EVE Search - Vista

All Channels

Out of Pod Experience

Vista

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kyrall A Few Killers	Posted - 2008.09.28 09:14:00 - [1] Okay, so by now most of the intelligent world should be ready to admit that Vista wasn't actually coded by the devil, and may in fact be near-enough usable. My girlfriend has it on her laptop so I've had a chance to play around with it a bit, but not to actually get in there and customise everything as I would if it were on my own computer (I already fiddle around with it too much so she says it's more like my laptop ). So what I want to know is this: What actually are the advantages of Vista, or just the things it does as good/differently/better than XP? I'm not willing to spend money to upgrade to it, but if I were, why should I? I'll start off with a couple that I know of. It can handle more RAM, as it's 64 bit. Nuff said. UAC. As far as I can tell, this is a really good idea, but imo is really badly executed in Vista. Theoretically, no bad software can be installed without your permission (I'm assuming it isn't easily bypassed), but with 2 warnings for every slightly important action you try to perform, it's slightly overkill and the "general public" (ie my girlfriend) have no idea what it is doing or why. A few more/improved things are built into the OS, like the software to interface with pocket PCs (Yay, no more ActiveSync!), and the picture preview thing works a lot better than XP's one. That's all I can think of at the moment, anyone with more experience of Vista like to suggest more? _____ Originally by: The TX Lemme just check my bothered-pocket.... oh, nothing there.
Elysarian Minmatar dudetruck corp	Posted - 2008.09.28 09:33:00 - [2] Biggest advantage it has over XP in my experience is that a driver crash no longer brings down the whole OS in most cases (USB drivers have bluescreened me a couple of times but that doesn't happen a lot) - Graphics drivers tend to restart after a crash halting just the exe that was using them at the time (e.g. Eve). There also seems to be better support for older games - I could never get Civ CTP to run well in XP but it works fine under Vista 64. UAC prompts get less intrusive over time as, once you've set up things how you like them there's no need to fiddle again (unless you're one of these people who can't settle with a system and are always tinkering). DirectX 10: while there aren't a LOT of games out yet that use it there are some and if you want to use it you have no choice but to upgrade to Vista as, despite some claims, it will never be available for XP due to the way the drivers are user-mode in Vista - see my first point as to why this is A Good Thing.
Marie Duvolle United Sentients	Posted - 2008.09.28 09:49:00 - [3] Correct on the driver crash thingy, I had installed a beta driver for my Nvidia and while playing a game (and have nother game in the background) all of a sudden I got a "Nvidia driver gave up the will to live and is now pushing up daisies" sort of thing. Screen flickered a few times and then stated that the driver was restarted and worked well. Neither game really got their panties in a wad over it, very nice. I primarily took it for the 4GB memory support, I'm not interested in cool gimmicks, graphics or other useless stuff from an OS. It should do it's job abnd stay in the background.
Irulan S'Dijana Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.09.28 11:01:00 - [4] Edited by: Irulan S''Dijana on 28/09/2008 11:02:56 Vista wasn't coded by the devil. Vista was coded by Microsoft. Microsoft doesn't work with small fry. Edit: ok, seriously, from what I can tell, Vista gives you all the gadgets that Linux does, but it also works with games w/o stuff like wine. I think that's about it.
The TX Gallente Pulsar Combat Supplies Alternative Realities	Posted - 2008.09.28 11:03:00 - [5] Originally by: Irulan S'Dijana Vista wasn't coded by the devil. Vista was coded by Microsoft. Microsoft doesn't work with small fry. -------------------- [Signature] [/Signature]
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.09.28 11:35:00 - [6] Vista wasn't coded by the devil. It's just not very good. It outclasses XP in many ways, due to 10 years of technological progress. But it also offers very little in the way of new features for a huge hike in resource usage (in the region of 50% on minimum requirements for things like RAM). The main argument against Vista, as an OS, has always been that it's just not worth it. Not that it's not better, but thats it's not better enough, for too higher a cost. For the huge monetary price-tag, the big resource usage, and the opening-year jitters, most people just couldn't see why you'd want it over cheap, reliable XP. Thats why it never sold well- not because it was unbearably awful, but because it just didn't shine over the competition. And of course its looking increasingly like Microsoft knew as much when they launched it. By announcing Vista's replacement DURING Vista's first troubled year, they made it quite clear that it was just a money making exercise, and not their idea for the future of computing. And if Windows 7 is as sexy as they're making it sound, it'll blow Vista (and XP) out of the water. ------ Originally by: Micheal Dietrich You can even get a midget with a camera to sit on the floorboard.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2008.09.28 12:02:00 - [7] some bad things. -you can't set your memory use. -this means no ps2 emulation and no option to set cache size in eve in the settings, vista takes it away. -no hardware acceleration control -this means no sound or dialog at parts in DX10 games like devil may cry of mas effect -no more screenshots of media players. -no S-video when hooking up to a tv with an nvidiea card that's about it, but yeah it works.
