Windows Vista - Thumbs down from Carmack

[Guest Kev_Is_Soaked]

No. I can definitely state without hesitation, that XP will have at least another three years worth of support. MS aren't that draconian :)This gives the new OS time to prove itself.I only needed three weeks with Vista to prove to me that this is the way to go. Security is by-far all-improved. Functionality has been increased ten-fold, performance and reliability seems a lot better than the already robust XP, and of course... I just loved the interface.I would recommend that if anyone out there is seriously interested in it, that they take it for a spin and kick the tires. I found it to be far superior to XP in almost every way. I will be upgrading within a week of release.

[Guest bnick]

Wow... Some great threads in here... I was all set to make the upgrade jump the end of this month from Win XP Pro64 which has run rock solid and very fast in all my business apps I use for my Architectural 3D Rendering work...I'm still not convinced I shouldn't upgrade because my seat of Win XP Pro64 gives me an upgrade path to Vista 64 bit business version, or the Ultimate version...As I understand, and please correct me if I'm wrong here but a person with a valid seat of XP Home, or XP Pro 32, will have no upgrade option, and will have to purchase a full price seat of Vista... I did read at Microsoft that many new pc's purchased with XP Home or Pro 32 between Nov 06 and possibly Mar 07 may receive coupons with their new pc's so they can buy an upgrade to a like Vista product...I was really hoping to see a good improvement in FSX by jumping into the 64 bit version of Vista... My XP Pro64 runs circles around my Win XP Pro32 on another identical drive, and these new SATA2 drives are so fast compared to the old IDE drives...If anyone knows how much ram XP Home or XP Pro32 can actually access and use, versus how much ram is accessible with XP Pro64 and Vista 64, I'd appreciate hearing about it... I know with my present system whether I have loaded 8gb or 16gb of SDRAM Win XP Pro32 only shows itself seeing a little over 2gb and I've read that's normal... When booting it shows 8gb or 16gb whichever I have loaded, echoed to the boot up screen before Windows loads...I still think I'm going to buy the 64 bit version of Vista just to take advantage of the seemingly limited and discounted upgrades available for Vista...bnickServer Workstation Win XP Pro 64 Tyan Thunder S2895 Mobo 4: AMD Dual-Core 270 Opteron processors 2: Asus 7800 GTX 512mb SLI Mode Graphics 8gb SDRAM 4200 (at present) 1: Western Digital 500gb SATA-2 drives (for Win XP Pro64FSX)3: Western Digital 250gb SATA-2 drives (for applications and backups)21 Viewsonic Creative Audigy 7.1 Surround Sound

[Guest]

Hmmm, hope you are right, however, this page shows support for XP Home support ended 12/31/06 but has quietly been extended, also mainstream support for XP pro seems like it will end late 2008, but extended support ends 2013. I think the critical updates are part of the mainstream package, not sure?http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060103-5891.htmlBit of a coincidence, I formatted my laptop that had XP Home installed just after Christmas and installed XP Pro 64 bit edition after a marathon hunt for suitable 64 bit drivers, still use XP pro for my other 2 desk top computers though.XP is getting on a bit now, but once you have tweaked it, it really is a fantastically stable OS and I do hope support continues for some time to come, fairly soon I will be upgrading my main computer to include fast C2D cpu, 2 gig ram, DX10 card, either from the current Nvidea range or the soon to be released ATI R600 series, and I just know I'll want to try Vista then, but as always I'll dual boot XP pro and Vista until Vista has matured with a service pack or two, just like XP did.

[Guest]

>If anyone knows how much ram XP Home or XP Pro32 can actually>access and use, versus how much ram is accessible with XP>Pro64 and Vista 64, I'd appreciate hearing about it... I know>with my present system whether I have loaded 8gb or 16gb of>SDRAM Win XP Pro32 only shows itself seeing a little over 2gb>and I've read that's normal... When booting it shows 8gb or>16gb whichever I have loaded, echoed to the boot up screen>before Windows loads...Win XP Home and Pro 32 can use up to 3gb ram, but I understand you need to let XP 32 know you have more than 2GB for it to be accessed? not sure what the limit is with Vista? but I'm sure its a lot more. Once I swap to Vista and start using it exclusively, and once I've upgraded my main desktop, I'll be installing 4gb ram, FSX is bound to like that :)I agree with you that XP pro 64 bit is quicker on the same hardware than XP home 32, I recently formatted my A64 3200 laptop that had XP home on it and installed XP pro 64, its noticeably quicker in tasks (don't play games on this machine) XP 64 seems like it uses the same amount of memory much better than the 32 bit XP Home did, was a real pain finding drivers for it though, no proper driver existed for the graphics chipset at all, but after much searching I found a modified .inf file for a similar 64 bit driver package for a similar graphic chipset chipset to mine, swapped them over and this works perfectly.

