Slashdot Mirror
One In Two PCs Won't Run Vista's Interface
ThinSkin writes "While integrated graphics seem to handle Windows XP and 2000 just fine, they won't be able to handle Vista's 3D 'Aero Glass' compositor, which will prevent roughly half of all PCs from running Microsoft's new OS. Performance class cards that can handle DirectX 9.0c are up for the challenge." From the article: "After years of delays and several feature revisions, one of Vista's main selling points is the Aero Glass interface. However, as Peddie notes, users already have the ability to start constructing a PC that should be Vista-ready before the OS even ships. Microsoft also said this week that it would reserve its Halo 2 videogame for Vista."
Back in 2004, Microsoft announced that Longhorn would automatically detect a computer's graphics capability and show one of three GUIs: Aero, Aero Glass (the really high-end interface) or a classic Win2K-style interface.
This new article doesn't actually say the PCs won't be able to run Vista, but that they won't be able to take advantage of Aero Glass. It doesn't mention the three tiers of interface, but it does say this:
Sounds like one in two machines will be stuck with classic. Or maybe even some of those will get the mid-level GUI. But it doesn't say they won't be able to run the OS.
Jeez, it seems to me that Microsoft should be very careful about the marketing of this, because if ya gotta buy a new box to run Vista, then why not just simply make the switch? After all Aero Glass is mostly based on developments seen quite a while ago in OS X.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I say this can be a good thing. We'll finally either:
A) Get some decent integrated graphics systems (or see NForce boards take off in popularity)
or
B) See big computer retailers putting at least adequate graphics cards into their base systems.
This will do wonders for the ability to play games on cheap laptops.
The people with older graphics systems that can't run Vista? Chances are most won't need to upgrade anyway, and XP-compatible consumer software won't be going anywhere for a long time. Sure, they won't be able to run Halo 2 PC, but hell, if they can't meet Vista specs, they sure as hell can't meet the game's specs.
1 out of every 2 computers is probably not even powerful enough to run vista, let alone some of its features.
Not only is it inaccurate summary, it's pretty trollish too... sure running Aero Glass takes some horsepower, there is nothing preventing a user from turning it off and running it in a more 95/98/2000 style and not have the benefits or eye candy they could have if they had a more powerful system
Hell, go back to 2001, I remember knowing many people whose PC's ran awful slow when running XP in Fisher Price mode, so they'd revert to the classic look and things were fine until they had a slightly better PC a little later.
Same will happen here.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
This is the sort of bullshit hardware requirement that makes it sure that I will NEVER upgrade to Vista.
They can run the OS, just can't take advantage of Aero Glass.
Did MS ever hear of the bauhaus design theory at all? Last thing I care for is an OS that tries its hardest to blow moonbeams and fluffy bunnies up my ass. If you cant go back to the no-frills win2k classic interface I plan to squeeze every last drop of life out of XP Pro. That is, until M$ does evil things to force people to upgrade, like releasing Vista-specific software and dropping patches for XP altogether.
"To err is human, to mod Funny divine."
The Intel 900 series graphics chips are good enough to run World of Warcraft. They aren't all that fast, mind you, but it works, I've met a couple people that do it.
I'd wager that at least the GMA 950 will be enough for the more advanced interface, and even the GMA 900 will be.
This is just a way to get large coroprations to spring for the $500 video card on their desktops. No really, this is just like Windows pushing everything to 24 bit color when everyone was doing 8bit. Within a year or so EVERONE was at 24bit. Well, almost everyone, but you get the idea.
Ted
Fantasy remains a human right; we make in our measure and in our derivative mode... -- JRR Tolkien
Is Aero Glass going to be THAT important? And what is it about computers that make them not be able to run them?-- The grapics card? Or processor? or what? And what does Vista have to do with Halo 2? hmmm...
The length of a
Yet another submitter who can't reconcile what he's writing with what he's writing...
...prevent roughly half of all PCs from running Microsoft's new OS.
One In Two PCs Won't Run Vista's Interface
All I have heard about aeroglass is that it makes the windows desktop look like the OSX desktop. Why does that take so much horsepower? I'm running OSX on an old Imac G3 450.
Why does the desktop requre more graphics calculations than a modern video game? Somebody please whack me with the cluebat.
Great way to get the 'hold outs' to upgrade faster to the nice shiny DRM enabled hardware.
