Vista? Don't Want It, Don't Need It, Don't Care!

[Mace 1,924]

>One of these days I'll grab a suitable Amiga 500 from Ebay as>well, this was my first comp of any kind and the first time I>played the FS series with FS2.Shoot that's not that old. TRASH-80 is old. I have a friend who still uses an Amiga 500 quite often. It really is a great machine too. That gui it has, was really ahead of its time.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2310 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 2.5-3-3-8 (1T), WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian case

[Guest iwantmydc3]

When MS ceases to support XP, I will acquire whatever new OS they have at the time. Currenty that is scheduled for 2009. It's becoming obvious that everyone is missing the point of my question-maybe I'm not expressing myself clearly enough, I apologize. Yes there are those that want us to buy Vista the second it comes out--PC Magazine, PC World, Computer Shopper, and, of course, Microsoft. DX10 is an API from what I understand, e.g. they could compile it for XP, if they wanted to, it doesn't have to be exclusive for Viata. besides I don't care about it that much it will be late and buggy you can count on it. Your car analogy is both the best, and worst, explanation of your point-it's a perfect illustration in that, yes my 2000 ford still looks nice, rides nice, and will go on for awhile with proper care, but eventually due to a couple of factors like difficulty obtaining spare parts (they have stopped making the Taurus and will quit making the Crowin Vic/Marquis/Town car for 2010), and the cost of constant repairs for every service stop vs new car note). However, quite frankly, this analogy doesn't fit either, because if you care for a car, and ARE able to get parts, cars can stay on the road for 50 years or more. Theoretically, I could still be running a 386 with DOS 5.0 and a dot matrix printer, if all I cared about was using Word Perfect and Lotus 123, and those programs still did what I needed them to do. But of course "the world" has moved on from that, so that would be silly--I just wouuldnt be able to get anything done. But with all that said-I'm still going to be a pain in the butt and stick with XP. I don't want to be Microsofts beta tester any more. At least when you're an official beta tester they give you the software free. XP Pro works fine, it's tuned and configured and patched, and I'm not going to deal with the headaches of upgrading, even on my new (3 month old) system. As I've said, if you think there's heartache getting FSX running on a 2 year old machine wait till you try a new operating system ;)

[Guest iwantmydc3]

Thank you! You have expressed what I tried to. Many folks think of XP as it is now (fairly dependable and stable), but don't remember all the heartache involved in "upgrading." I dont do any "gaming" anymore on the PC either, just FS and Chessmaster, I have consoles for gaming (another expensive hobby, and another story). All I need my computer to do is do the tasks I need it for, run my programs, use the internet, and run Flight Simulator, my favorite hobby. In October I purchased a Dell XPS 410, as well equipped as I could reasonably afford (I like Dell becuase you choose the components, they ship it right to you, and you pay by the month without having to max the visa card), which does an excellent job on all of these things. As far as "convergence" I have never cared. I have a computer to do computer things with, I have a digital cable box/dvr, DVD recorder, and TV to watch TV and movies with. I have never even built a music collection of any size on my PC; I have CD players and radios to listen to music, and a cassette player in my car, so if I want to say, listen to a favorite CD in my car I use my boombox to dub it to CD. (That's why we still pay that tax on casettes you know). So, in 2009, or if I get a new computer before then, I will get Vista. Oh, and I thought I explained already-Windows Kazumangia is slated for 2020. It's Windows UMAGA!!!!!* that's out in 2015.*Ha ha! ©Armando Alejandro Estrada. If you get that reference, hello fellow smark :0)

[Guest iwantmydc3]

BATCH FILES! YES! Remember all the work that used to be involved in writing your AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS Files, so that you could run your memory manager, etc? Those games from back in the day, like Wing Commander would bring a 386 to its knees, LOL. I remember I had to buy programs like QEMM so that I could run Windows 3.1. For those of you that started with Windows 98 or whatnot, be glad you missed the stone age :)

[byork 2,259]

Speaking of building new systems, has anyone heard anything on the rules regarding the purchase of OEM versions of Vista?I hear MS is tightening up the rules on OEM versions.-Bryan

[Guest iwantmydc3]

Which version? I beleive there will be about 6 versions of Vista and 9 of Office (Oh, yeah! don't forget Office 2007 is coming out, too!)

[Guest dfoulk]

Oh yes,I remember Brother QEMM very well! Funny thing though, it would bring a real smile to the face when you kludged out the right combination of commands to make those programs run!