Bish Ounen Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.09.28 13:13:00 - [8] Originally by: MotherMoon some bad things. -you can't set your memory use. -this means no ps2 emulation and no option to set cache size in eve in the settings, vista takes it away. -no hardware acceleration control -this means no sound or dialog at parts in DX10 games like devil may cry of mas effect -no more screenshots of media players. -no S-video when hooking up to a tv with an nvidiea card that's about it, but yeah it works. Ironically, MOST of the issues you are having are a direct result of the built-in DRM support that Vista has. The reason you can't mess with the memory is because memory management is locked away so that people can't use Vista to crack DRM. No screenshots of media players so that copyright DRM for video can't be gotten arouns. No S-Video because it is an ANALOG technology that doesn't recognize the HDCP DRM. MS closed the Analog DRM hole for the MPAA. And on and on and on. Let's be honest, this is a big reason why Vista sucks. Not only is it a "meh" improvement over XP, but MOST of the major work in Vista went to two things: 1) Shiny interface 2) DRM and DRM support. I don't know about you, but I don't want an Operating system that tells me what I can and cannot do with it, or the media I own. This is why I will NEVER use Vista. No computer I own will ever police me. I am the master, the computer is the servant, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. Remember kids, DRM (Digital Rights Management software) manages rights in the same way that Prison manages freedom. Tactical Logistics using the last T1 Frigate hull!
Elysarian Minmatar dudetruck corp	Posted - 2008.09.28 19:29:00 - [9] Originally by: Bish Ounen Originally by: MotherMoon some bad things. -you can't set your memory use. -this means no ps2 emulation and no option to set cache size in eve in the settings, vista takes it away. -no hardware acceleration control -this means no sound or dialog at parts in DX10 games like devil may cry of mas effect -no more screenshots of media players. -no S-video when hooking up to a tv with an nvidiea card that's about it, but yeah it works. Ironically, MOST of the issues you are having are a direct result of the built-in DRM support that Vista has. The reason you can't mess with the memory is because memory management is locked away so that people can't use Vista to crack DRM. No screenshots of media players so that copyright DRM for video can't be gotten arouns. No S-Video because it is an ANALOG technology that doesn't recognize the HDCP DRM. MS closed the Analog DRM hole for the MPAA. And on and on and on. Let's be honest, this is a big reason why Vista sucks. Not only is it a "meh" improvement over XP, but MOST of the major work in Vista went to two things: 1) Shiny interface 2) DRM and DRM support. I don't know about you, but I don't want an Operating system that tells me what I can and cannot do with it, or the media I own. This is why I will NEVER use Vista. No computer I own will ever police me. I am the master, the computer is the servant, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. Remember kids, DRM (Digital Rights Management software) manages rights in the same way that Prison manages freedom. I just have to comment on the part I bolded.... XP was (and is) just windows 2000 with a shiny interface tacked on... was hated when it first appeared because of incompatibility issues and people stuck with win98 (or, in some cases server 2000) for a good while after it came out. I was running Win98 until server 2003 came along then switched to that - I now run Vista and have since SP1 came out.
Bosie Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.09.28 19:45:00 - [10] Originally by: MotherMoon some bad things. -no more screenshots of media players. -no S-video when hooking up to a tv with an nvidiea card Wrong on both accounts. S-video works fine on my 8800 GTX and you get an application called Snipping Tool with Vista that will take pictures of media that you are playing. "There is a forgotten, nay almost forbidden word, which means more to me than any other. That word is ENGLAND
Bosie Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.09.28 19:57:00 - [11] Just to add a screen shot of a DvD: Click me. "There is a forgotten, nay almost forbidden word, which means more to me than any other. That word is ENGLAND
The TX Gallente Pulsar Combat Supplies Alternative Realities	Posted - 2008.09.29 00:32:00 - [12] Originally by: Kyrall Vista Don't do it. -------------------- [Signature] [/Signature]
Atomos Darksun Infortunatus Eventus Obsidian Empire	Posted - 2008.09.29 01:46:00 - [13] Vista works fine for most users, you just have to twist it's ear sometimes. I bought it for Dx10 and 64 bit compatability, but it's not worth upgrading from XP. Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice... Atomos' Guide to Forum Flaming
Mr Friendly That it Should Come to This	Posted - 2008.09.29 02:54:00 - [14] I really liked Vista's shineys and it's incredible core stability. And I dumped it after 6 months because it takes 1.5 gigs to do what XP does in 400 megs: it starts up. That's it, really. I don't like bloat. I refuse to use bloatware. Bloating is for bodies left in the river too long, not for OSs. Hopefully Windows 7 doesn't use 3 gigs just to start up, or else I won't be using that, either.
Bish Ounen Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2008.09.29 03:33:00 - [15] Originally by: Elysarian XP was (and is) just windows 2000 with a shiny interface tacked on... was hated when it first appeared because of incompatibility issues and people stuck with win98 (or, in some cases server 2000) for a good while after it came out.. Here we have the old argument "Well, everybody hated XP when it first came out." The inference is that the arguments against XP were superficial and that eventually users got over their silly stubbornness and switched. The problem with this argument is that it leaves out several vital factors. 1) XP Pro is actually a marked improvement over Win 2000 Pro. Even though it does share a nearly identical kernel, several core improvements were made to the 2000 kernel. In particular, massively improved memory management over ANY previous version of Windows, and even better crash handling and prevention than Windows 2000. 2) Most of the complaints about XP's cosmetic improvement over 2K were accurate until one thing happened: Service Pack 2. XP SP2 transformed XP from a mediocre half-step improvement over 2K Pro to a leap forward in stability, security, and overall quality. XP SP2 was THE big change that massively increased the uptake of XP. 3) At the time of XP's release, Windows 2000 had already been out for 3 years. Many businesses (and even some home users) had already moved to Windows 2000, and the jump to XP was an easy change to make. XP's demands, while somewhat more than 2000, were only SLIGHTLY more. 4) For home users, the most recently released MS operating system in 2003 was the abysmal ME. Understandably, many people had chosen to either stay with Win 98 (5 year old technology at that point), or make the jump to 2KPro. XP Home was correctly advertised as bringing business class performance into the home. Not only was XP Home an incredible leap in quality from 98 (and especially ME), but XP Home was essentially XP Pro, with a simplified permissions and sharing system to make it easier for home users. However under the hood, it was exactly the same. (Unlike Vista, which has substantive differences between the versions.) 5) Vista, despite being several years late, massively over budget, and incredibly hyped, makes few major changes over XP in either user-experience, performance, or quality. Yes, there ARE improvements (the user-level driver functionality is probably the biggest one.) But these improvements have been totally overshadowed by Microsoft's failure to communicate with it's hardware partners and the hardware market at large about just HOW different the user-space driver system would be, resulting in driver incompatibility issues that we are still dealing with. 6) The overall jump in hardware requirements from 2K Pro to XP was MINIMAL. Essentially, you just needed to throw another 512 stick of RAM in. And in 2003, RAM was nearly as cheap as it is today, proportionally speaking. The jump from XP to Vista was (and is) HUGE. Particularly when Vista was first released. Indeed, Microsoft has all but admitted that they completely lied about just how much more hardware would be required to run Vista. This has resulted in major problems for people who bought "Vista Capable" XP machines, only to find out that these computers had nowhere NEAR enough power to run Vista when they got around to loading it up. This isn't much of an issue for PC gamers, who tend to run high-end systems anyway. But for businesses and people on a budget who bought a "Vista Capable" branded system it was a huge letdown. Many people felt (quite rightly) ripped off and there was a class-action lawsuit which Microsoft quietly settled. 7) DRM, DRM, DRM. Vista is FESTOONED with DRM! I already touched on this in my first post, so I won't cover it again, but it is THE big issue with Vista. I'm out of space, but I could easily go on for PAGES about this. Vista's cool reception is NOTHING like the minor pains XP went through. Vista Sucks. Accept it. Tactical Logistics using the last T1 Frigate hull!
