the first time in a Windows interface (Linux and MacOS have been doing this for much longer), is using the 3D card to render the interface. This is ultimately good because all of the graphics problems in the Windows XP interface go away because the 3D card is so much more robust than their old software system. The bad part is that to take advantage of it you need a powerful video card to do it. Not an amazing card in terms of gaming performance (everyone here probably has a card that can do it) but a pretty powerful card as far as business is concerned.

There's pros and cons to this system but Vista becomes a big performance hog when you enable this mode. Its better I think...much smoother, nicer to look at, less or no re-draw issues when multitasking, better possibilities (not really taken advantage of) for usability.

There's also some new work being laid that will factor in later as far as DX10 is concerned (I expect a wait of 2-3 years before games seriously start using this technology).

Also there are changes to the way user types interact. No longer do you login as your admin account...you're just a regular user and you can elevate to admin to install something and then return back to normal permissions later. Its a good idea...Unix has had this forever...but again I think it could have been done better or should have been in earlier editions.

Plenty of other things changed for better or worse. Do some reading http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So what do you mean by a good videocard, I know that my gaming rig can handle it, but I have another rig that is jused just for basic music, movies internet stuff. And it has Nvidia 6100 integrated card. Could that handle Vista? Any ideas? I ask becouse I lost track of computers years ago, I used to know these things when Voodo5 was the best card there was http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
6100 probably won't cut it. Not for the fancy interface mode that Microsoft wants everyone to use. It also has a paired down version that looks basically like Windows XP (except black - which you can already do on Windows XP http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) and classic still is buried underneath the glitz as well. But the fancy stuff that make Vista slightly appealing...probably not. Or not well.

VW-IceFire
01-29-2007, 09:53 PM
Just noticed and read an article at Toms Hardware that may be relevant for everyone interested in this topic.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/index.html

Performance is degraded, often in a significant fashion, from Windows XP. This will probably get better over time but it doesn't seem like there are any magic pills to take right now that will cure things.

Flying_Nutcase
01-29-2007, 10:38 PM
The more I hear about Vista and the more I become acquanted with Macs the more I hope that by SoW time, SoW and IL2 will be runnable on Macs with good performance.

Several people I know have recently migrated to Apple and they all swear by them, albeit after a month of adjustment.

TheGozr
01-30-2007, 12:11 AM
We just need Mac os X for PC..

HellToupee
01-30-2007, 02:49 AM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
We just need Mac os X for PC..

We have osx for pc, had it for a while now, not all hardware is supported, and little tricky to get going but ive managed to install it on my computer before.

CrazySchmidt
01-30-2007, 03:11 AM
Originally posted by Deedsundone:
How about a gaming OS,just stuff enough to run your games.

I'll drink to that!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

CS. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

bazzaah2
01-30-2007, 04:27 AM
I lifted this from another forum I visit. I wonder if there exists in this the potential for M$ to monitor in real time what people put on their PCs.

"In short, Microsoft have the right to glean system info and product key info from your copy of Vista, from time to time. They will also be keeping track of the hacks and cracks. When the info transmitted to MS warns them of a crack (a dodgy product key, system files in the wrong place, tampered files, etc...), you will get "reduced Windows functionality, a "get real" banner on the screen and thirty days to activate".

AWL_Spinner
01-30-2007, 05:09 AM
I'm thinking about moving to a Mac for my next home upgrade, rather than a Vista PC.

Bootcamp will allow a Vista install, should it be necessary for gaming (and it would only be gaming I used it for - incredibly expensive for a gaming OS http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif ).

x6BL_Brando
01-30-2007, 06:08 AM
Originally posted by bazzaah2:01
..I lifted this from another forum I visit. I wonder if there exists in this the potential for M$ to monitor in real time what people put on their PCs.

"In short, Microsoft have the right to glean system info and product key info from your copy of Vista, from time to time. They will also be keeping track of the hacks and cracks. When the info transmitted to MS warns them of a crack (a dodgy product key, system files in the wrong place, tampered files, etc...), you will get "reduced Windows functionality, a "get real" banner on the screen and thirty days to activate".

Do you think that refers to the OS or any installed program? I take it to mean the OS and other Microsoft products only (e.g. Office) We could be said to have that already in the 'Windows Genuine Advantage' validation tool, although that can be simply got around if required, at the price of (guess what?) reduced functionality. Sure, we're only talking access to Automatic up-dating and premium Windows software, but the precedent is already established in XP.

