Graphics performance, which has long been an afterthought for most corporate PCs and many consumers, will move to the forefront with the launch of Windows Vista, Microsoft’s next Windows operating system. Vista, due late next year, will offer four different themes, including the well-publicized three-dimensional Aero Glass with transparent windows.
Bridging the Vista Graphics Gap
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
but will it run on my Radeon 7000 64MB SDR?
Yes, and no.
The Radeon 7000 is a DX7 card. It is better than a lot of integrated graphics even now (mostly the Intel varieties). Vista will certainly run on it, but you can’t expect any graphics better than what DX7 is capable of. So, no, you won’t be able to see all of the DX9 effects without an upgrade.
Not against Intel’s Graphics Media Accelerator 900 in 3D Marks 2001 SE…
I’m not really sure that there’s anything new in the article. It’s just a rehash of what is known to date about Vista’s GUI options. Most of the article is actually just a collection of views on graphical hardware requirements.
It is unlikely for many enterprise customers to care whether or not all of their computers can run the Aero interface. The CEO will probably want it, but most CEOs have far better hardware than the average worker anyway.
A lot of people seem to complain that each new version of Windows requires them to upgrade their computers (or buy a whole new computer) in order to run it. IMO that isn’t the case with Vista as much as with previous versions. The base configuration of Vista should run well on practically any computer that currently supports Windows XP. Vista won’t be out for another year, and there are already a lot of computers that can run it with all the bells and whistles. And, if you want to run Vista on an older computer with the graphical eye-candy, it is much simpler to upgrade or install a graphics card than to upgrade an entire system.
Besides, discrete graphics cards are already extremely capable. It only makes sense that MS does something to try taking advantage of this.
The article that this linked article is based off of closes out with “Longhorn Beta 1 expected early next year” or something to that. Either a typo, or a really outdated article. Judging from the screenshots, I’d say outdated.
Most corporate PCs will be be working in the legacy video mode without any use of 3D cards because
1) Businesses don’t care about transparent windows
2) Businesses care about the cost of hardware
3) Businesses prefer video cards with passive cooling because of noise and reliability consideration.
Then what exactly is the benefit for them in upgrading to Vista? If they’re already on subscription, then the only incentive that I can see to upgrade is so that they’re not paying for nothing (like they have been for the last few years). If they’re not already on subscription with MS, what exactly does Vista offer the enterprise that XP can’t handle?
Vista should be a more secure OS out of the box than any previous version of Windows. User modes look like they will have a much better design than previous versions of Windows. Vista will be the OS code base for any new MS technology.
Companies also like to have a homogeneous workplace if possible. So, once they start buying new computers with Vista installed, they might consider upgrading the OS on all computers.
XP is good enough for most purposes, but there are a few reasons to upgrade especially if the cost is practically zero.
“Not every company will choose to step up its hardware just to gain a flashier user interface.”
One line in the whole article that says it all.
Indeed. In fact, someone needs to do an audit, to see exactly how many businesses are still running Pentuim II’s with Windows 98.
A businessman will not spend money if it is totally unnecessary, and most of them will view the upgrade to Vista as unnecessary.
A businessman will not spend money if it is totally unnecessary,
Might be true if it’s their own money, but payed executives are perfectly happy to waste other people’s money.
and most of them will view the upgrade to Vista as unnecessary.
Wishful thinking. People don’t understand and don’t care much about technical details, so they’ll judge it by its fancy looks.
From your reply, I take it you have never worked in a serious business environment.
Wishful thinking. People don’t understand and don’t care much about technical details, so they’ll judge it by its fancy looks.
Nope, you forget the one thing these “payed executives” always ask…. “Whats in it for me ?”
They might waste money willy-nilly, but only on things they can benefit from, and if they think that will only be on how things look, then they will not fall for it, and spend money elsewhere.
They might waste money willy-nilly, but only on things they can benefit from, and if they think that will only be on how things look, then they will not fall for it, and spend money elsewhere.
Like big company cars, first class flights, and fancy office furniture? None of those are really essential for a business, but they’re great for bragging rights and impressing gullible business partners. Ditto with Vista.
(And yes, it should have been “paid”. But why the hell was my previous post modded down?)
That as always they are going to include a option to turn all that CRAP off.
Considering my Grandmother can figure out how to use WinXP, they should be @#$%ing DONE with the UI. That’s it. Quit wasting time on stupid garbage like transparancies which just make it harder to read anything, and instead fix all the other shit that doesn’t work right.
Oh, and that goes for OSX, KDE and GNOME too.
..is the least exciting Windows update ever.
I was wrong.
Another content-free fluff piece that does nothing but keep the name “Vista” in the public eye until Microsoft can manage to get it out the door. Yawn.