Make it impossible to run the 'trusted OS' that will be needed to run next years applications.
The power wasted in todays applications is almost obscene.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
One In Two PCs Won't Run Vista's Interface
That's nothing, zero out of my three PC's will!
Hosting 20G hd, 1Tb bw! ssh $7.95
When you're faced with a hostile audience (e.g. Slashdot), it can be tricky to slip your PR messages past the filters. After all, you aren't AMD; you don't want to have your own Slashdot Vendors section to give you a straight feed to the PR bin, since you know that skeptical readers will just ignore your message.
So what you do instead is construct a message that seems threatening for about forty-five seconds -- just as long as an editor will review it in the pending articles queue: you say, hey, my new software product is going to have really stringent hardware requirements. Oh, the editors say, this is perfect! It's interesting, controversial, and definitely front page material.
What they don't see is the second touch: you subtly phrase the article so that the impression left on reader is not that your product is incompatible, but that it is exclusive. Oh, they think -- I have a high-end system! I've got to try out this Vista thing on it!
Suckers.
We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
Why are 'oooh, shiny!' features the main selling feature of Vista?
I must be missing something. Maybe they're putting something hallucinogenic in the XP interface, which I have completely missed, up to this time. It sure looks hippy dippy from a distance...
I think I will wait a bit to upgrade my home machine; there should be piles of really nice used ones hitting the market when Vista comes out.
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
Have you seen Aero Glass? Obviously you're not going to do these things on a bargain basement graphics board.
> Hell, go back to 2001, I remember knowing many people whose PC's ran awful slow when
> running XP in Fisher Price mode, so they'd revert to the classic look and things were
> fine until they had a slightly better PC a little later.
On the rare occasions I am forced to run Windows, I still turn off the Fisher Price mode. It blows goats and I'd bet good money Aero Glass will molest farm animals as well. Those morons write for morons and it shows. Of course OS X is also crap and don't even get me ranting about GNOME or KDE.
Goddamn, what has happened to user interfaces. They chew through ten times the resources they did a decade ago and suck. With a vector based desktop built on GL we should be able to do some stuff that actually makes a PC easier to use instead of looking like a rejected prop from Hackers.
And this story also blows. Good grief people, if you are planning on plunking the cash for a Vista upgrade buy a damned video card, they are under a hundred bux for a good one these days.
Democrat delenda est
I wouldn't have much use for Halo 2 on such a computer anyway.
Aero is just MS copying something that Apple had working and perfected years ago:
Drastically widespread hardware incompatibility
Which will be left over which will happily run Linux.
Deleted
I'm in the progress of doing an hardware upgrade, and while I don't care one iota about Vista, I know that my motherboard is sold as "Windows Vista Hardware Ready". Not sure exactly what that means in practice, I guess it's just marketing.
Belief is the currency of delusion.
We're *just now* upgrading to XP. Who really cares what the requirements for Vista are? In 4 or 5 years time, we'll be upgrading to Vista - after the OS has had several patches and a couple of service packs. I think MS is well aware of this trend in the business world. Those fanboys that want the latest and greatest already *have* the latest and greatest hardware. Get over it already.
I will add that requiring Vista for Halo2 is a bit slimey, but hey...what did you really expect? The business world isn't biting, MS needs to hook *someone*.
What's the difference between 9.0 and 9.0c? I recently upgraded several PCs with some inexpensive ATI Radeon 9550 cards, which are supposed to support DirectX 9.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
We've got three generations of PC's in my office. The newest ones run XP very smoothly. The next generation back runs XP okay, and runs 2000 smoothly. The oldest generation runs 2000 marginally, and cries if I install XP. (Really, I've heard the old Matrox cards whimper!)
Whether you select the Aero Bar--I mean Aero Glass-- GUI or not, I suspect that other bloated--I mean feature-rich--aspects of the OS will prevent it from running smoothly on a lot of PC's that cheap-ass--I mean financially thrifty--offices currently have.
Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
ConsultingFair.com
If this organization says one in two PC's, how are they defining a PC? Is a PC a computer that is already running XP, or is it any computer running any version of Windows including those still on 3.1 or 2000? Or even worse (for sake of their statistic), is it any personal computer, including Macs, or personal linux boxes being used for simple tasks with a simple 8mb graphics card?
I'd guess that almost half of all PC's today can't even adequately run Windows XP without being bogged down because of graphics and RAM requirements.
