mIRC Home    About    Download    Register    News    Help

Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20
C
Ameglian cow
Offline
Ameglian cow
C
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 20
That's assuming it lets you play games, since they might open up security holes and be hacked, so they might get disabled by the overzealous protection of the OS. Personally, I hate how Microsoft is trying to treat the PC as nothing more than an entertainment system. It defeats what the computer was originally made for, which is to make complicated tasks easier, such as business-related software. By making an OS that does nothing more than handle mostly entertainment, Microsoft is shooting themselves in the foot. This is why I've stuck with 2K even though I would avoid Windows if I could get away from it (once WINE for *nix gets good enough, in other words).

Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,252
R
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
R
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,252
Not literally in response to the original topic, but just thought I'd say that I use a *nix OS on one system, and (with the exception of mIRC, which requires the usage of WINE), all of the other programs that I use are *nix based.

The *nix version that I use is called Xandros

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,330
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,330
Yes, you can use *nix if you don't play a lot of games. But if you play a lot of games, you're stuck right now as Wine/Cedega, although good, just can't handle most games yet.


Invision Support
#Invision on irc.irchighway.net
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,962
S
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
S
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,962
I'm not aware of Vista disabling games for security issues. Some games might not work unpatched on Vista for security reasons, but it's not because Vista disables them, it's because in previous versions of Windows games were given practically free reign over some aspects of hardware access which was a major security issue. MS have actually done the right thing in preventing this in Vista to increase security and they're still getting ragged on with FUD saying they've "disabled games"? Typical. Vista is no lesss capable of handling business-related software than previous Windows OSes.


Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,252
R
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
R
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,252
I don't play a lot of games, and most of the games that I do play have *nix versions. The few that don't run well enough for me using WINE.

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
B
Pikka bird
Offline
Pikka bird
B
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
The protection of the video path is a requirement to allow support of content protected formats.
If you do not like that, take it up with the source not the messenger. Microsoft did not steer Hollywood into protected video paths. Chances are XP will not support HD from most vendors due to licensing requirements of a secure video path which XP does not give.
Note also the website linked
http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
Has loads of bull on it and thats me just reading the first section.
SPDIF is not the highest audio connections, it only has a data rate of 1.2gbits which is not enough for most hd multichannel audio. In that SACD and DVD-A simply do not fit on spdif and have never worked on it from any player ever. The choice to send a limited LPCM signal down spdif is upto the player and Vista does not stop that. Also SACD has NEVER supported PC, it lacks any physical drive to read it and no software has been licensed decoders. Considering the "facts" on that website are just utterly wrong I wouldn't lay much trust in the guy having a clue about what he is saying. However I will continue to read it some other day to see if the guy has a single valid or correct point.

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,330
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,330
As a note, the article does mention that SACD is not supported on the PC and that it was an example.


Invision Support
#Invision on irc.irchighway.net
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
B
Pikka bird
Offline
Pikka bird
B
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
I know, but why bring the point up when all "hardware" based players have ALWAYS functioned exactly like that even when capable of playing sacd in the first place?!
Also he claims hdmi is required for hdcp and that dvi-d is not capable. When infact dvi-d carries a 1:1 identicle format to hdmi video, it is very much hdcp capable. This is just a pinout difference not functionally different(hdmi just offers audio pins aswell but drops the analogue pins).

His dot points on most the technology have precisely zero to do with Vista and were invented and set in stone long before Vista had any say over them. Vista is merely following the rules set so it is capable of playback which XP in most cases is NOT!!

Plus the fact his entire writeups is about "probably" and "likely" meaning they are his own mislead reading of specs he has/had neither tested nor actually researched correctly.

It also states nvidia and ati can no longer offer universal drivers under Vista. I think this is a point that will sing home for most users that this website is a worthless link.

Honestly the more I read of that website the more I laugh as the guy understands almost nothing about the technology he is rattling on about.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11
M
Pikka bird
Offline
Pikka bird
M
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11
bits has it exactly correct.

I've been on Windows Vista for over a year now. Through the entire beta process as well as right on through to the final operating system.

The REAL problems have very little to do with the problems that people like this guy spout on about.

Let's focus on the REAL problems with moving to Vista.

-Video Overlay support is gone. This has massive ramifications for hardware-assisted rendering such as Nvidia HD or DVD content playback. Nvidia has claimed that a modified version of this support will come in future driver revisions, but as of right now it does not exist. This means your CPU is being chugged into doing all of the processing work. Which isn't TOO bad these days considering your CPU should be powerful at this point in time.

-DirectSound 3D hardware acceleration is gone. This means that Creative's hardware engine for directsound no longer works like it did in XP. All sound now passes through the CPU, which once again for those of us who would prefer the CPU to do other tasks (and of course got something like an Audigy for the sole purpose of offloading audio from the CPU), this is a problem. Creative is working on support, however. They're releasing a new standard called OpenAL which bypasses the internal audio system of Vista and will output directly to the hardware. So right now any software that supports OpenAL will in fact output directly to the hardware bypassing this internal Windows system, but there's just not that much software that supports it yet.

Not really related to Vista specifically but something brought about by this generation of computers.

-Dual core support across the board is still severely lacking. Vista of course can handle many cores thrown at it but lots of software simply doesn't use it yet. Which can be a curse or a blessing depending on what you're doing.

-64 bit support is still kind of problematic. FRAPS' FPS1 codec chops all of its videos up at the 4GB size and then continues onto the next since the codec is only a 32-bit codec. The problem is then if you wanted to edit this video, you would have to use 32-bit software to do it. Virtual Dub x64, for example, will not recognize the fraps 32-bit codec and will not open the video. One must use virtual dub 32 in order to edit it.

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 342
M
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
M
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 342
I've been using Vista for sometime now. I like the sidebar. I like the large icons. I like many things about it. Indeed use Vista for six months and come back to XP. Hmmm... maybe Vista not so bad after all, hmmm?

Quote:
-DirectSound 3D hardware acceleration is gone. This means that Creative's hardware engine for directsound no longer works like it did in XP. All sound now passes through the CPU, which once again for those of us who would prefer the CPU to do other tasks (and of course got something like an Audigy for the sole purpose of offloading audio from the CPU), this is a problem. Creative is working on support, however. They're releasing a new standard called OpenAL which bypasses the internal audio system of Vista and will output directly to the hardware. So right now any software that supports OpenAL will in fact output directly to the hardware bypassing this internal Windows system, but there's just not that much software that supports it yet


Ugh... please. You think audio processing actually takes up huge amounts of overhead? The stupid Creative drivers probably use more overhead than anything. Go look at the hardware requirements for the SB X-FI pro! Hmmm... 1GHz processor, 256MB of RAM. Huh? Isn't the SOUND HARDWARE supposed to be doing the work?

Really, in the end it doesn't matter what sound card you have. You don't really need one anymore either... since you can just use USB.


Beware of MeStinkBAD! He knows more than he actually does!
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,252
R
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
R
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,252
In theory, however, in my case I haven't found a USB alternative, since I have my sound go from my sound card to my stereo system.

Although, if you know of an alternative that I haven't come across, I'm more than happy to give it a look.

Apologies for the off topic post (in regards to the original topic)

Last edited by RusselB; 19/03/07 02:05 AM.
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
B
Pikka bird
Offline
Pikka bird
B
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 18
USB ofcourse is completely handled by the cpu and adds its own load.

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard