View Full Version : Microsoft lists Vista high points - in case you missed it
MaXimus
02 Feb 2007, 23:24
ONE OF THE most damning condemnations of the shiny DRM infection masquerading as an OS is on Microsoft's own site, its paid for list of reasons why Vista roX0rz or something. It is really a good laugh.
This article is sheer marketing pabulum, but you would think Microsoft could have at least figured out something worth a damn to crow about in its own propaganda piece. Rather than fib about what Vista brings to the table, it told the truth, and that is why things are so sad.
So, what does it bring? 7.5 things, none of which are worth the time it takes to install, much less the money or the rights Vista takes from you. Let's go down the list shall we?
1) IE 7: The number one thing as they say is not exclusive to Vista, nor is it anything other than a warmed over virus and spyware vector. Use Firefox or pay the price, botnet herders want your box. So far 0/1.
2) Windows Sidebar: Be still my beating heart, widgets that every other OS in the world has had since about, oh, 1983, but done more intrusively. Luckily it sucks resources and screen space. Handy tip, if you are experiencing heavy CPU load at idle, turn off the clock, you may get 1/3 of your CPU time back. This pile was tested for how long? 0/2.
3) Aero: Ok, they are right it is pretty. 1/3.
4) Mahjong Titans: If you don't have anything real to talk about, why not tout fluff. (Read this next part as me feigning excitement) Holy sh*t, Mah-fscking-jong!!! Way cool. I was only expecting a database filesystem and middleware layer four years ago, but Mahjong just blows me away. Now I understand where all those years, programmer-decades and billions of dollars went, certainly not flushed if you get Mahjong Titans! Damn grrl. Can you imagine if you could get this kind of awesomeness on the web for free, or at any of 17 billion freeware sites? Never happen, would it? 1.000007/4
5) Start Menu Search: This is a feature? Ummmm, this is better than Google Desktop Search how? Oh yeah, it is on the start menu not the start bar so it takes an additional click. Whoopty-fscking-do0. MS should be ashamed of this one, like the start menu on the bottom where it ergonomically blows to avoid accusations of cloning Apple. Hint to MS: Apple put it there for a reason, it was the right thing to do ergonomically, and the bottom is not. Hint to MS 2: Google put it there for a reason, it was the right thing to do ergonomically, the menu is not. 1.000004/5.
5.5) Stay Start Menu: Wow, it would take an MS employee to put their name on liking the 'advances' of the XP start menu over the older one. More clicks are better, and even a troll would know bigger is better. It is also green, what more could you want? Anyone with half a brain kills that monster as one of the first things on the must do list after installing XP. Advances from there are low hanging fruit indeed. That said, I think they deserve the .000003 points back for that, going to 1.000007/5.5.
6) Control Panel Search: WTF? The reason they need a search for the control panel is because they dumbed it down to the point of unusability. How stupid are they? The non-moron interface, aka classic mode, worked just fine, if you wanted to adjust your fonts, you clicked on fonts, user accounts, you clicked on user accounts. You never had to guess which one of 4 big icons might have the thing you wanted, if any of them did. One really has to wonder if MS is run by wizards, not the term of endearment, but little applets that don't let you do anything while frustrating the hell out of you and leaving you more borked than when you started. This is clearly a case of 19 steps backward followed by another 3 back trying to make up for it. Dumb dumb dumb.-1.999993/6.5 with an added 'idiots'.
7) Windows Photo Gallery: Yay, Microsoft finally realised Picasa is a threat, so it is forcing a bloated app down your throat. Not having tried it, and being a kind person who really likes Microsoft, I will give it full credit here. -.999993/7.5.
So, as you can plainly see in this scientific look at the high points of Vista from MS itself, Vista adds negative value to your computer. There is no denying the numbers, it is there in black and white using only MS paid for spin.
Vista is shiny and its maker can't even come up with a decent list as to why you should care. May I suggest you take your $400 and pick a new hobby using this as seed money? You won't get a DRM infection, you won't sell your soul to licensing agreements, and you will have a computer that is actually more functional. What more do you want?
