When it comes to Windows Vista, there are bugs – and then there are bugs. There is no doubt that people will find glitches in Beta 2 of the oft-delayed operating system. The question is whether there are any show-stoppers. Microsoft has time to squish some bugs, but it needs to avoid any significant headaches, if it is to make its revised goal of finishing the code by November and launching the product in January. In the meantime, ExtremeTech tests Vista’s gaming performance.
Microsoft will prevail.
Man, I hope your kidding…..
^_^
http://osnews.com/permalink.php?news_id=14683&comment_id=127129
+2 and -6 for the same comment. Interesting. (I didn’t vote on either, for the record.)
What scares me is that Microsoft will prevail by rolling off a log, by continuing business as usual. They’ve poured tons of money into this one, but I don’t see any reason as yet why buyers should return their investment. All the screenshots and my time with Beta 1 have told me that this will be the most bothersome Windows experience yet, with wizards and pop-ups galore.
I hadn’t used my games box for a long time, and when I went and turned it on the other day, my operating system complained to me that I wasn’t using all the icons on my desktop. Better yet, there wasn’t a dismiss button. I had to launch the wizard just to tell it to shut up. I don’t know why people put up with this.
On the plus side, though, Microsoft does seem to have “innovated” a proper Unix home folder into Windows. I was really sick of everything sticking itself in “My Documents.” But not hundreds of dollars worth of sick.
Aren’t they supposed to be offering a $99 version for the common folk or was that only a rumor?
there are some dark days ahead if internal sources are to be believed.
Sounds to me they are focussing too much on the compatibility issues, and that would mean a continuing story of security holes and instability.
That’s one thing I respect with other OS’, breaking compatibility to improve. Not easy in the short run, but better in the long run for customers.
I’m afraid they’re going to make the same mistakes again just to keep everyone “happy”.
Apple actually managed it intelligently. OS 9 only existed for one reason: to backport the OS X API to OS 8 so that developers could quietly begin transition to the newer OS’ structure.
If XP had had a SP3 with the same concepts, it would have made a transition to the Vista MS originally envisioned possible: a brief interregnum where developers could less painfully rewrite their apps to use the new APIs and security model, while ‘classic’ XP apps remain compatible. Then, roll out Vista proper and tell developers to get with it or get eaten by their competitors who have. Virtualize XP for gamers and diehards for one or two release cycles, then kill it.
Apple actually managed it intelligently. OS 9 only existed for one reason: to backport the OS X API to OS 8 so that developers could quietly begin transition to the newer OS’ structure.
AFAIK, the OS X API was not backported which is why they included OS 9 in OS X for compatibility.
If XP had had a SP3 with the same concepts, it would have made a transition to the Vista MS originally envisioned possible: a brief interregnum where developers could less painfully rewrite their apps to use the new APIs and security model, while ‘classic’ XP apps remain compatible. Then, roll out Vista proper and tell developers to get with it or get eaten by their competitors who have.
The original vision for Vista had all of WinFX except WCF (and maybe Workflow) running only on Vista. After getting feedback primarily from PDC 2k3 that devs wanted much of it on XP (among other things) as well, MS ported WPF and WinFS downlevel, making it possible to run some WinFX apps in some form downlevel. Win32 remaining in the OS was also part of the original vision as classic apps would not be compatible otherwise. Games are some of the most demanding apps on Windows and many would not work properly in a VM unless you provide GPU support. This is planned for a future version of VPC and likely their hypervisor, but was never part of the original plans for Vista.
The issue isn’t as easy as you make it sound, and MS has never had plans to drop those dependant on legacy APIs just because. In fact, many of their largest customers would be slow to move forward if they did. Developers aren’t (can’t in some cases) going to rewrite their apps just because either.
Apple did create the Carbon lib which allowed for a single application to operate in both 9 and X as a native app for either one.
I hope, that Microsoft is actually using that
$39.79 Billion ($12.25 Billion Net)in Revenue to use and write an OS that is less prone to problems…..
Dont get me wrong, every OS has flaws, but D*MN! What the hell do you do when you make the one OS 96% of the WORLD uses…..
I dont think they have an excuse at this point…..
but I can only hope…
Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MicroSoft
Edited 2006-05-31 03:20
———–there is currently a performance drop associated with running games under Vista. It varies from game to game, but it seems as though turning on anti-aliasing and anisotropic filtering cause the biggest performance problems. You definitely want some high-end hardware to play demanding games like F.E.A.R. under Vista.————-
Of course, there’s three reasons for this.
1. Drivers.
2. Still-in-beta infrastructure.(OS, DX, etc)
3. BLOATWARE!!!!! The fact that Vista requires at least 800Mhz is definately a factor.
No matter how fast AMD and Intel make their processors, Microsoft will find a way to slow things down again.
And then there’s Vista’s RAM requirements. It’s a joke.
All Desktop OSs are bloated ( Vista, XP, OSX, Linux, etc… ). The fact that you need 800mhz or more shouldn’t bother anyone because no computer (I am not counting used computer you buy from your neighbor) under 1.2 ghz was sold since 2001.
The people who still got their sub-1ghz computer ougth to change after 5 years. Most of them will.
I guess I fall under your “old computer” user definition, as a user of a 1200MHz machine.
But I did want to point out a clarification to you mentioning “Linux” as “bloated”. I think you mean to call KDE or Gnome as bloated, as Linux will still do quite well on the sub-1GHz PCs by using a lighter WM (XFCE, *box, etc.).
Old hardware doesn’t necessarily mean “obsolete”.
Well, X.org itself is still enormous, regardless of WM, carrying drivers for every video card no one’s ever heard of. Modular helps on disk space, but it’s also the bleeding-edge version, so it may or may not be good for slower systems.
But GNU/Linux definitely is scalable both up and down, (I’ve been working on preparing ELKS for my 286) and even when you install everything under the sun, none or almost none of it will run itself in the background, so filling up a hard drive with Linux software won’t slow down any of its component parts.
When Microsoft adds a feature, though, look out! You can even feel the difference. I never get the sense that OS X or Linux is doing something without my knowledge, but Windows… it’s thinking, and not in a cool Dreamcast sort of way.
I’ts an vicious circle.
Microsoft keeps the hardware vendors satisfied.
The fact that most people have a 800mhz+ computer is not a reason to to make software bloated. You can have a good desktop with good security without increasing the mhz requeriments, if you do it well. Microsoft can’t. And is not that Windows is that great as desktop, it depends mostly on third party applications to function properly, so there is no excuse as how much of a PC you need to make it work. If it sucks, it sucks.
Off topic, this StarForce copy protection really scared me! I can’t accept that someone pretends to force me to install an hidden device driver running with full privileges on my system just because I bought a software. If this is an example of how things work now in Windows, I’m really happy I stopped playing games some years ago (and ceased using Windows)…
Vista is going be very good as a gaming platform. The beta runs very modern games out of the box, with beta drivers, with an improved networking stack which is always appreciated by people like me who play online games.
As to 800 mhz machines.. if your running a beta os on a 5 year old machine, your the problem, not the operating system. Hardware specs must improve as code gets more complex; there is no way around that.
I would not stand in it’s way. After so many delays and set backs I have a feeling it’s going in ready or not and nothing will stop that show.
Sounds like shooting fish in a barrel.