Kyrall A Few Killers	Posted - 2008.09.30 02:13:00 - [16] Here's a screenshot of my desktop, as I posted in a thread of them. As you can see, I'm a bit of a fan of minimalism. My feelings are (as someone else posted in this thread) that the OS is there to run in the background and be a portal to other stuff, it's not actually an interesting thing in itself. This is probably my main problem with Vista, all those fancy effects and the sidebar, it's all just bloat that really doesn't need to be there. Does anyone else feel the same way but run Vista? How well does it work with minimalism? In a sort-of-related note, at my girlfriend's house we've just connected an old win ME box to the TV and stereo, so we don't need the Vista laptop sat in the middle of the room when watching films/listening to music and stuff like that. It's just an old pc that wasn't doing anything, so it doesn't really have much installed. It does a cold boot in about 5 seconds, and powers down completely in about 2 seconds! Task manager shows 3 tasks running, Explorer, Systray and something else which I'll probably get rid of. Win ME rocks, but I think I'll upgrade from that ball mouse though... _____ Originally by: The TX Lemme just check my bothered-pocket.... oh, nothing there.
Irish Whiskey Caldari The Black Fleet The Black Alliance	Posted - 2008.09.30 03:27:00 - [17] Edited by: Irish Whiskey on 30/09/2008 03:29:44 Originally by: Kyrall Does anyone else feel the same way but run Vista? How well does it work with minimalism? I got vista on a virtual machine, it can be turned down to have none of the bells and whistles the same way as XP in classic mode. Edit: and running it in a VM with multiple apps running on the host system (slackware) on a 3gb ram laptop, it runs decent. As with most windows, theyre not complete resource hogs if you tweak it down to be just 'in the background' which im sure you would be able to do after a few minutes and some google.
Marie Duvolle United Sentients	Posted - 2008.09.30 04:08:00 - [18] My vista looks just like I had XP, I turned off all crap (incidentally, back on XP I set it to look like old win98). I have the premium version but the first thing I did was turn off the sidebar and the gimmick interface. Ofcourse at points it will do things differently from XP (because it's not XP) but in essence I brought it douwn to the bare basics. Same with animations for folders and all that, I disable all of it (did so on older OS's as well), not because my computer can't handle it but more because it's annoying and unnecesary. If you have a decent computer and want to make use of more than 2GB ram (at some point) get vista 64, it runs smooth nice and without much trouble. If you like eyecandy and like installed 3487563 cool looking 'free' programs and never really clean your programlist and/or defrag then yeah it'll bog down, but then so do all OS's.
Last Wolf Umbra Wing	Posted - 2008.09.30 04:51:00 - [19] I use XP-64 bit. Sexy XP with 4gigs of RAMmy goodness (and my mobo has room for 4 more gigs.) Only problem I had was I couldn't get XP to install the Raid-0 drivers that came with my mobo. Which isn't that big of a deal. Plus XP-64bit pro was like $110, how much is vista ultimate?
midge Mo'yb Antares Shipyards Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.09.30 08:38:00 - [20] Edited by: midge Mo''yb on 30/09/2008 08:41:54 All these crybabys crying there ram is at 50% usage all the time need to be quiet, unused ram is wasted ram, why buy 4gb and cry because something is using it? the second another application needs more ram vista will release it to said program - Disable superfetch i think it is if you dont like this, it preloads your most used apps into memory so whe nyou try to use them they load faster, this is bad how? +Start menu search, just the little things that make a difference - i dont think ive clicked programs in 6 months +UAC, to be honest i only ever see the UAC prompts when i install stuff, or want to run with "Admin" privelages, which shouldnt be often unless your playing pre Vista games alot, and if it protects my system for the same of 1 alert every now and then meh... + Drivers dont nuke the OS much now :) no longer will nvidia kill my pc! + My fps in eve went up :D + tablet support - Shitty companys wont update there hardwares drivers :(
R3dSh1ft Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.10.01 02:58:00 - [21] Originally by: Irulan S'Dijana Edited by: Irulan S''Dijana on 28/09/2008 11:02:56 Vista wasn't coded by the devil. Vista was coded by Microsoft. Microsoft doesn't work with small fry. Edit: ok, seriously, from what I can tell, Vista gives you all the gadgets that Linux does, but it also works with games w/o stuff like wine. I think that's about it. Linux? You must be joking, Vista doesn't come close to providing the same quantity, quality or customisability of gadgets that linux sports DKOD - an awesome synchronised killing machine
Mr Friendly That it Should Come to This	Posted - 2008.10.01 10:09:00 - [22] Originally by: midge Mo'yb Edited by: midge Mo''yb on 30/09/2008 08:41:54 All these crybabys crying there ram is at 50% usage all the time need to be quiet, Since I don't need all that ram taken up for no end-user benefit over XP, and Vista doesn't release said ram without a fight, I will not stop complaining. It's bloated. Like a corpse. XP runs like a champ while using 50% less ram. As far as memory use goes, Vista is fail.