Source: http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37394
I heard it has built in digital rights management:
(taken from the wiki)
Digital Rights ManagementAnother common criticism concerns the integration of new forms of Digital Rights Management (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Rights_Management) into the operating system, specifically the introduction of the Protected Video Path (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_Video_Path). This architecture is designed such that "premium content" from HD-DVD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HD-DVD) or Blu-ray (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray) discs may mandate that the connections between PC components are encrypted. Devices such as graphic cards must be approved by Microsoft. Depending on what the content demands, the devices may not pass premium content over non-encrypted outputs, or they must artificially degrade the quality of the signal on such outputs or not display it all. There is also a revocation mechanism that allows Microsoft to disable drivers of compromised devices in end-user PCs over the Internet.[47] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#_note-microsoft-ocp) Peter Gutmann (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Gutmann), security researcher and author of the open source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source) cryptlib (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryptlib) library, claims that these mechanisms violate fundamental rights of the user (such as fair use (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use)), unnecessarily increase the cost of hardware, and make systems less reliable and vulnerable to denial-of-service attacks.[48] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#_note-gutmann) Proponents have claimed that Microsoft had no choice but to follow the demands of the movie studios, and that the technology will not actually be enabled until after 2010;[49] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#_note-smith)[50] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#_note-arstechnica) Microsoft also noted that content protection mechanisms have existed in Windows as far back as Windows Me (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Me), and that the new protections will not apply to any existing content.[51] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#_note-29)check it out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista
also look at
http://news.com.com/Hollywood,%20Microsoft%20align%20on%20new%20Window s/2100-1025_3-5844393.html?part=rss&tag=5844393&subj=news
Hollywood, Microsoft align on new Windows
For the first time, the Windows operating system will wall off some audio and video processes almost completely from users and outside programmers, in hopes of making them harder for hackers to reach. The company is establishing digital security checks that could even shut off a computer's connections to some monitors or televisions if antipiracy procedures that stop high-quality video copying aren't in place.
check these view points:
http://www.jethrocarr.com/index.php?cms=blog:20070124
WINDOWS VISTA - HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE SCREWED TODAY?
24 Jan 2007
I've heard about Windows Vista's strong DRM, but I thought it was basically for multimedia playback and DRM'd documents.
However, the truth is worse. Peter Gutmann has done a cost analysis of Vista's copy protection (http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/%7Epgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html) - and it doesn't look good. Here's my summary of this great report highlighting some of the issues that are in Vista and my thoughts about them.
http://apcmag.com/5049/10_reasons_not_to_get_vista
whu u should
http://apcmag.com/5082/10_reasons_you_should_get_vista
now this grates me a lot
9. DirectX10
OK, this isn't so much a benefit as your hand being forced: DirectX 10 will never be made for XP, and a raft of games have already been announced ‘exclusively' for 10. Admittedly it does take gaming graphics to the next level, but it's very much tied to Vista.
thats 1 reason why i would not upgrade.
Why must u be forced to use a new version for a new version of directx ?
Microsoft's attempts to keep the next version of Windows secure could help promote the free software ethic, says technology commentator Bill Thompson.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/5271386.stm
Thallium
05 Feb 2007, 09:09
erm, Mudd. this is what happens when theres too much piracy. tough, everybody is just gonna have to deal with it, or move to "another OS" if your not happy.
thats 1 reason why i would not upgrade.
Why must u be forced to use a new version for a new version of directx ?
Because, DX10 cannot work on Xp. end of story. Deal with it
Read this thread http://www.unreal.co.za/forums/showthread.php?t=3664&page=2
Xp will have dx9L which will allow DX10 Apps to work on Xp, But Emulated and slow. Vista will allow Dx9 and below Apps to work, but Kind of like Emulated too.
"DX10 cannot work on Xp". It can if Microsoft wanted it too - but they want to force you to upgrade to vista.
I have never been in favour of a forced software upgrade by microsoft - take i.e 7 for another example - it does not run on windows 2000.
I am hoping opengl will have a big comeback over dx10 because of this bull sh*t.