What would be alarming is if leading software brands were to be allowed (sold?) right of access to activation codes and altered settings for their software on our PCs. Only the possibility of a stampede to Apple & Linux-based equipment might hold them back, and the general apathy and incomprehension of the average 21st Century computer-user might just tip the balance Microsoft's way. In a way, the desire of gamer's for even more "reality" on their screens is to Microsoft's advantage - what liberties wouldn't we sacrifice for a handful of extra frames-per-second and an end to stutters?

Me, I'm just gonna stand back and watch the herd tear by. When the dust has settled I may saddle up and go see if that was a sheer precipice they were heading for, but I feel no rush. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

B.

JOHNRAMBO84
01-30-2007, 09:08 AM
http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/3335 a nice read.

x6BL_Brando
01-30-2007, 09:19 AM
I found an ominous line in the above blog

"Unfortunately file sharing between Vista and XP machines is difficult."

That'll be handy then, for owners of a home network running say 3 or 4 machines? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
If true, it won't just be a matter of up-grading the flight rig - but also the file-server and the domestic rig and the lappy? I hope not!

NonWonderDog
01-30-2007, 10:15 AM
Most of the real network support has been ripped out of the Home versions. Only Business, Enterprise, and Ultimate have all the network features of XP Pro. It's an incredibly stupid ploy to get people to buy Ultimate, because the Home versions can only use the absolute simplest default Windows Home Network settings. I have strong doubts that a Home version would ever work satisfactorily with a DVR, and you'll probably need Business, Enterprise, or Ultimate to have full compatibility with XP computers on a network. There's no remote desktop in Home versions, either, and it sounds like you're not even able to connect to a remote desktop with a Home edition. I must be wrong on that one, because that would defeat the entire point.

That said, if you don't know how to set up a network in XP Pro as it is, Vista Home versions are easier. They just connect the way they want to, without consulting you as to how.

Business and Enterprise versions are missing all the gamer-oriented features, however. Home Premium and Ultimate have the graphics score thing in them and who knows what else. That probably didn't affect those benchmarks, though; what really killed them is the driver support. Current nVidia drivers have no native OpenGL support, while ATi apparently have poor OpenGL support in some drivers. I don't know if the old rumors of Vista only supporting OpenGL drivers as a Direct3D wrapper are true, but that would be a major roadblock for 90% of professional software if true. I'd expect to see a lot of very unhappy engineering firms when they find out that Unigraphics only works at 1/10 the frame rate under Vista.

jarink
01-30-2007, 11:06 AM
Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
The upgrade versions are always useless, too; you DON'T want to install a new version of Windows over your old one. The inability to reformat and reinstall makes the upgrades useless.

Where have you heard that? In the past, upgrade versions of Windows allowed clean installs, so long as you had the media (CD or floppies) of a qualifying previous version of Windows.

I do know that one upgrade scenario with Vista will involve upgrades from, say, Home Basic to Ultimate will be possible without needing a new DVD. The installs for all versions are supposed to be included on the same DVD (we did get a Technet DVD labeled "Vista ISO images", but I haven't had a chance to check it out). Supposedly, all that would be required would be a new keycode from MS for the upgrade.

This sort of upgrade may actually work, since Vista was actually designed to be modular so as to accomodate the different versions available. I'm sure someone will try this new upgrade functionality soon and report!

NonWonderDog
01-30-2007, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by jarink:
Where have you heard that? In the past, upgrade versions of Windows allowed clean installs, so long as you had the media (CD or floppies) of a qualifying previous version of Windows.

Hmm... I'm getting conflicting information the more I search. The DVDs for the upgrade versions of Vista are apparently not bootable, and yet it is apparently possible to do a clean install. That seems impossible to me, but I confess I don't really know.

AHA! http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=238

Only the Business, Enterprise, and Ultimate versions allow a clean install from an upgrade disc. Don't ask me why. I guess Vista Ultimate is only $260, then, and only $20 more than Home Premium (because the upgrade version of Home Premium is worthless). The OEM price for Vista Ultimate is $200, by the way, but OEM versions don't allow you to transfer the OS to a new computer. I have absolutely no idea what Microsoft considers a new computer, so I'm wary of that.

Pirschjaeger
01-30-2007, 07:08 PM
I was told WinXP 64 Edition was the same as Vista. I don't know whether that's true or not but I can and have done clean reinstalls.