[Mike T 208]

Vista comes with BOTH 32-bit and 64-bit versions on the same DVD. You choose what you wish to install and you have some time to try it out before you register it, at which time your key becomes either 32-bit or 64-bit permanently.All tests have shown that there is no real advantage with going to 64-bit Vista but the REAL downside is the fact that 64-bit Vista will NOT load ANY drivers that haven't been officially blessed my Microsoft.Think how many times you have loaded a driver and the popup came that said the drivers are not "official" do you wish to continue? Vista 64-bit will simply not load them. That means you'd BETTER check every single one of your components from motherboard to printer to make sure it is offically supported in Vista 64. BTW, any version of XP is upgradeable to any version of Vista. You can upgrade from XP or XP Pro to Vista Home Basic through Vista Ultimate (Vista Business is one step below Vista Ultimate).Having a 64-bit license of XP doesn't mean anything to upgrading to Vista.

[FTD1949 0]

In reality there is MSFS for Mac. All you need is a new Intel based machine, a copy of XP, Mac OS X Tiger v10.4.6 or later and Boot Camp. Craig

[FTD1949 0]

For anyone interested in an objective test of Vista with gaming then check this link at Toms Hardware. http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/17/gam...ista/index.htmlCraig

[Guest n1g]

I have read a few reviews on Vista and it doesnt seem very promising at this time. Optimization will be ongoing, it has too. The sky isnt falling yet.Bob

[cklink 0]

Yeesh ...Interesting article. I think the best quote is "A lot hinges on the hardware vendors". In my opinion is seem like MS has jumped about 3 steps ahead of hardware, (hmmm like FSX) in expectation for hardware to evolve up to thier software. Remember when hardware lead the way, and software was developed to work on it. Seems Bill is forcing it to go the other way around. He'll make the OS and the hardware vendors have to make thier stuff to follow suit. The biggest p/o to me is still the fact that even though we pay for it, the software is owned by our PC configuration at the time.Regarding drivers, and windows refusing (instead of warning) to use non "windows" certified drivers really turns me off. Heck half of the best nvida drivers over the years were custom tweaked non certified beta's.I'm still wondering if we will ever see the day's again of when you bought software, took it home and installed it on your hardware and it worked. No patches, no problems, no issues. No wonder web browsers come with the OS, heck you'd never be able to get it working if you didn't have access to the support websites and tech/workaround articles. Speaking of which, if your StarTrek fan - do NOT buy Legacy. Do yourself a favor and spend $20 bucks on a good hammer. Use the hammer to smash yourself in the face as you flush an another $20 down the toilet. Its way less painfull and you'll save 10 bucks.Anyways,Garett

[Guest Traffic]

>>>>If anyone knows how much ram XP Home or XP Pro32 can>actually>>access and use, versus how much ram is accessible with XP>>Pro64 and Vista 64, I'd appreciate hearing about it... I>know>>with my present system whether I have loaded 8gb or 16gb of>>SDRAM Win XP Pro32 only shows itself seeing a little over>2gb>>and I've read that's normal... When booting it shows 8gb or>>16gb whichever I have loaded, echoed to the boot up screen>>before Windows loads...>>Win XP Home and Pro 32 can use up to 3gb ram, but I understand>you need to let XP 32 know you have more than 2GB for it to be>accessed? not sure what the limit is with Vista? but I'm sure>its a lot more. Once I swap to Vista and start using it>exclusively, and once I've upgraded my main desktop, I'll be>installing 4gb ram, FSX is bound to like that :)>>I agree with you that XP pro 64 bit is quicker on the same>hardware than XP home 32, I recently formatted my A64 3200>laptop that had XP home on it and installed XP pro 64, its>noticeably quicker in tasks (don't play games on this machine)>XP 64 seems like it uses the same amount of memory much better>than the 32 bit XP Home did, was a real pain finding drivers>for it though, no proper driver existed for the graphics>chipset at all, but after much searching I found a modified>.inf file for a similar 64 bit driver package for a similar>graphic chipset chipset to mine, swapped them over and this>works perfectly.Vista 32bit can allocate/manage up to 4GB of memory. At least that's what the Vista gods have been saying on the MSFT Vista newsgroup.

[flyingscampi 2]

Microsoft officially withdrew support for Windows 98 last year - nearly 10 years after it's release. If corporates demand Win XP support for the next 10 years then Microsoft will be forced to provide it.I agree with John Cormack and think Microsoft are wrong to only provide DX10 support for Vista. PC gaming development is already under threat from consoles and this can only make things worse.Maybe FSXI will only come out for the XBox, the vast majority of people who buy FSX will probably only buzz around some nice scenery in external view anyway.I had a compelling reason to upgrade to XP from 98, stability. XP was a completely different OS to 98 which evolved from the collaboration between Microsoft and IBM (IBM's version became OS/2, MS's became WinNT).I admit I haven't used Vista yet, but I suspect I won't be using it for some time to come as security is not a compelling reason to upgrade as I know how to keep XP secure and I still use the Windows Classic interface anyway!Eventually Vista will replace XP and I will use it eventually but this will probably be at least a year or two.I bought FSX, messed around with it and shelved it until I can make it look as good as the FS9 with addons I currently use. GE PRO 2 on FS9 makes FSX look rather ugly in my opinion.Craig.