Topic: Windows Vista: worth the money? (Read 17454 times)

the_tard · « **on:** 23 Dec 2006, 03:52 »

I currently use XP and I'm fairly happy with it most of the time. The only "work" I do on my computer is done in MS word, so I don't use it extensively on that end. I do use it alot for gaming, and I'm wondering if Vista would have a good or bad effect on that. Also, my friend still uses windows 2k and he can't install some games on it (BF 2142 for example) and I'm kind of concerned about that happening to me. So, what do you guys think, is it worth the money to buy it?

Johnny C · « **Reply #1 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 04:01 »

I'm no expert but I'll go with "if you think you have the power to run it go ahead." I have no use for it at the moment and I won't until I get some massive hardware upgrades.

supersheep · « **Reply #2 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 04:40 »

For games, Vista won't make much difference unless the games have been designed to run on it (as far as I know). There may be compatibility problems with some games, I am not sure. As for MS Word 2007, I have tried it and I do not like it. They have taken the interface and made it bad, and you cannot go back to the old way. ARGH!

Grawsith · « **Reply #3 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 04:44 »

OSX for the win!

*sob* i'm so alone *sob*

Storm Rider · « **Reply #4 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 07:38 »

In terms of gaming, Vista will be the only OS to support DirectX 10, so when games start requiring that, you'll have to upgrade. But for the most part, I don't think any major PC games on the horizon are forcing that upgrade yet. Crysis is the only one I know of that's being built around DX10 right now.

CaptainLorax · « **Reply #5 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 08:01 »

Im looking forward to hear the vista bootup and shutdown sounds played by Robert Fripp on guitar. Im going to search the web for it.

Brian Eno did the music for Windows 95.
-----------------------------

edit: haha, they took the soul out of Fripp's 20 minute Vista jam. Corporations are so cool.

this is a compilation of all the vista sounds
http://www.istartedsomething.com/uploads/vistasounds.mov

Toba · « **Reply #6 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 12:04 »

Quote from: Grawsith on 23 Dec 2006, 04:44

OSX for the win!

*sob* i'm so alone *sob*

Gentoo for the win!

*sob* I'm so alone *sob*

the_tard · « **Reply #7 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 12:11 »

Off topic, but that Crysis game looks pretty freakin sweet

Entilzah · « **Reply #8 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 15:24 »

My laptop is setup to run vista when it comes out, but i believe i'm going to wait several months before I consider getting it. That'll give everyone enough time to start bitching and moaning about it. And then i'll be able to weigh the pros and cons of it's use in my life.

Grawsith · « **Reply #9 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 15:29 »

Plus they'll patch the hell out of it in the first few months.

Entilzah · « **Reply #10 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 15:33 »

this is true, but the patches are sometimes worse than the original.....look at SP2 for XP. Personally I thought SP1 was much better!

Ã¶de · « **Reply #11 on:** 23 Dec 2006, 22:49 »

Re: Windows Vista: worth the money?

No.

Marauder_Pilot · « **Reply #12 on:** 25 Dec 2006, 09:31 »

I'll probably get Vista for my desktop, namely because it's my gaming rig and eventually games are just not going to work as well on XP.

Plus, Halo 2 is coming to Vista Fall 2007, which is almost reason enough for me (Since I suck noodles at console shooters).

Alegis · « **Reply #13 on:** 25 Dec 2006, 23:35 »

Yes I think it is worth it.
Yes I do think it is much cheaper than OS X versions combined over the release period since XP
And yes, it is worth it to change now rather than "wait for patches and drivers" because driver support is ace.

Have been using it since early betas and while I did not have to pay for this version (RTM from windows connect) - I am pleased.

Please pay no heed to those saying there are no changes, or it is merely a copycat. I thought people first looked some things up before they make ignorant statements.
Good in-dept review on several new features:
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_05.asp

the_tard · « **Reply #14 on:** 26 Dec 2006, 00:34 »

About how much does Vista go for (in Canadian, preferably)? I've heard anywhere from 200-400 which is a pretty big difference.

Alegis · « **Reply #15 on:** 26 Dec 2006, 01:35 »

Take the upgrade versions. I believe Vista home premium upgrade is $100 (American), going all the way up to more expensive Ultimate upgrade ($259). It's worth checking out what every version offers.

I'm not saying you should buy it blindly. I love it, I'm sure some may not. But for example lists as Paul Thurrot's site are great references.

the_tard · « **Reply #16 on:** 26 Dec 2006, 14:58 »

Judging by the site, this is a prettier windows XP that supports direct x 10. The only forseeable differences other than that were very vague, just repeating over and over that it was "more convenient". All the other things it lists I've already got (DVD/CD burner, WMP, stuff like that). I really want to get that Crysis game thats coming out because it looks sweet but I don't really want to go buy a new operating system specifically for one game...

P.S. If you like shooters check out this new crysis game on google vid, the physics are nuts but the video doesn't make the graphics very flattering. Allow me to post a screenshot.

Another

*drool drool*

Spike · « **Reply #17 on:** 26 Dec 2006, 15:43 »

Another thing to remember about Direct x 10 is that not only do you have to buy Vista, but you also need to buy a video card that can handle Direct x 10. That's not going to be a huge problem right away because direct x9 isn't going to magically disappear after direct x 10 comes out, but eventually support for it is going to disappear.

When the first of the Direct x 10 cards come out they are going to be expensive, so if you want to get a hold of a decent card that won't cost you 200-250 dollars you're going to have to wait for the new generation to drive down the prices on the old generation.

supersheep · « **Reply #18 on:** 26 Dec 2006, 17:54 »

OK. At first I thought that was a photograph. What the hell? I've seen video of Crysis, but that takes the biscuit. That is more beautiful than a beautiful thing in beautyland.

mqarcus · « **Reply #19 on:** 26 Dec 2006, 18:20 »

Quote from: Storm Rider on 23 Dec 2006, 07:38

In terms of gaming, Vista will be the only OS to support DirectX 10, so when games start requiring that, you'll have to upgrade. But for the most part, I don't think any major PC games on the horizon are forcing that upgrade yet. Crysis is the only one I know of that's being built around DX10 right now.

I'm not quite into this, but I guess SOMEONE will make some kind of port to run DX10 on old XP.

Mnementh · « **Reply #20 on:** 27 Dec 2006, 10:42 »

The problem with Vista is the system is pretty much on lockdown in terms of what users can do, and, word is that it's incomplete. A lot of businesses are sticking with XP (it's out for businesses now).

I'm going to stick with XP on the laptop, and dual boot XP/OS X on the iMac.

Spike · « **Reply #21 on:** 27 Dec 2006, 13:17 »

I just figure I'll keep using xp until it is impossible to play any new games.

Ã¶de · « **Reply #22 on:** 27 Dec 2006, 17:19 »

I'm going to stick with Ubuntu until there's some reason to get my free copy of Vista.

Alegis · « **Reply #23 on:** 27 Dec 2006, 17:43 »

Quote from: Spike on 26 Dec 2006, 15:43

Another thing to remember about Direct x 10 is that not only do you have to buy Vista, but you also need to buy a video card that can handle Direct x 10. That's not going to be a huge problem right away because direct x9 isn't going to magically disappear after direct x 10 comes out, but eventually support for it is going to disappear.

When the first of the Direct x 10 cards come out they are going to be expensive, so if you want to get a hold of a decent card that won't cost you 200-250 dollars you're going to have to wait for the new generation to drive down the prices on the old generation.

Not really. ATM I have an ATI X1900 XT (which is DX 9) but I'll be able to run Crysis with most stuff on highest, except for a shader setting here or there

And Nvidia does have one already I think (8800 GTS?), ATI does not.

Will · « **Reply #24 on:** 27 Dec 2006, 20:18 »

Heh, 2000 was probably the best OS MS ever produced. <-- I said this, I must have accidentally modified this post instead of quoting it. Will, you'll have to post again, sorry. - Dan

Grawsith · « **Reply #25 on:** 28 Dec 2006, 04:41 »

It took 5 years for MS to make a pretty clone of XP. What the hell were they doing?

The Cosmic Fool · « **Reply #26 on:** 28 Dec 2006, 10:03 »

If you have the method and the means, go for it. Do your research first though. Find out what works best. Staying with XP won't kill you and upgrading to Vista won't either.

bff · « **Reply #27 on:** 28 Dec 2006, 10:34 »

My personal opinion is that Vista reeks of ME-ness; I wont even consider touching it for at least a year or two.

Mnementh · « **Reply #28 on:** 28 Dec 2006, 11:31 »

More on Vista's over the top DRM and the real world implications thereof.

the_tard · « **Reply #29 on:** 28 Dec 2006, 11:51 »

^ Whoa. I don't understand what most of that means but I don't like it nonetheless. Seems like microsoft is trying to make Vista ridiculously secure.
Hmm. Thank you for displaying that article.

Jenno · « **Reply #30 on:** 28 Dec 2006, 14:45 »

I'll be upgrading to Vista pretty soon after launch, DX10 and the 8800 GTX/GTS is just way too much of a draw for me. Also... shiny!

GileX · « **Reply #31 on:** 28 Dec 2006, 16:40 »

Hmm let me think... No, no no no no no no no no no no no no. Upgrade and i will come to your house and molest everything not tied down. DO NOT upgrade for atleast a year, then it will be SLIGHTLY useable

supersheep · « **Reply #32 on:** 28 Dec 2006, 17:54 »

Dan, that stuff is bloody scary. DRM is one of the most distasteful concepts in the history of computing. Vista is now off my list. At the very least, until someone breaks the DRM features.

Alegis · « **Reply #33 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 02:56 »

Quote from: GileX on 28 Dec 2006, 16:40

Hmm let me think... No, no no no no no no no no no no no no. Upgrade and i will come to your house and molest everything not tied down. DO NOT upgrade for atleast a year, then it will be SLIGHTLY useable

I must be doing something wrong then, as it is a much better product than XP. Even without patches, who'd have thought!

the_tard · « **Reply #34 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 03:44 »

Alegis do you use your Vista comp for gaming? because that's really all I'm worried about. If it can run firefox, iTunes and Crysis then I'll be set.