Constance Harme	Posted - 2008.10.01 10:13:00 - [23] Originally by: Mr Friendly Originally by: midge Mo'yb Edited by: midge Mo''yb on 30/09/2008 08:41:54 All these crybabys crying there ram is at 50% usage all the time need to be quiet, Since I don't need all that ram taken up for no end-user benefit over XP, and Vista doesn't release said ram without a fight, I will not stop complaining. It's bloated. Like a corpse. XP runs like a champ while using 50% less ram. As far as memory use goes, Vista is fail. I dropped my RAM usage down to 23%..
Irida Mershkov Gallente War is Bliss	Posted - 2008.10.01 11:14:00 - [24] I had more problems on XP than I have had with this Vista Comp. And speaking of more. I haven't had any problems with Vista at all. People seem to forget that XP was just as bad, or maybe even worse than Vista on its release. Although I do miss my 1gig of ram. :(.
midge Mo'yb Antares Shipyards Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.10.01 11:37:00 - [25] Edited by: midge Mo''yb on 01/10/2008 11:38:29 Originally by: Mr Friendly Originally by: midge Mo'yb Edited by: midge Mo''yb on 30/09/2008 08:41:54 All these crybabys crying there ram is at 50% usage all the time need to be quiet, Since I don't need all that ram taken up for no end-user benefit over XP, and Vista doesn't release said ram without a fight, I will not stop complaining. It's bloated. Like a corpse. XP runs like a champ while using 50% less ram. As far as memory use goes, Vista is fail. did you even read what i said? this ram is used to pre cache your most used programs so they load faster, so yes it does have soem end user benefit, actually try vista for a few weeks, once your drive is indexed and it learns your preferences it works flawlessly. and why is utilising RAM even a problem? why put 4gb in your pc if your only content to use 10% of it... -----------------------------------------------
TimMc Gallente The Motley Crew	Posted - 2008.10.01 14:33:00 - [26] Only way to bluescreen vista is to break your hardware somehow. That is my favorite reason, and the fact I can use (and I suppose have to) 8gb of RAM.
Marie Duvolle United Sentients	Posted - 2008.10.01 14:37:00 - [27] Tbh, I did have some BSOD's on Vista, it does happen. Don't stir the hornet's nest
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.01 18:24:00 - [28] Originally by: midge Mo'yb Edited by: midge Mo''yb on 01/10/2008 11:38:29 Originally by: Mr Friendly Originally by: midge Mo'yb Edited by: midge Mo''yb on 30/09/2008 08:41:54 All these crybabys crying there ram is at 50% usage all the time need to be quiet, Since I don't need all that ram taken up for no end-user benefit over XP, and Vista doesn't release said ram without a fight, I will not stop complaining. It's bloated. Like a corpse. XP runs like a champ while using 50% less ram. As far as memory use goes, Vista is fail. did you even read what i said? this ram is used to pre cache your most used programs so they load faster, so yes it does have soem end user benefit, actually try vista for a few weeks, once your drive is indexed and it learns your preferences it works flawlessly. and why is utilising RAM even a problem? why put 4gb in your pc if your only content to use 10% of it... Because when you buy a sexy new game that require 3.8GB of RAM on full graphics mode, you'd really rather 2GB wasn't already being used so that you can open Microsoft Office a little quicker? ------ Originally by: Micheal Dietrich You can even get a midget with a camera to sit on the floorboard.
midge Mo'yb Antares Shipyards Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.10.01 18:34:00 - [29] and vista releases said ram when said game requires that ram... im running 2 premium clients now hovering at 2.5gb used of 4 and im sure eve takes more than 500 :P and if you play your games more they will be the apps that are pre cached so meh -----------------------------------------------
Pwett Minmatar QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony	Posted - 2008.10.01 18:42:00 - [30] Really, Vista's only 'true' failure was DirectX 10. _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.