While I'm sure that many PC's won't be able to run the new Aero Glass of Windows Vista, I think the Researcher should have been a little bit more specific about his estimate. People have uses for computers without upgrading to the "latest and greatest."
and link to research press release: http://www.jonpeddie.com/index.shtml#vista
That summary needs changing - it's so inaccurate. Shame on the editors.
They tend to only get OS upgrades when they get a new computer, or when a techie pushes them to. The non-tech users that are likely to upgrade are more the gamer/power user types that are likely to have a card that'll handle the UI.
my old 233 with 128mb ram and 4mb onboard video ram could run ut at 1024x768 very very well.... so i dont see why the 64mb onboard cards of today couldnt run vista. they wouldnt do it as well as, say even a radeon7500 (64mb dx8 card) but they would still run it.
portfolio
One of the guys at work has run the latest vista CTPs on an Intel 945-based machine using the onboard Intel-Extreme graphics card, and it ran perfectly well. My guess is that quite a few onboard chipsets will be capable, or at least those within the last 18-months say. Earlier ones might not, but then I've seen stranger things.
Q: Why not "just switch to Mac/OSX"? A: Some of us like having more than one mouse button.
It seems that M$ is going out of their way to make the Vista release as unpalletable as possible. Between the endless delays and now what appears to be massive incompatibility problems, I suspect that Vista will fall flat on its face. The only way this is going to get wide spread adoptance is by force. M$ will likely pull one of their famous application "upgrades" forcing people to switch OS to continue to use their applications. I refuse to play that game any more. Thank God for open office. Screw M$.
When all else fails, run.
i'm calling BS on this one.
microsofts own demonstrations of Vista prove it can run on medium end PCs.The aero interface and all the nifty gadgets can be shutdown and in fact are if you don't meet the minimum requirements.
so if you can run xp smoonthly you should be able to run vista as well.And if you can't...well then you're running an old pc anyway.
So now evey desktop PC will ship with 3d acceleration and an opengl based X server - or better - an opengl based graphic server supporting X a legacy can arise... no more "but some people don't have acceleration" argument... I'm already dribbling in front of expose... but my linux desktop being behind MacOs AND vista... no way!
\u262D = \u5350
...because by the time it's released, those computers will be in a landfill!!
please excuse my apathy
Intel GMA 900 and 950 chips are full DirectX 9 accelerators, and those are the integrated video on all new Intel systems. They aren't blazing or anything, but enough to play World of Warcraft and enough to handle Vista's interface. However even on an older system, no problem. Once can pick up a GeForce 6200 or Radeon X300 for about $50. Despite the price, they are full DirectX 9 cards with all teh features of their bigger brothers, just less power.
So while you may need an upgrade to get the advanced interface, it needn't be an expensive one.
Apple mice do have more than one mouse button :)
Some think the Internet is a bad thing. I just think that AOL is a bad thing.
Last thing I care for is an OS that tries its hardest to blow moonbeams and fluffy bunnies up my ass.
You better be careful, or you'll get the Apple Mafia to drop a horses head in your bed.
HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\DWM UseMachineCheck = 0 I'm hopeing this wont go away as its been in the CTP builds but it could be just for debuging reasons. Oh well worth a try for those with laptops with intergrated boards. I own a £800 laptop its Packard Bell A5 tiny, only 1.7 kg so there are not many seperate components everything is preaty much intergrated, its new this year I hope it runs the interface but hey it will proberly become anoying after a while.
It couldnt be any uglier. Consider those who cant run it, lucky
:)
Atleast they'll be able to use their monitor still
Will all that crap be running in the background while I'm trying to play a game, thus further crippling my system?
I'm never going to use vista, so I don't care....but I'm sure plenty of people would.
--Once you try 2GB you never want less-- (Athlon 64 3500+) PF Usage still 225MB running just IE, Google video player, and Yahoo messenger. Feels pretty damn smooth, Windows XP that is. But damn, I can remember running Win98 with,hell, maybe 256MB and having the same "feel". WTF!? Fucking software has just exploded. And not just Windows. Tried running Suse 10 on my P2 333 w/256MB. Fucking sucked, slow-ass POS. Felt like I did when I was playing with an old Redhat distro on my 486, about 6 years ago, or like at the local community college where they tried Win95 on 486s with 8MB ram-which depending on what software you had wouldn't necessary be a bad experience-but in their case-it sucked.