Alegis · « **Reply #35 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 04:37 »

Yep. Running all games, only had problems with Gothic 3, because that game is just full with graphic glitches and I doubt Vista is to blame.

Firefox and itunes work. Only things that won't work now are zonealarm (refuses to install) - which is most likely temporary, but comodo seems to work - and importing libraries in java compilers (although I got it working with Eclipse)

Crysis (the game) most likely, as it is Vista only, but it's not released yet.

Remember, you can install it for 30 days without any key. In case you would want to try it out, by obtaining an RTM dvd somehow.

Spike · « **Reply #36 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 08:13 »

After reading through that article, I refuse to touch Vista. I understand that they want to protect content and all, but when it starts costing me in system performance and stability I can't allow that.

Jenno · « **Reply #37 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 11:32 »

Quote from: GileX on 28 Dec 2006, 16:40

Hmm let me think... No, no no no no no no no no no no no no. Upgrade and i will come to your house and molest everything not tied down. DO NOT upgrade for atleast a year, then it will be SLIGHTLY useable

Considering I haven't had any issues whilst testing X64 RTM, I think I'll be fine. Although I'm yet to test nforce RAID, which has the potential to get interesting.

Mnementh · « **Reply #38 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 13:18 »

Quote from: Spike on 29 Dec 2006, 08:13

After reading through that article, I refuse to touch Vista. I understand that they want to protect content and all, but when it starts costing me in system performance and stability I can't allow that.

Yeah, the gentleman who route that works in the medical imaging field, so his perspective is a good one to get. After having worked for a software company, I can understand the desire to protect content, but that just bypasses all reason, goes through the realm of unreasonable, and into potentially life threatening.

That article called windows vista "the longest suicide note in history" and I believe it. MS really endangered itself, especially among its Enterprise user base.

Sort of related but not quite article that I find interesting, you all might too.

GileX · « **Reply #39 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 17:59 »

Im sure it will be fine for your average user, but for your expert who likes to get their hands dirty then its absolutely useless, most games "should" run on it, i could run a few games, framerate was a little slower then expected but M$ will fix that or else. DRM just annoys me, especially HDCP, if anyone here has a good article, would you please link it, its important everyone knows.

supersheep · « **Reply #40 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 18:48 »

There's one about ten posts up, posted by Daniel. I am seriously considering Linux in the near-to-mid future. I'd rather use WINE and take the performance hit than have a crippled system.

Ã¶de · « **Reply #41 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 20:59 »

Wine doesn't actually hamper performance at all (e.g. UT2k4 runs just as fast wine'd as it does on the linux version, although 99% of the files are the same). The problem is lots of software isn't supported on wine (recently tried to get voipbuster, no luck, missing DLLs).

supersheep · « **Reply #42 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 21:15 »

That makes sense - after all it is not an emulator. Doh. What's it like for gaming?

Ozymandias · « **Reply #43 on:** 29 Dec 2006, 23:21 »

ARGUING ABOUT OSES IS NERDY(IN A BAD WAY) AND LAME

Mnementh · « **Reply #44 on:** 30 Dec 2006, 00:04 »

This was on slashdot today.

Quote

"With nearly a month of Vista availability behind us, businesses don't seem to be in any rush to take the leap. An article on ITworld cites two significant reasons for the foot-dragging. First, Microsoft's case-by-case approach to Vista patches, which is leaving some problems unpatched until after the consumer release in January. Second, application (in)compatibility. From the article: 'Some of the applications that still aren't compatible with Vista include IBM Corp.'s Lotus Notes e-mail and collaboration suite; Cisco Systems Inc.'s and Check Point Software Technologies Ltd.'s VPN clients; Intuit Corp.'s accounting software QuickBooks 2006 and earlier versions; and anti-virus (AV) software from Trend Micro Inc.'"

Johnny C · « **Reply #45 on:** 30 Dec 2006, 01:33 »

My question: Will OS X Leopard be worth the purchase? Also, does anyone know if it's possible to configure the Time Machine application to terminate at a certain date, like two weeks in the past or something? I hardly ever delete stuff unless I really don't need it anymore.

Jenno · « **Reply #46 on:** 30 Dec 2006, 10:58 »

Even if Time Machine doesn't support that, you should be able to script up something similar quite easily.

Johnny C · « **Reply #47 on:** 30 Dec 2006, 13:44 »

I couldn't script my way out of a conversation.

David_Dovey · « **Reply #48 on:** 30 Dec 2006, 21:27 »

Quote from: Grawsith on 23 Dec 2006, 04:44

OSX for the win!

Jenno · « **Reply #49 on:** 31 Dec 2006, 09:01 »

Well you could probably do it with Automator as well, but I've never really used that.

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: Windows Vista: worth the money? (Read 17454 times)

the_tard

Grawsith

CaptainLorax

the_tard

Entilzah

Grawsith

Entilzah

Alegis

the_tard

Alegis

the_tard

mqarcus

Mnementh

Alegis

Grawsith

The Cosmic Fool

Mnementh

the_tard

GileX

Alegis

the_tard

Alegis

Mnementh

GileX

Mnementh