Recently I've had a problem with icons not working for both 32bit and 64 bit OS's. In the beginning, everything works fine but after a day or so nothing happens when I click on the icons. This was one of the reasons for dropping 64 and reinstalling 32. The other reason was a lack of 64bit drivers. China's internet was down for weeks.

Yesterday I installed Mozilla and once again, my icons failed. Not only was browsing next to impossible, but trying to uninstall Mozilla was not easy. Every icon from "Uninstall" to "Add and remove programs" failed.

But 64 didn't recognize some of the drivers I had from manufacturer cds and refused to install.

Like some have mentioned in hear, I will wait a long time before I bother with Win 64 again.

Heavy_Weather
01-30-2007, 10:18 PM
Originally posted by Snuffy Smith:
Wait for Vista Service Pack One. Do not upgrade. There are new processors coming too. In a year or 2, when you need a new computer, get Vista factory installed. XP is stable and compatible with proprietary software. It will take Vista at least a year to get there. Do not get Internet Explorer 7 without checking to see if it is compatable with all the sites that you need to access. If you need to buy a new computer right now, then go ahead and get one with factory installed Vista; it will work fine, and is prettier than XP.


this sums it up

tagTaken2
01-30-2007, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by NonWonderDog:
Only the Business, Enterprise, and Ultimate versions allow a clean install from an upgrade disc.

That sucks.

woofiedog
01-31-2007, 06:27 AM
A write up and examples of graphic's of Vista from Gamespot... Link: http://www.gamespot.com/features/6164940/index.html

Company of Heroes Windows XP vs. Windows Vista Performance... Link; http://www.gamespot.com/features/6164940/p-5.html

JOHNRAMBO84
01-31-2007, 07:06 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gifvista..you r failing me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

RxMan
01-31-2007, 07:07 AM
I read yesterday that the security features of Vista blocks almost all online gaming, only a small number of ports are open (not 21000). I just bought a new laptop (not for gaming) with the $10 upgrade to Vista, I'll wait for the disk, but not install right away.

Heavy_Weather
01-31-2007, 09:30 AM
bit OT here, but have you guys been keeping up with the new game from Crytek called Crysis?

man that game is going to own! the developer also noted that it will be compatible with old direct X9 hardware but also mentioned it will run even better with the new DX 10.

Werre_Fsck
01-31-2007, 10:46 AM
Originally posted by JOHNRAMBO84:
so i heard wv coming out next week.the thing is i dont know what this means, what does it do, will it make my games look better, or what, fill me in fellas! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

It's a money making scheme and a Digital Restrictions Managent (DRM) hell designed to take control away from the user as well as giving M$ total control over hardware peripheral manufacturers.

It also features a prettier user interface that almost matches competing systems from 7 years ago.

No, it won't make anything faster or prettier but I've heard constant bending over is good for some muscle groups.

jarink
01-31-2007, 01:41 PM
Originally posted by Pirschjaeger:
I was told WinXP 64 Edition was the same as Vista. I don't know whether that's true or not but I can and have done clean reinstalls.

Recently I've had a problem with icons not working for both 32bit and 64 bit OS's. In the beginning, everything works fine but after a day or so nothing happens when I click on the icons. This was one of the reasons for dropping 64 and reinstalling 32. The other reason was a lack of 64bit drivers. China's internet was down for weeks.

Yesterday I installed Mozilla and once again, my icons failed. Not only was browsing next to impossible, but trying to uninstall Mozilla was not easy. Every icon from "Uninstall" to "Add and remove programs" failed.

But 64 didn't recognize some of the drivers I had from manufacturer cds and refused to install.

Like some have mentioned in hear, I will wait a long time before I bother with Win 64 again.

No, they are not the same. XP 64 bit Edition was something of a last-minute-oh-my-God-the-public-actually-wants-this release from MS. There are also separate 64-bit versions of Server 2003, but they are much more stable (and useful, due mainly to memory architecture differences - SQL on 64-bit Server 2003 rocks!)

The problems you're having sound like a corrupt ShellIconCache file (in the Windows folder). You can safely delete that file and Windows will create a new one after a reboot.

Vista will come in both 64-bit and 32-bit versions on the same media. Depending on your hardware, it will install the appropriate version.

Vista 64 bit support (http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_ff_x64.asp)

jarink
02-01-2007, 08:23 AM
I got my WindowsSecrets.com newsletter today and it continaed this little gem. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif



The secret is that the setup program in Vista's upgrade version will accept an installed copy of XP, W2K, or an unactivated copy of Vista itself as evidence of a previous installation.

