another reason not to get vista

[QUOTE="wanted_police"]http://www.megagames.com/news/html/software/xpsp3boostsperformancevistasp1doesnt.shtmlTHERSOfi

Lol, wow.

Nice find btw.

Looks like I might be asking for an XP professional installation with my new computer.

[QUOTE="couly"]I had no problems upgrading for vista, it's the price of progress. You'd hardly expect NASA to fly to Mars with the same technology it used to fly to the moon. DJGOON

Yes things like upgrading hardware is inevitable, but what does Vista offer over XP? Its like NASA just repainting a space shuttle and hanging a fluffy dice from the cockpit hehe.

Vista is hungry for RAM and CPU. It consumes about 800 Mb of RAM, while XP only about 250. Those 550 really matter in games today!

Vista's only benefit is DX10.

Baranga

DX10 benefit is questionable, at this point atleast.

[QUOTE="Blue_Tomato"]

[QUOTE="onuruca"]i'm feeling we have to get vista as i'm thinking of alan wake and other games which will be exclusive for vista.biggest_loser

Like Halo 2? There's a patch to make it run on XP, and DX10 is being ported to XP by independent developers as well. There's no technical reason for binding a game to Vista, its just about business - using games to promote the sales of a new OS.

Well, me for one do not like to be dictated which OS to use. I felt bad enough being forced to buy a Vista license when buying a new laptop, its not my choice. If Microsoft did not force Vista on people through the purchase of new copmputers, their Vista sales would look incredibly bad...

Do you have any evidence of this? Particularly DX10 being ported to XP? I believe you but it says almost too good to be true!!

It's work in progress, but the Alky Project seems to be able to deliver DX10 on XP, here's one link, google for more:

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070424-project-aims-to-bring-dx10-gaming-to-xp-linux-os-x.html

Even Linux and OSX is targeted for DX10 through this project.

I'm a game developer myself, and I do not see any technical reasons why it can not be done. Not easy, but certainly not impossible. DX10 is more like a mechanism to lock games to Vista for business reasons, rather than a technology only possible on Vista.

It will be interesting to see how it affects performance though, it would be hilarious if the hacked DX10 version on XP runs better... :)

I have both a Vista drive and an XP drive on this rig. Vista does improve games even Day of Defeat: Source, but Vista is not worth the $100 for O.E.M. right now.roulettethedog

Retail upgrade is $99. Search the internet and you will find a way to install it as the full version with no need for XP.

How long till we find out do you think about Dx10 on XP? That would be the ultimate crushing blow, the final nail in the coffin, for ol' uncle Vista. There would be no need to get it at all then.....except for the Vista exclusive games, but there's only 1 at the moment: Alan Wake.
biggest_loser

and yet, eventually you will get it. just like you got XP even though everyone was complaining about it too.

[QUOTE="biggest_loser"]How long till we find out do you think about Dx10 on XP? That would be the ultimate crushing blow, the final nail in the coffin, for ol' uncle Vista. There would be no need to get it at all then.....except for the Vista exclusive games, but there's only 1 at the moment: Alan Wake.
Hewkii

and yet, eventually you will get it. just like you got XP even though everyone was complaining about it too.

Actually Charlie I'm still using Windows 2000. :D Surprise.

Actually Charlie I'm still using Windows 2000. :D Surprise.

biggest_loser

ah, so you're one of those types. ;)

My company has been testing Vista on a 20 PC/Laptop test environment for almost a year. Vista runs well on some systems, but other systems you see mass corruption of OS apps within 2-4 months and have to be reloaded. It seems to be hardware-specific and to a lesser extentdriver-specific. As a result the move to Vista has been postponed several times. I personally had Vista on my PC and found the same corruption after 2 months, then 9 weeks and had to reload. Several games would also not even run on Vista. I moved back to XP because I would rather be playing games on my PC than doing IT work at home.

People can come in here all they want and say "it works fine for me! your rig must be crap!" all they want, I will takethis data over your anecdotal data any day of the week.

Vista Ultimate 64-bit on my main desktop at home, Vista Home Premium 32-bit on one of my notebooks. Primary use is gaming and web browsing and I've been using Vista since April.

Seriously, I have not had any major difficulties, works great, the desktop in particular. Not once I have I thought I've needed to return to XP. That said, I don't see any huge advantage in features or otherwise Vista has over XP.

Also keep in mind, however, my machines at home do not run a large number of applications, it's more games than anything else, and I customize Vista to my preference (UAC off, defender off, primary account is an admin account, etc).

At work we run more apps with Vista, and we need to consider the customer's Vista environment who will be running our software. Here is where I've seen many, many more issues.

Vista Ultimate 64-bit on my main desktop at home, Vista Home Premium 32-bit on one of my notebooks. Primary use is gaming and web browsing and I've been using Vista since April.

Seriously, I have not had any major difficulties, works great, the desktop in particular. Not once I have I thought I've needed to return to XP. That said, I don't see any huge advantage in features or otherwise Vista has over XP.

Also keep in mind, however, my machines at home do not run a large number of applications, it's more games than anything else, and I customize Vista to my preference (UAC off, defender off, primary account is an admin account, etc).

At work we run more apps with Vista, and we need to consider the customer's Vista environment who will be running our software. Here is where I've seen many, many more issues.

Nitrous2O

Interesting.....I guess this OS was intended for games really afterall wasn't it?

I don't know what to tell you....I'm loving vista! My 3gb of ram cuts through it like nothing and my graphics card is working wonders with it.

I experience no slow down time at all with vista so i really don't know whats so wrong with this OS. I haven't had a BSOD yet either.

All my software is compatible with it to. IMO XP is really really great but its not something your going to want to stick with for the next few years. The next OS Microsoft releases will probably be a lot more similar to vista then XP and then what are you going to do? Stay with XP? Or move to mac where you cant game at all?

I love vista but that's just me.

I am not so sure about that link...MS will concentrate more on Vista this year.gfile

The only reason why anyone would want Vista is because of DirectX10 - there is no other reason - but even that hasn't been put to any great use since it looks so similar to Dx9.

[QUOTE="gfile"]I am not so sure about that link...MS will concentrate more on Vista this year.biggest_loser

The only reason why anyone would want Vista is because of DirectX10 - there is no other reason - but even that hasn't been put to any great use since it looks so similar to Dx9.

I haven't even got the game yet, my computer is too crappy but have a look at this boyo, the image comparison.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,2222549,00.asp

[QUOTE="nizzleton"][QUOTE="nizzleton"][QUOTE="Baranga"]

Vista is hungry for RAM and CPU. It consumes about 800 Mb of RAM, while XP only about 250. Those 550 really matter in games today!

Vista's only benefit is DX10.

PerfectGamer17

Are you lying or just plain ignorant? Vista barely used 512mb (sometimes dropped to 350mb) on my 1gb of ram. If you have the money to get Vista you have the money to get a decent amount of ram and processing power - thus I doubt it's just 'vista is hungrier than xp' otherwise we'd all be on 98, yes?

because they don't know what there doing.