Windows Majove - Really?

[cultcross]

Vista is just a pain. Plus, I've had constant crashes. It's not nearly as resilient to playing with as XP is.

Do you believe that because you have had constant crashes that everyone with Vista has constant crashes?

The only crashes I've ever had were really the result of poor 3rd party driver support, which has since been fixed. Certainly not Vista's fault... and the same thing happened when XP was first released.

Ah, not supporting drivers isn't the OS's fault - the old Microsoft excuse. What is an OS for, exactly, if not allowing your computer to function effectively with all its hard and software installed and functioning? It's not the job of the 3rd party to make sure their drivers change when Microsoft happen to changes their OS, it's Microsoft's problem to see they don't 'upgrade' their customers out of the ability to do what they want to do with their system.

 

[firehawk12]

Well, that's the thing. It's not in the best interests of manufacturers to support new OSes. Lack of driver support for old software is probably the best way to force consumers to buy new printers/scanners/etc.

 

[Koinek]

I'm in what people might call the swing demographic here. I'm a hardcore XP user and I would never switch from Windows but the bad rap that Vista is getting has so far prevented me from moving to it. I do however like the visual detail and other things the system brings. These ads have made me feel more comfortable about switching over. I guess if you've got strong enough feelings against it, you will never overcome them but for me it worked.

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Vista's been more stable than XP for me. The downside is every now and then you run into some little internet program that isn't vista compatible. It's crashed, maybe twice, between April 07 and today. By comparison, my XP computer at work has crashed half a dozen times since i started there (May 08)

 

[Hermiod]

Well, that's the thing. It's not in the best interests of manufacturers to support new OSes. Lack of driver support for old software is probably the best way to force consumers to buy new printers/scanners/etc.

Right now, though, the Vista drivers for new hardware aren't as good - especially graphics cards. The drivers ATi and nVidia have released to support the new Windows driver model aren't as mature.

 

[Rii]

Right now, though, the Vista drivers for new hardware aren't as good - especially graphics cards. The drivers ATi and nVidia have released to support the new Windows driver model aren't as mature.

How are things back there in 2006?

 

[Hermiod]

Right now, though, the Vista drivers for new hardware aren't as good - especially graphics cards. The drivers ATi and nVidia have released to support the new Windows driver model aren't as mature.

How are things back there in 2006?

It's still true. The drivers aren't mature, especially when you bring OpenGL in to it.

 

[Rii]

Right now, though, the Vista drivers for new hardware aren't as good - especially graphics cards. The drivers ATi and nVidia have released to support the new Windows driver model aren't as mature.

How are things back there in 2006?

It's still true. The drivers aren't mature, especially when you bring OpenGL in to it.

This must be why nearly every comparative gaming benchmark test (such as this one) conducted over the last six months shows Vista performance either on par with or superior to XP.

 

[Hermiod]

This must be why nearly every comparative gaming benchmark test conducted over the last six months shows Vista performance either on par with or actually superior to XP.

Have they been testing OpenGL games ? Those are the real problem.

 

[Rii]

This must be why nearly every comparative gaming benchmark test conducted over the last six months shows Vista performance either on par with or actually superior to XP.

Have they been testing OpenGL games ? Those are the real problem.

I'm not sure the human eye can perceive the difference between 340fps and 400fps in Quake III.

 

[Hermiod]

I'm not sure the human eye can perceive the difference between 340fps and 400fps in Quake III.

Well, no, but the people I talk to about graphics (people I work with) are sticklers for that sort of thing.

 

[Rii]

I'm not sure the human eye can perceive the difference between 340fps and 400fps in Quake III.

Well, no, but the people I talk to about graphics (people I work with) are sticklers for that sort of thing.

Fair enough. For gaming purposes, then, Vista performance and driver support is no longer an issue.

 

[Hermiod]

Fair enough. For gaming purposes, then, Vista performance and driver support is no longer an issue.

The same game on Vista will still typically have higher system requirements, especially memory, than on XP though.

 

[Rii]

Fair enough. For gaming purposes, then, Vista performance and driver support is no longer an issue.

The same game on Vista will still typically have higher system requirements, especially memory, than on XP though.

True, but memory is a resource that new PCs are, or should be, drowning in. DDR2 is what, USD $20/GB these days? The sticker difference between too little RAM and more than most users - even gamers - know what to do with amounts to three-fifths of fuck all. It's an issue for older PCs, sure, but nobody should be "upgrading" their PCs to Vista anyway.

 

[JonathonWally]

Fair enough. For gaming purposes, then, Vista performance and driver support is no longer an issue.

The same game on Vista will still typically have higher system requirements, especially memory, than on XP though.

True, but memory is a resource that new PCs are, or should be, drowning in. DDR2 is what, USD $20/GB these days? The sticker difference between too little RAM and more than most users - even gamers - know what to do with amounts to three-fifths of fuck all. It's an issue for older PCs, sure, but nobody should be "upgrading" their PCs to Vista anyway.

would now be a good time to point out that XP can't even use all of my ram and only Vista can?

 

[Rii]

would now be a good time to point out that XP can't even use all of my ram and only Vista can?

Of course you probably can't use of all your PC's RAM either.

I know that someone could "borrow" at least 1GB from this system and I wouldn't notice the difference outside of the BIOS display on startup.

 

[JonathonWally]

would now be a good time to point out that XP can't even use all of my ram and only Vista can?

Of course you probably can't use of all your PC's RAM either.

I know that someone could "borrow" at least 1GB from this system and I wouldn't notice the difference outside of the BIOS display on startup.

Maybe photoshop get's some use out of it. I did buy a lot.

 

[Hermiod]

It's pointless going past 3gb on a 32-bit version of Windows XP or Vista, 4gb even more so as neither OS can access that much memory. You certainly can't go past 4gb as there's no way to represent addresses beyond that in 32 bits.

 

[JonathonWally]

It's pointless going past 3gb on a 32-bit version of Windows XP or Vista, 4gb even more so as neither OS can access that much memory. You certainly can't go past 4gb as there's no way to represent addresses beyond that in 32 bits.

4gb, running 64 bit. Will probably go to 8gb in the next few months.

 

[Hermiod]

It's pointless going past 3gb on a 32-bit version of Windows XP or Vista, 4gb even more so as neither OS can access that much memory. You certainly can't go past 4gb as there's no way to represent addresses beyond that in 32 bits.

4gb, running 64 bit. Will probably go to 8gb in the next few months.

Ah, that's different.