This enables you to "clean install" an upgrade version of Vista to any formatted or unformatted hard drive, which is usually the preferred method when installing any new operating system. You must, in essence, install Vista twice to take advantage of this trick. But Vista installs much faster than XP, so it's quicker than installing XP followed by Vista to get the upgrade price.

Before you install Vista on a machine that you don't know is 100% compatible, you should run Microsoft's free Upgrade Advisor. This program " which operates only on 32-bit versions of XP and Vista (plus Vista Enterprise) " reports to you on any hardware or software it finds that may be incompatible with Vista. See Microsoft's Upgrade Advisor page.

Also, to see which flavors of XP Home, XP Pro, and 2000 officially support in-place installs and clean installs of the different Vista editions, see Microsoft's upgrade paths page.

Here's a simplified overview of the steps that are required to clean-install the upgrade version of Vista:

Step 1. Boot the PC from the Vista DVD.

Step 2. Select "Install Now," but do not enter the Product Key from the Vista packaging. Leave the input box blank. Also, turn off the option Automatically activate Windows when I'm online. In the next dialog box that appears, confirm that you really do want to install Vista without entering a Product Key.

Step 3. Correctly indicate the version of Vista that you're installing: Home Basic, Home Premium, Business, or Ultimate.

Step 4. Select the "Custom (Advanced)" install, not the "Upgrade" install.

Step 5. Vista copies files at length and reboots itself one or more times. Wait for the install to complete. At this point, you might think that you could "activate" Vista, but you can't. That's because you haven't installed the Vista upgrade yet. To do that, run the DVD's setup.exe program again, but this time from the Vista desktop. The easiest way to start setup again is to eject and then reinsert the DVD.

Step 6. Click "Install Now." Select Do not get the latest updates for installation. (You can check for these updates later.)

Step 7. This time, do enter the Product Key from the Vista packaging. Once again, turn off the option Automatically activate Windows when I'm online.

Step 8. On this second install, make sure to select "Upgrade," not "Custom (Advanced)." You're not doing a clean install now, you're upgrading to Vista.

Step 9. Wait while Vista copies files and reboots itself. No user interaction is required. Do not boot from the DVD when asked if you'd like to do so. Instead, wait a few seconds and the setup process will continue on its way. Some DOS-like, character-mode menus will appear, but don't interact with them. After a few seconds, the correct choice will run for you automatically.

Step 10. After you click a button labeled Start in the Thank You dialog box, Vista's login screen will eventually appear. Enter the username and password that you selected during the first install. You're done upgrading to Vista.

Step 11. Within 30 days, you must "activate" your copy of Vista or it'll lose functionality. To activate Vista, click Show more details in the Welcome Center that automatically displays upon each boot-up, then click Activate Windows now. If you've dismissed the Welcome Center, access the correct dialog box by clicking Start, Control Panel, System & Maintenance, System. If you purchased a legitimate copy of Vista, it should quickly activate over the Internet. (You can instead activate by calling Microsoft on the phone, which avoids your PC exchanging information with Microsoft's server.)

I have not tried this technique myself (I don't have access to an upgrade version of Vista, just full installs via MSDN Universal), but I will certainly try it as soon as possible!

BrotherVoodoo
02-01-2007, 12:42 PM
You couldn't pay me to put Vista on my gamer. SP1 at least if not SP2 before I go in. Does any one remember XP in it's infancy?

NonWonderDog
02-01-2007, 01:53 PM
That sounds utterly insane. You have to install an unregistered unusable full install of Vista, and then "upgrade" your copy of Vista to Vista?

There's only one little problem:

"Step 1. Boot the PC from the Vista DVD."

Unless they changed it last week, upgrade DVDs are not bootable. They probably did that precisely to keep people from doing this trick, and installing a full version of Vista with only an upgrade key.

It might work if you have access to a full version beforehand, although I can't imagine why they'd let you install the OS without a product key.

JOHNRAMBO84
02-02-2007, 08:55 AM
its not what its cracked up to be trust me.

GerritJ9
02-02-2007, 03:26 PM
Regarding DX10- I think it will also be available for XP. Look at IE7, which was (supposedly) developed for Vista; it is also available for XP. When DX10 is released there will still be millions of PCs running XP (far, far more than running Vista), and most will not be upgraded or replaced soon. If DX10 is only available for Vista, many won't be able to run the games designed for DX10 in mind- so why buy them? IE7 isn't a necessity in the way that DX10 would become. I doubt whether Windows 98 will be able to handle DX10 and W2000 may not be able to either. If not, I'll switch to XP Pro. If W2000 CAN handle DX10, W2000 stays on my PC.