C:\>
You bought a "Treacherous Computing" motherboard.
Of course you don't have to enable the treacherous features, so don't feel bad about it. Vista probably will if you install it though.
I've recommended to all of my customers, friends and family that they not even consider migrating to Vista unless they want to buy ALL NEW HARDWARE and suffer Draconian and oppressive restrictions on what they can do with their computers.
I also notified my customers that if they do go to Vista that I will not provide tech support or make service calls for Vista based systems.
I use Linux on all my machines but I have 1 XP and 1 2k box that I fire up only when needed to do over the phone walk-thrus. I won't purchase Vista. I wouldn't install/use it if it were FREE..
Boycott Vista.
Personally, I'm happy with my computer on Win XP and I'm just going to wait until I buy or build a new system.
Or until after SP1....I do enough beta testing as it is.
Follow their links:
l uate/hardware/entpguid.mspx#ECAA
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/windowsvista/eva
Not really surprising.
"You know you don't act like a scientist, you're more like a game show host." Dana Barret
wait, there are windows fanboys that read slashdot? i thought linux-zealot.com redirected to /.
This is NOT true, do the Slashdot editors even know people that are in the Vista Beta or have a MSDN subscription?
Vista scales its graphics to three levels, the basic level which still supports all of the WPF applications, scales the OS UI back to look like Windows 2000. This level however does not use WPF effects for the UI, such as transparent 'glass' Window Frames, etc.
The second level is a cross between WindowsXP and the Vista Interface. Again it supports all the WPF applicaitons, however the UI, visually is themed and looks somewhat like the higher level 3D 'Glass' Vista UI.
The third level is the 'high' level 'glass' and basically works on any Video Card that has basic DirectX 9.0 features built in. This level brings the WPF and 3D effects to the UI.
You get Glassy WIndow Frames that not only are transparent but also do a blur effect on the Windowsw Frames with Shading. This level also takes full advantage of your cards 3D Acceleration features throughout the basic Windows UI.
However even in the 'basic' mode Vista will run on ANY video card, Vista will still do amazing looking 3D effects on a crap card with the WPF, and if possible take advantage of any 3D GPU acceleration features in your video card.
For example if you are running a 1998 ATI Rage 128 32MB Video card, you are going to run in the seconde level of quality, and can turn it down to the basic level if you choose. (See, even old cards run in the second level, just like they would be themed in WindowsXP.)
Now even if your video card is only able to run in the second level or lets say, it has no 3D acceleration features, Vista will still properly run WPF and 3D WPF designed applications.
For example the WPF Chess game that comes with Vista, has reflective tile, smooth lines, is a full 3D applciaiton workspace, and runs with or without a 3D GPU in the computer. (The power of software rendering of WPF and DirectX.)
What Vista won't do on older video Cards is map the UI to 3D RAM on the GPU, and slow down your computer interface to display cute animations or glass if your Video card is not fast enough to do that.
So if you are running a computer with a video diplay older than a Geforce FX 5200, then you won't get the pretty UI, but if you have an old FX 5200 you will, and most people can pick this level of card up for almost any computer for like 30-50 US. (You can even buy a PCI version for your 500mhz system that has no AGP port, get the pretty Vista high level Glass.)
There are some recent 'cheap' Intel onboard chipsets that don't support enough 3D to the high level 3D display mode, and there are also some onboard Video that uses shared Memory, etc that won't support the high level Vista display mode.
Sure these people won't get the 'glass' effect, but they will be able to do everything else. And if they want the prettier interface, buying a video card that is considered 'low level' by today's standards is not such a big thing. If these people are playing WoW or any other game released in the past few years, they already have had to buy a newer video card anyway.
And Vista without Glass is not ugly or losing a lot for people, all it means is that Windows itself won't be sucking your GPU power and RAM for 'pretty' effects, when it is not necessary.
This not much different than people turning off themes in XP, expect there is a new level of UI themes in Vista that is a full 3D UI implementation that Windows itself uses for displaying runing applicaitons and the Windows Shell Interface.
If anyone has any doubts or questions go to the WinSuperSite, he seems to have the ability to release information on Vista without breaking an NDA. http://www.winsupersite.com/ (You can even see him explain this, screen shots of the different modes, and why and how it works.) -It is actually pretty slick and smart of Microsoft.