[Guest Shep]

This company, link below, has a few rules regarding OEM Bryan - not sure how it relates to official MS rules.http://www.vadim.co.uk/Windows+Vista+Ultimate+32+bit+DVD+OEM Amazon UK have stopped taking pre-orders for Vista on instruction from MS.http://tinyurl.com/2ldz3nRay

[PhilTaylor 45]

"DX10 is an API from what I understand, e.g. they could compile it for XP, if they wanted to, it doesn't have to be exclusive for Viata. besides I don't care about it that much it will be late and buggy you can count on it." There are a couple of points worth making here:1)Any D3D release has 3 parts: a)the API programmers use b)the runtime that commmunicates with the OS kernel and driver c)the DDI(device driver interface)and driver that manages the hw2)DX10 is out and nVidia has shipped product that works with it. WRT to my point 1:So its factually wrong that "they could just compile it for XP". The runtime and its communication with the kernel is tied to a OS. There were significant changes in the runtime-kernel interaction. That would have to be back-ported to XP ( in addition to the API work ) and changes made to the XP kernel. Its not XP at that point. In addition the DDI and drivers themselves significantly changed. This would mean developing an additional DDI layer, an additional DDK, validating the DDI and the test driver, having additional WHQL suites, additional logo work, and additional driver development by the IHVs.None of that is easy. And thats before the additional SDK work on XP to support developers.WRT to my point 2:By definition DX10 is not late. It is in Vista. Vista was late. Time will tell if there are any critical bugs in DX10 but early results indicate not.

[scott967 62]

>>2)DX10 is out and nVidia has shipped product that works with>it. I think there are a lot of 8800 owners looking for those drivers, though. Maybe you have them already?>WRT to my point 1:>>So its factually wrong that "they could just compile it for>XP". >>The runtime and its communication with the kernel is tied to a>OS. There were significant changes in the runtime-kernel>interaction. That would have to be back-ported to XP ( in>addition to the API work ) and changes made to the XP kernel.>Its not XP at that point. >>In addition the DDI and drivers themselves significantly>changed. This would mean developing an additional DDI layer,>an additional DDK, validating the DDI and the test driver,>having additional WHQL suites, additional logo work, and>additional driver development by the IHVs.I understand a big emphasis in Vista was to get most of the driver code out of kernal layer and into user layer. I imagine the D3D10 stuff has to be carefully matched to that new driver model.scott s..

[PhilTaylor 45]

Once Vista becomes "publicly" available to consumers - I expect 8800 drivers for Vista will be downloadable within 24 hrs.

[Guest Kev_Is_Soaked]

It is true btw.... you can't just 'recompile' the DX10 code and expect it to run under XP. It would be calling for OS API's that don't exist, and would have to be emulated under XP. It would also call more advanced API's that do exist in XP under a previous schema... which would lead to software having adverse effects across platforms.It's almost like thinking that MS Office would be completely happy running under Mac OS if only MS would 'compile' it on a Mac.... not the case. The software is so tied in to the OS that it would be completely impossible to do so without a near-complete rewrite of Office.There are 8800 series drivers available on the NV site btw. Download the latest Beta's to get it. Also, don't expect full functionality out of these drivers until, as Phil said, Vista goes retail. (Jan30th I believe).If any of those people feel ripped off that the drivers aren't out yet, oh well.... the host OS is not released to the public yet, therefore NV is not bound to supplying drivers until it is.

[Guest wyoming]

Problem is you don't have a choice. You can try Linux, which is very light and a powerful OS enough for what probably 95% of people do, but there's no software or if there is you got to decompile and work like a whole week, at least me to have it, perhaps work. No FS there. Windows keeps on getting bigger and wider, trying to satisfy 3 billions people, 3 millions businesses and 300,000 focus-groups at the same time and winding up with a freakin' gigamonster, that needs constant updates, service packs and so forth to address the endless issues it creates. So, yeah, I guess I will "up"grade to Vista at some point. Just, and only, because I have no choice.

[MD83 1]

>It's actually FUNNY when someone says....."Use a regular PC>and you'll see that it doen't work well" (paraphrase).>>If I have the money and the inclination to upgrade my PC and>enjoy the benefits of FSX and VISTA...why would I listen to>such an illogical idea?>>FSX is running super smooth on my system (yes, it's expensive;>so what?). >I now look forward to VISTA and DX 10. And if I have to buy a>new Video card for DX10, then I will.>>Sorry for the attitude, but if you can't play in the game>(simulation in this case) then play something else.>>Yes, you certainly do have an attitude :-roll

[Hollywood 1]

i have installed Vista one week ago and i am running FS9 at about 5fps faster than under WinXP. It might be only related to the fact that i did not update Xp to Vista. I did a fresh installation. Finally i don't care. FSX is no topic for me because i could not run it well under XP neither i can under Vista.My Specs:ASUS P5P800 SE MoboP4 3.2 Ghz2GB Ram DDR400GF6800 GT 256MB320 GB SATAVista Ultimate Build 6000I have 25fps (locked at 25) in 90% of all sceneries running complex panels 100% 3D clouds 80% traffic. With FSX Demo in St. Maarten using the cessna i got 5 -10 ;) sliders not maxed out.CheersMartin