Aaron_GT
02-02-2007, 04:07 PM
No, they are not the same. XP 64 bit Edition was something of a last-minute-oh-my-God-the-public-actually-wants-this release from MS

Win XP 64 bit is essentially the 64 bit version of Windows Server 2003 (minus the server specific bits like IIS) with 'XP' branding. But then Windows Server 2003 is derived from XP plus the stuff from the Server versions of Windows 2000. They are all closely related.

Codex1971
02-03-2007, 06:19 AM
Originally posted by GerritJ9:
Regarding DX10- I think it will also be available for XP. Look at IE7, which was (supposedly) developed for Vista; it is also available for XP. When DX10 is released there will still be millions of PCs running XP (far, far more than running Vista), and most will not be upgraded or replaced soon. If DX10 is only available for Vista, many won't be able to run the games designed for DX10 in mind- so why buy them? IE7 isn't a necessity in the way that DX10 would become. I doubt whether Windows 98 will be able to handle DX10 and W2000 may not be able to either. If not, I'll switch to XP Pro. If W2000 CAN handle DX10, W2000 stays on my PC.

DX10 will never come out for XP, many of the DX10 optimisations are inter-woven with the Vista OS itself so if they were to offer DX10 for XP you would have to upgrade XP anyway.

What will happen is new games designed for DX10 will also be backward compatible with DX9.

Check out:
http://www.incrysis.com/
http://www.projectoffset.com/

Codex1971
02-03-2007, 06:27 AM
Crytek 2 Engine...DX9 (on left) v DX10 (on right)

http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=1857

Heavy_Weather
02-03-2007, 10:10 AM
yep, and i think we will probably see more software written like this, at least til everyone finally goes to vista

GerritJ9
02-03-2007, 03:33 PM
Codex1971..... I disagree with your view that DX10 will never be developed for XP. Microsoft developed IE7 for XP, even though it was intended for Vista. Ditto for Media Player 11- like IE7 intended for Vista, but also made available for XP . XP will be fully supported until 2009 at the very least, after which it will enter the extended support period of five years- ending support in 2014. Since DX10 will be introduced well before 2009, there should be no reason why it shouldn't appear for XP. Some code may have to be altered, but that may well have been the case for IE7 and MP11 as well. It probably won't work on W2000- then again, since XP is basically a tarted-up W2000, it might.

Codex1971
02-03-2007, 06:30 PM
Originally posted by GerritJ9:
Codex1971..... I disagree with your view that DX10 will never be developed for XP. Microsoft developed IE7 for XP, even though it was intended for Vista. Ditto for Media Player 11- like IE7 intended for Vista, but also made available for XP . XP will be fully supported until 2009 at the very least, after which it will enter the extended support period of five years- ending support in 2014. Since DX10 will be introduced well before 2009, there should be no reason why it shouldn't appear for XP. Some code may have to be altered, but that may well have been the case for IE7 and MP11 as well. It probably won't work on W2000- then again, since XP is basically a tarted-up W2000, it might.

It's not my view...Micrsosoft has stated they're not going to release DX10 for XP...simple.

Direct3D10 finally completes the break from the legacy fixed-function pipeline. Developers will use the programmable pipeline to emulate the older, fixed-function steps. Additionally, Microsoft had to rethink its display driver model now that the entire desktop is going 3D. The video card isn't just for games anymore. When you have a 3D desktop and give each application its own 3D window, the display driver has to be flexible and stable enough to handle the video card's increased role in the system. Microsoft split up the display driver to increase stability, to ensure that the 3D desktop stays up in the event that a game or another application crashes due to a graphics error. This change also means that Microsoft will not release DirectX 10 for Windows XP, because many of the Direct3D10 improvements will need the new Windows Vista Display Driver Model.

http://au.gamespot.com/features/6143883/p-4.html?sid=6143883&page=4

LStarosta
02-03-2007, 06:41 PM
Can you install MacOS X on a laptop that came with WinXP on it? Has anyone had luck with this before?

Codex1971
02-03-2007, 07:18 PM
Originally posted by LStarosta:
Can you install MacOS X on a laptop that came with WinXP on it? Has anyone had luck with this before?

Not impossible...

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page