O yes - windows defender is another example of a forced upgrade . . .
CrazyBob
05 Feb 2007, 13:46
Agg, you know what - slate it all you want.
I've had it installed for a few days now, and while it's definately not perfect and there's some obvious driver issues for now, I dig it. I find it faster and just more pleasing to use. I'm a designer, and I multi-task alot. What I found surprising, is that it copes just fine on only 1GB RAM ...still waiting for my 2GB to arrive.
Was just doing some work on it for the 1st time this w/e, and I really find I'm able to work faster. Sounds like a typical thing to say from some1 with my bias, but I was also sceptical 'til I realised this.
Obviously it'll take a small while to adapt, but we human are good at that :D
Oh, Flip 3D & voice recognition is awesome ...and finally it's got a proper screen-grab app, yay for that!
Now if only I could get my ol' webcam to work!
erm, Mudd. this is what happens when theres too much piracy. tough, everybody is just gonna have to deal with it, or move to "another OS" if your not happy.
The freedom you have to do whatever with your PC have always been behind its popularity.
Thallium
05 Feb 2007, 14:56
"DX10 cannot work on Xp". It can if Microsoft wanted it too - but they want to force you to upgrade to vista.
I am hoping opengl will have a big comeback over dx10 because of this bull sh*t.
so why do they even bother making a DX9 version called DX9L to support DX10 on XP in emulation?
Is this part of there "Ploy", or is there really Such an OS improvement from Xp to Vista that makes DX9 and DX10 not compatible with each other. i wonder.
OpenGL is dying fast in the Windows category. it won't comeback.
Sneaky, you can still do what you wan't in Vista, only a lot more Legal, shame for the pirates :thumbsup:
Well i.e. 7 wont run on windows 2000
It is the same with the new dx - there is no reason for the incompatibility - other than generating more sales. (forcing users to upg)
ALL the os has to really do is communicate with the hardware - this is why nvida and ati provide drivers.
There is no additional magic in it.
Thallium
05 Feb 2007, 21:21
Well i.e. 7 wont run on windows 2000
i googled on why it does not work, here is the first page i opened http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_No_IE7_for_Windows_2000/1117464807
ALL the os has to really do is communicate with the hardware - this is why nvida and ati provide drivers.
There is no additional magic in it.
you obviously have no idea how it actually works.
for hardware acceleration, Directx must communicate to the hardware, not the OS, and vendors like ati and nvidia must make drivers and hardware that is compliant to Directx.
Directx also communicates with the OS, the OS doesn't even see the Hardware at all on HA. But, DirectX needs to use the HAL in windows
Ever heard of HAL?? hardware management has changed in Vista, guess what needs HAL to work, yes, DirectX. DirectX has a device called Direct3D HAL, thats needed to work directly with the Hardware, EVERY hardware accelerated app, needs to use Direct3DHAL to generate pretty 3d looking objects, Direct3DHAL is needed to transform vertices in hardware, to manage hardware driven lights etc etc.
let me break it down so you can understand..
1.) hardware needs drivers
2.) drivers need DirectX
3.) Directx needs HAL
4.) Oh Noes, HAL changed drastically in Vista
5.) Complete Redevelopment needed for older DX's
6.) Not worth it for Microsoft to fix this problem
7.) Quick solution to bring out new DX9 for Xp to allow DX10 apps to work
etc etc, i can go on for years, but its a waste of my time.
You are insulting my intellegence chop.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=22161
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
id Software exec unconvinced by new OS
id Software development legend John Carmack believes Microsoft is "grasping at straws" in an attempt to get gamers to upgrade to next-gen PC operating system Windows Vista.
"Nothing is going to help a new game by going to a new operating system. There were some clear wins going from Windows 95 to Windows XP for games, but there really aren't any for Vista," Carmack told Game Informer (http://www.gameinformer.com/News/Story/200701/N07.0109.1737.15034.htm?Page=1).
"They're artificially doing that by tying DX10 [DirectX 10] so close it, which is really nothing about the OS. It's a hardware-interface spec. It's an artificial thing that they're doing there.
