Sign in to follow this  
Guest iwantmydc3

Read before you jump on Vista wagon...

Recommended Posts

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-...r_windows_vistaThere are MANY reasons (beyond these) NOT to buy Vista so I'd recommend you folks be a little cautious about your upgrades.1. 3 times as many Services running in Vista (every one of these services consumes some CPU cycles)2. OpenGL3. No Direct3DSound support4. Lots of compatibility issues with current software5. It runs slower in every test tossed at itVista 32 bit is pretty much a waste of money/time so if one does upgrade go with 64 bit so you at least get the benefits of additional RAM support assuming you have a game/app that will use the additional RAM. But for anyone that does a lot of rendering (or multi-CPU intensive) work, you might want skip Vista entirely - I didn't expect these results, I thought multi-CPU thread apps would work well (apparently not).As for FSX, I think additiona RAM support will be a MUST! DX10 will have to overcome the drag of the OS so the DX10 FSX might still be faster but perhaps not as fast if Microsoft made DX10 available for WinXP (which they could but choose not to).Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

3. No Direct3DSound supportI'd love to know their thinking behind that one.Jim Karn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to read all of it. "No new Windows release has been able to offer more application performance than its predecessor."Also, Direct3DSound has been superceded by something newer. Its an advancement not regression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read a lot of positive reviews of Vista too. The Tom's Hardware Review was not all that negative in my opinion. I didn't see anything in the review indicating no Direct3DSound support but, if true, it's not that big of a deal and support will be there soon. The bottom line for me is I can't stand reading about other people talking about the awesome things they have been able to do with Vista, etc., and I'm still running the old OS. ATI just published new Vista drivers for their video cards today. Other manufacturers will be doing the same pronto or risk falling behind the curve and not remaining competitive. I'm upgrading as soon as I can to learn more about this new technology and to explore. Vista is the future. XP, WinME, Windows 98, DOS, etc., are the past. Plus I have the money to explore new things and find new challenges!:-) I'm really looking forward to this upgrade! Thanks for the info though.Best regards,Jim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE...stop threads like this.As an IT professional for 20 years, my eyes are bleeding from the sheer lack of information and understanding of some users who think that everything that is being published is the truth.1. False, Vista runs a few more services, not 3 times more. Fact is also that the memory and CPU cycle-hungry services are usually the ones that are installed by 3rd parties. Ever used Google Desktop?2. ???3. As stated earlier, DirectSound has been superceded, but the API is backwards-compatible.4. I have been running Vista since Beta 1. While there were some compatibilty issues in the earlier betas, I haven't had any problem with any of my software since Vista RC2 and CERTAINLY not as many issues compared to a switch from Windows 2000 to XP.5. Partially true. It does run about 1-5% slower than Windows XP, but that is mainly due to the fact that the tester used the drivers supplied by the OS. As drivers get more optimized by the manufacturers the margin will be insignificant. Superflous and not needed services can be safely DISABLED - just like in XP.Vista 32 is the current state of things. Vista 64 will become more significant to the normal user when going beyond 4GB of Ram and with more optimized drivers and software on the horizon. That time is about 1-2 years away.Vista features better CPU cycles and prioritization, enhanced caching and memory management, just to name a few. The entire kernel has been rewritten, for the first time since Windows NT 4.0.Everything DX10 is pure speculation, but is supposed to offload a significant amount of CPU towards the GPU. Noone has seen it yet in action, not Tomshardware, Digg, Slashdot - or wherever you get your news from.Please stay with the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never been a fan of Toms Hardware for many years now, it used to be "the" site to go for hardware reviews, but a lot of the reports started showing terrible bias, this was a few years ago, so cant speak for this Vista review on that site?But?>1. 3 times as many Services running in Vista Dont you have the option to turn unnecessary services off in Vista like you do in XP? if not then surely we will soon have a power toys utility that can enable this.What about OpenGL in Vista? What do you mean?I've heard from some people that some programs runs better in Vista than in XP, certainly my experience of XP64 edition on a 64 bit CPU confirms some apps do, though I don't use that laptop for gaming of any kind.At the end of the day, why discourage folk from going Vista? It will be our OS of *only* choice sooner or later even if we like it or not, with that in mind, the more people that buy Vista and do the real beta testing (Yes I know its morally wrong) the better.I'm not supporting Vista or Billy Boy, just giving my opinion ... I do know one day I'll have to switch over, just like every OS I've used since DOS 5 if I'm to keep up, but for now I don't feel the need to warn everyone not to use it, if they want to, why not? if nobody did, then we would never move fwd and that OS would never mature, things would stagnate.12 years ago people were panicking about Win95 and swearing they would not stop using DOS 6.22, then it was ... I will not swap to Win98 and so on and so-forth :) trust me, we are going to have to move fwd, but lets do so at our own pace, without trying to convince others not to do so.I say, why worry? I, like many others will jump on the Vista bandwagon when I'm good and ready, and even then dual boot with XP to ease the transition process, just like I've done with all my other OS's.The only thing of concern with Vista for me just now, are the reports you can not use unsigned drivers, Microsoft are going to have to step back on this one, thats commercial suicide, if I was not able to use unsigned drivers on my current XP pro, I'd have a lot of hardware I'd still not be able to use, also it's bound to cause delays getting monthly ATI and Nvidea drivers certified, perhaps Microsoft are telling hardware vendors to submit the hardware examples and drivers to them so they can test them first, even then, this is bound to mean unacceptable expense all round not to mention delays or clean putting off anyone developing new PC hardware, even then, who is to say a Microsoft tester is any better to evaluate and test a driver than many thousands of real users, be it flight sim or otherwise ... even now, relatively unpopular drivers like Thrustmaster Cougar ones are still unsigned for XP, No, I'll bet money Microsoft climb down on this one or provide an acceptable solution quite soon.The best advice I've read if you are really concerned about Vista, is wait until it gets SP1 or maybe 2.It seems MS are going to keep supporting XP for a while yet, so no worries, but we are all going to swap over sometime, trust me. I was still composing my post at the time Aerdt posted his, so apologies for similar replies :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim,But what is new in Vista? It's slow - ATI drivers will not speed up the OS. The primary drag on the OS is the 3X more services running - WinXP has anywhere from 50-100 services running, Vista has 300+. This is a big drain on performance and it shows.Another major performance hit is the layer on layer on layer of compatibility that is in Vista, with their aim to retain 80% app/game compatibility they are forced to include a lot of translation code which in turn is slowing down the OS even more. But if you look at Microsoft's past they ten to go good OS, bad OS, good OS, bad OS (on the none server side) -- Vista is falling on the bad OS cycle (aka the WinME). This is Microsofts transition OS from 32bit 2D to 64bit 3D -- it really is the WinME equivalent -- this is their learning ground for what will be the better OS, the one after Vista which is currently named Vienna.Vienna has already set the stage to break backward compatibility -- Microsoft knows they can't keep the layers going any longer, it's too buggy, too slow, too vulnerable.Lack of Direct3DSound support just means many existing games will only work in basic Stereo. Not sure what Creative Labs have in terms of EAX for Vista -- I assume they will but I've not heard anything about it.Tom's is by no means the only source that has test Vista, many magazines (MaximumPC, CPU, and others) have all come up with virtually the same results.If you do go with Vista, do the 64bit install -- I think you'll ultimately be happier in the long run. Who knows maybe FSX for DX10 will actually make use the extra address space to speed up scenery/texture loading.But as with all things Microsoft lately, you'll need hardware that will be produced 3 years from now to run smooth ;)But seriously Jim, Vista is not the future.Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been a software engineer for 26 years (not exactly sure the releveance in this, but hey you think it is important) -- I actually code and install Windows Services as part of my professional life, I do know a thing or two about them and how many are install in retail OS like WinXP and Vista. Turn on Aeroglass and take a 2nd look ;) Turn on some of the other OS feature and start counting the services enabled.As with WinXP, sure if you install the absolute basics you don't get as many running services, same with Vista -- I've never run into anyone that runs the basics but maybe in your environment you control that situation?I'm MSDN Universal subscription also and pay my $2500/yr for everything Microsoft so yeah, I've have early Beta running also -- I guess we disagree because it had more than "some" issues, lack of network drivers and wireless drivers was amazing, often had to find WinXP 64bit drivers and force them to install with some "adjustments".The Kernel was changed, it has always been changed in every version, it was NOT re-written from ground up! That is just completely false. They had to modify A LOT of the Kernel to accomodate Aeroglass, DRM, security, and a few other features."better CPU cycles" -- that doesn't make any sense? If you are talking about multi-threading and CPU specific threading -- well whatever they did at Redmond has helped the performance of existing applications.Where do you think Microsoft got the drivers that are in Vista? Hardware vendors submit their drivers to Microsoft who then put them thru the certification process and if they pass they make it into the OS. I've worked with the DDK so I'm very familiar with the driver certification process at Microsoft.I'm all about facts.Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like your arguement for upgrading is because you will have to sooner or later?Is that a good reason to upgrade? I guess I don't live with companies that leverage their software in such a manner -- such as making DX10 only for Vista even though the development and testing process of DX10 was done on WinXP and Win2K3, yet it magically can't work in WinXP and Win2K3, but the tools that produce it and test it do?? How strange don't ya think?In the RTM you can use unsigned drivers, you just have to be in the correct account. Perhaps you're thinking about the DRM policy?Vienna is the Microsoft's next real OS -- Vista is their transition OS from 32bit 2D to 64bit 3D. Microsoft have already stated that Vienna will drop the backward compatibility concept -- meaning that they truely will start from almost ground zero and salvage code along the way.Tom's or whomever (MaximumPC, CPU Magazine, etc. etc.) -- they've all been unimpressed and post the same performance results -- but don't hold your breath for magical hardware drivers that are suddenly going to give Vista a 2X performance increase, just not going to happen.Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stated my years of IT experience not to elevate me to a 'higher level', but to simply state that I know what I am talking about, because I work with, troubleshoot and optimize operating systems all day long.The lack of drivers is a concern right now, agreed. But I recall that the lack of drivers at the launch Windows XP was similar, if not worse.The kernel has not been a total 100% rewrite, you got me. But MS has made significant enhancements, which attributes to about 2/3 of the kernel: Management mechanisms, security features, other application support mechanisms, support for hardware innovation, power management, plug and play and, most importantly, the hardware abstraction layer. (Source: MSDN)"Better CPU cycles" meaning "CPU Cycle Counting": Windows Vista includes a number of enhancements in the area of processes and threads that include use of the CPU cycle counter for fairer CPU allocation and the new Multimedia Class Scheduler Service (MMCSS) that helps media applications deliver glitch-free playback (Source: MS TechNet)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>It sounds like your arguement for upgrading is because you>will have to sooner or later?>>Is that a good reason to upgrade? >Tom's or whomever (MaximumPC, CPU Magazine, etc. etc.) -->they've all been unimpressed and post the same performance>results -- but don't hold your breath for magical hardware>drivers that are suddenly going to give Vista a 2X performance>increase, just not going to happen.>>Rob.I'm not arguing to upgrade or not.Just pointing out the options as well as the inevitable.And if history is anything to go by, then yes, most if not all of us will eventually go Vista before the next OS comes out ... and this will happen, sooner or later.I thought my post was fair, looking at the pro's and cons, as well the current speculation.I don't want to argue here or come across as an expert and talk down to people, just giving my opinion to the debate, for what its worth.However, as I said before, there are some worrying aspects of Vista, and I wish Microsoft would be more clear about them.I still say, let people make up their own minds.No need for personal campaigns against an OS, yikes, I've seen enough of that against FSX, its all bordering on the very silly.PS: who asked for magical hardware drivers? Who are you talking to here? what were you talking about with OpenGL in Vista? You never answered that, but bought it to the table?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the USA, the country is founded on campaigns and lobbiest pretty much control everything. But that's another topic of discussion.I'm providing information on the "wow" OS called Vista so hopefully at least provide information about it to those that might no nothing about Vista other than it being position as the next best thing from Redmond. The next best thing from Redmond (we hope) will be Vienna, not Vista.Someone had posted about Vista being slow because there is no "optimized" hardware driver support -- my comment was to indicate their are no magical "optimized" drivers that will make is significantly faster.Nothing wrong with a debate nor your opinion - that's what freedom of speech is about and hopefully welcome in this forum.It's unfortunate you think upgrading to Vista is inevitable -- many didn't upgrade to WinME and waited for WinXP, so upgrading isn't a must do. Microsoft's only real leverage is DX10 and gaming, for those not interested in that I would imagine WinXP will do everything they need it to do and do it faster than Vista.Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like the Vista caution is out to the public already and folks are NOT jumping on the wagon -- no lines, no camping out, no out of stock.I'm glad to see this, I think times are changing and Microsoft's days of "leverage" are numbered -- they'll have to return to the arena of competition again -- long over due.http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-01-...htm?POE=TECISVAI must admit, I think Microsoft marketing folks could have done a little better than selling "wow".And yes there are realistic alternatives today.Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rob, I went out today to buy a copy of XP Pro SP2.What a LAUGH!It was like XP Pro was being launched. I tried two Big Box, (they had no XP Pro left, but had Home) and finally found a copy at the Business Depot.Geez... I should buy ten of these suckers and auction them off on EBay, LOLOLOLOLOLNo matter...kidding aside, I got what I was after and am much relieved.It will be interesting over the next few days.Oh...there was a man and a woman that both had what I had in their little hands. Nobody at the software section seems to want the new Big Brother/Hand Heavy operating system.Vista....hmmm.....that means a 'view'. Was that a cryptic laugh on us, naming it such? They intend to 'view' your computer system and remove/add whatever they like.... Disallow what they do not!Not on this guy's system.Like I said, K.M.A. Micro Surveillance.I'm sure that when Vista bombs, DX 10 will be made available for XP as the card manufacturers will be screaming for blood....and get listened to. We only have to hang in there a bit....Now, back to FSX....Mitch R.