"They're really grasping at straws for reasons to upgrade the operating system. I suspect I could run XP for a great many more years without having a problem with it."
According to Carmack, id Software would probably only move development of its own titles to Vista when the market had widely adopted the platform. Titles it's currently partnering on, like Splash Damage's Enemy Territory: Quake Wars, will remain XP-based.
Elsewhere in the same interview, Carmack reiterated that he feels design errors in the creation of PlayStation 3 could tip the balance in Xbox 360's favour.
Any concern he has about Microsoft's PC activities certainly doesn't extend to the Washington firm's next-gen games console, which he continues to compliment.
Another quote worth noting:
"DirectX is just a bridge from OS to Hardware. The hardware actually speaks in Shaders and GPU related code, not DirectX code.
Programmers write game code in DirectX because it allows their gaming software to work over multiple hardware architectures. DX is all about compatibility for the programmer, not graphics for the end user."
This also goes for OpenGL =)
DirectX and OpenGL supports your card, not the other way around.
Mudd@, XP isn't going anywhere soon, and you can be sure that even Crysis, UT2007, Bioshock and other games will still use the DX9 API for years to come. Thing is, this is MS after all, and they can do what the heck they want to sell their software.
This is the first time a DirectX API is tied to a Windows version, but there were many incompatibilities before with the Win3.1 to Win95 jump, and even the Win98 to WinXP jump, where some newer games just refused to work on the older OSes.
MaXimus
06 Feb 2007, 07:52
I'm not interested in being a Beta tester for M$ and will probably only start upgrading in a year's time.
Since I can't afford to purchase new licenses for my Windows based development tools (will probably cost around R50,000 in total) I'm already starting to play with software development in Linux. In fact, this will be the last year I do any development for Windows, especially since most of my software are backend server orientated anyways.
Thallium
06 Feb 2007, 10:11
You are insulting my intellegence chop.
rofl.. you were first. chop.
mudd, you are arguing with some one thats done directx development since DX5
I can't argue with what john carmack wrote, after all, its john carmack, the great opengl developer.
that last quote you wrote, i seen it before, where is it from?
i think it was some kid on some site called digg or something that posted it. yes, he's name is justice7. it still has no point.
Gamos is right
I think he has a valid point even if he is a kid - the hardware does not need directx. The hardware has all its features allready available. Directx is an easy way for game developers to access the hardwares features.
Microsoft is very good at keeping you locked in to their software. That is my gripe.
I have been using windows 2000 and am still using windows 2000 - and have not yet been unable to access any technology that I need for my personal and business needs.
Although - I am thinking of going to Xp very soon :) (not vista)
anyone selling a legal version of xp because of vista? Pm me :)
Only going to XP now?
SHeesh you dunno what you've missed all these years...
Thallium
06 Feb 2007, 12:06
I think he has a valid point even if he is a kid - the hardware does not need directx. The hardware has all its features allready available. Directx is an easy way for game developers to access the hardwares features.
yes, thats right. i knew that 10 yrs ago already. but still does not have anything to do with DX10 and Vista with a HAL compatibility problem. go back and read what i been writing, it has nothing to do with your statement there. i guarantee you that you have absolutely nothing to tell me about Directx that i do not already know.
I have been talking about Directx problems only, not opengl or others, etc etc. They have there own problems with Vista ATM. because of vista's change from Xp/2000
anyway,
MS does not want to upg xp to use dx10. Its got fckall to do with anything else.
It is a clear selling point for the new OS - and the exact one that will cause gamers to upgrade.