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vista is just an excuse to suck more money out of your wallet.And most likely will screw OpenGL like what happened to Glide.We shall see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I can tell about Vista, it is the least inspiring Windows OS to come along. I certainly do not see big reasons to upgrade to it unless I am forced to, because of new hardware or software support.Let's see why I upgraded before:DOS to Win 3.1 - Windows GUIWin 3.1 to Win 95 - Not sure now, but I think it was needed to use more than 2MB of RAM and a host of new features.Win 95 to Win 98 - Move to 32-bit environment and support for larger disk drives.Win 98 to Win XP pro - More professional OS, NTFS. I must say that I have stayed with Win 98 for three years for gaming reasons.All of the above upgrades had much better reasons than Vista's 3D UI, indexed search and features that I already get from 3rd party vendors.I also agree with the poster above that after seeing the sales figures for Vista, MS will be pressured to release DX10 for XP.And finally, I'll let others have all the fun of being a beta tester for at least the next two years. I am also curious to see just how far MS went on being a Big Brother. Time will tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tis more microsoft leverage -- however OpenGL is alive and doing very well on other more "serious" OS platforms.OpenGL is still functional in Vista, just goes thru a Direct3D layer so it will be slower. Microsoft didn't have the balls to just drop it (they were going to initially), they just handicapped it even more so DX10 becomes the primary choice. But if nVidia or ATI come up with ICDs so that the API does have direct access to the GPU, then OpenGL will still be alive. I just don't know nVidia or ATI's commitment to the ICDs.Ironic that OpenGL is what made Microsoft Windows a viable gaming platform as DirectX was not mature enough. Rather than expand on OpenGL (because Apple used it and *nix and an entire consortium of graphics specialist) they pushed ahead with their own DirectX which took many many years to just catch up with OpenGL. The reason, it's all about leverage -- get them addicted -- control the environment.Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it seems it takes more than "wow" to sell an OS to people - thank goodness people aren't rushing to get it nor lining up overnight.Hey you forgot Win98 to WinME -- I know it was easy to forget, just like Vista will be.The way it will go down is Microsoft will provide huge incentives to help gaming companies produce DX10 games that will provide some "wow" and hope this will generate more Vista sales. Microsoft have already started their PC gaming on the road gaming campaign although I'm not seeing much of an impact at the local retailers (BestBuy, CompUSA, Fry's). I am seeing Mac's being sold at BestBuy now -- surprised Microsoft didn't leverage BestBuy to stop that practice. Anyway, the Aces team may suddenly find themselves in the spot light to produce a truely amazing FSX DX10 version.If this plan does fail, then yes, we'll see DX10 for WinXP -- just a matter of how long Microsoft are willing to play the waiting game.Rob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were no lines at the XP release either.Name one realistic alternative, which combines the ease-of-use, the wide range of hardware support and an infinite selection of software!Pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should i care if vista runs slower or faster , the average person , and there aint none in here because we are all geeks cares about things that the average person could card less about.1 to 5% slower so what.it does not like certain software the average person does not care.in reality we may see all (us geeks) of the faults and gains of the new software, but the Mom or DAD that goes out and buys a computer for there card games , or solitaire, or to surf the net, aint looking at the numbers that we are looking at.But here is something i know about geeks, we are going out to get the new operating software just because we have got to have it.we must work it , test it , play with it, cuss at it, do all the things that geeks do.yeah i know all about this new vista, does not matter im going out to get it and move on, id rather be frustered up to date than be frustered behind date.I was cussing like a champ with FSX but now im cussing much less and injoying myself.Vista is here and it is going to stay whether you like it or not, so geeks get busy and learn the new operating software so that the non geeks can ask us questions and get our help...........................Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert,True to some degree -- but some applications/games run 25-50% slower -- this will be noticeable to the average person (whatever the average person is).My folks (70+) don't want to upgrade -- the last thing they want is change, they just got somewhat comfortable with WinXP. But your arguement doesn't make sense, if the "average" person plays card games, solitaire, surfs the net then they have even less of a reason to upgrade to Vista. Naaah, geeks already had the OS long before the public got it. I don't have it on any of my personal use machines, only a few work machines for testing purposes. Can't even develop with VS 2005 on Vista without doing some work to make it compatible and installing the VS 2005 SP1.Vista is the WinME equivalent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Partially agreed, but OSX does currently not support the variety of software and hardware. And, to be, honest, the hardware selection from Apple for a barebone Mac is pathetic.However, I do agree with you, if OSX would be opened up for PCs. That would really spur the competition.Pat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this