What's your point? Big giant coroporation screws over consumer for more sales. Just another day in the rat race. :)
Thallium
06 Feb 2007, 13:58
MS does not want to upg xp to use dx10. Its got fckall to do with anything else.
thats right, Xp DOES need an upg to use DX10. glad you understand now :p
Xp needs an Upgrade. DX10 cannot work on Xp as it stands. theres no such thing as Microsoft doing this on purpose just for marketing only, that would be fucking stupid. they are the biggest Corporate in the world, there are a lot more things behind it than just a simple "BUY HALO 2, DX10, RAH RAH"
if i was MS, i wont waste time, money and resources to "fix" Xp for DX10 or vice versa, then DX10 becomes a mess on its own because of backwards compatibility, this is a huge chance for MS to get rid of DX8,7,6,5, etc etc. and eventually 9. i think its a damn good move. because that is also what they are doing.
better new OS, Clean New Directx, good marketing strategy on top of all of this.
you gotta think more out the box boet. but it looks like you have more of a grudge than a simple gripe, after everything i said, you still say this same shit
oh by the way, to upg Xp for DX10, all vendors will probably have to develop new drivers for Xp, most of the current drivers for Xp will probably stop working, or, They Can Downgrade DX10 to work for Xp.
Ms chose to Degrade DX10 into a DX9L version which i have said numerous times already. of course, thats probably the last DX version we will see for Xp.
EDIT: looks like i'm wrong with the DX9L its reversed to what i first thought.
Ms chose to Degrade DX10 into a DX9L version which i have said numerous times already. of course, thats probably the last DX version we will see for Xp.
Your posts were read and considered.
My point of view has not changed.
Every person has freedom of opion - ours is different.
I dont think its a bad thing. I will be chilling out now on one of the ut servers.
MS does not want to upg xp to use dx10. Its got fckall to do with anything else.
It is a clear selling point for the new OS - and the exact one that will cause gamers to upgrade.
I agree, seems to me that the new os has aimed at gamer communities, which is growing by the day... But
I tried it, and I get more fps on XP than on vista, by a lot (more than double).. and my motherboard drivers wont install on it at all(Nforce chipset)
Hence, XP is my os of choice for the time being
Thallium
07 Feb 2007, 09:06
I will be chilling out now on one of the ut servers.
I wish i could join you on the servers, but unfortunately, i'm running Vista now. :p
Macera, which motherboard you got?
GM<Jaymac>MF
07 Feb 2007, 12:45
XP till Vista is cheaper, older, tested and working.
Macera running the RC1 or RC2 of Vista wasn't a good choice as I am sure at that time there wasn't support for your mobo.
I would presume that now with the official versions support for almost all motherboards would be included and you should have no issues.
I would buy Vista if I had the money to now, as I am sure it will have endless benefits in the long run, but I am going to wait for the first service pack to be release before I do buy it.
Peace out ;)
Dagger
XP till Vista is cheaper, older, tested and working.
Einstein?
Wonder how you figured that maths out?
I wish i could join you on the servers, but unfortunately, i'm running Vista now. :p
Macera, which motherboard you got?
winfast nf4k8mc
Macera running the RC1 or RC2 of Vista wasn't a good choice as I am sure at that time there wasn't support for your mobo.
I would presume that now with the official versions support for almost all motherboards would be included and you should have no issues.
I would buy Vista if I had the money to now, as I am sure it will have endless benefits in the long run, but I am going to wait for the first service pack to be release before I do buy it.
Peace out ;)
Dagger
Soz for second post...
Allan.. My friend bought it, and he borrowed it to me to test it out (offline without activating or whatever) so its the official version not supporting my mobo's ethernet :(
Thallium
07 Feb 2007, 15:41
winfast nf4k8mc
that board is made by foxxconn.. it has a broken down version of the NF4 chip.. it does not have an Nvidia Network controller it has a built on Broadcomm network card.
thats why it does not work on Vista, go look for Broadcomm drivers
GM<Jaymac>MF
07 Feb 2007, 15:53
Einstein?
Wonder how you figured that maths out?
The same way I figure everything out... with a calculator and sense of humour. :P
that board is made by foxxconn.. it has a broken down version of the NF4 chip.. it does not have an Nvidia Network controller it has a built on Broadcomm network card.
thats why it does not work on Vista, go look for Broadcomm drivers
The drivers I got with the motherboard on the cd which installs one nvidia chipset package(Including sound, chipset, and ethernet drivers) should work??? The sound, everything else works on Vista, just not the ethernet :(
And it says it is a "Nvidia nForce Networking Controller"
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.