One thing Microsoft if introducing with Vista is a new Display Driver Model Called the LDDM an
This might be a way to drop all old hardware support by deleting driver, free up some space I suppose. They can't run the OS anyway, so it's possible. What's slashdot's take on this?
Could I please insist that you alway put the word theory when having to mention the so called 'Vista'.
We here at the Intelligent (OS) Design Board feel that young people need the choices explained to them in a scientific way, with all choices clearly labeled.
Regards,
I(OS)D
PS (Dont hurt me mods!) TFA is kind of, um, inaccurate, it was always the Eye of Redmond's plan to offer a hardware accelerated desktop option in the LongHonk shell - the news here seems to be that half the PC don't have 'enough' hardware acceleration today. Of course, when the Vista (Theory) actually does ship then the ratio will be a lot different than today - we may all have rocket boots too...
Performance class cards that can handle DirectX 9.0c are up for the challenge.
Should something as simple as a UI require as much horsepower as a top of the line first person shooter?
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Exactly. DrEldarion: Did it further occur to you that perhaps the vast majority of us actually prefers the less expensive, less capable graphics cards if given the choice (especially in an office environment, as you specified)?
Many of us don't want retailers to start bundling these over-powered graphics cards by default, because we don't want to pay for them. Even if they're less expensive than they are now, they'll certainly be more expensive than the basic cards that are shipping now.
If it runs of 50% of computers out there, that's still better than Windows XP, 2000, NT, 9x, and 3.1/3.11 combined.
Let's see. 4 letters beginning with 'A' and ending with a vowel. One consonant and 3 vowels. Renders a GUI using graphics hardware. Named after one of the four elements. Hmmmm...it's on the tip of my tongue...but I can't quite place it...
"The White House is not an intelligence-gathering agency," -- Scott McClellan, Whitehouse spokesman.
I think a lot of Vista's success depends on software companies doing the swap. If M$ and threaten, force, extort, do whatever it takes in order make sure that the gulf IS NOT filled up by other vendors.
Take video cards for example, AGP is suppose to be dead yet half of all gamers' PC sit have an AGP slot. The forced upgrade meant that more then half of the LAST generation of cards were PCI-E only and companies lost sales because of a lack of upgrade options. AGP is still dying a generation later, yet strongly represented in the current generation. I'm assuming M$ made the same mistake and there's a great chance to stab their "partners" in the back when they attempt to force their customers to do the same.
Linux needs games, Linux software needs to include everything needed per install. Blender is horrible and sucks because it isn't one package, I mean like why the hell bother? Linux needs MPAA and RIAA certification. Linux needs Direct3d (cloned opengl anyways).
Will even two people even want to run Vista? I mean, that's kind of a positive view on your new marketshare, Microsoft :)
Seriously. Apple gaming isn't nearly as bad as it's been. Switch to OS X already!
maybe people will finally stop using it.
Am I the only one that quickly covers up the OS with a program?
Nice to know the apple trolls are still heavily here at Slash dot. You a holes were one the reasons I stopped coming to Slashdot so much:
FYI: OSX is a decendant of Free BSD which is a flavor of Unix.
So when, exactly, did Apple start running it? three years ago?
Hope they pay you a lot to do this trolling.
I'm still running Linux and loving.
I'm thinking about going out tonight to buy a dual core 64 AMD box.
I will, of course, need another harddrive so I can install Linux.
I will use whatever in on the Window harddrive when I play video games and for nothing else.
That's how good Microsoft stuff is: it is a toy and nothing more.
I would guess over 90% of /.ers (when forced to use Windows) use the W2K Style, with the rest enjoying XP's Aero or a 3rd party skinning app. I hope Microsoft opens up the format for the Themes so such an additional app isn't needed. It would be a step up in my book, and I imagine the big OEMs will want to tweak their own a bit.
http://mrl.nyu.edu/~jhan/ftirtouch/
Wasn't the purpose of operating systems to run the hardware, and not the other way around? When did the shift arrive when you were expected to change your hardware to run a new OS?
Exigo spamos et dona ferentes
... shouldn't this article be under games?
Windows Vista will require much more than 640k on the video card alone.
Logical conclusion: Bill Gates believes nobody will ever need Windows Vista.
Damn, I guess I'll have to upgrade all my company's Windows servers with new DX9c graphics cards so we can admin our servers with Aero Glass when we upgrade to Vista. Darn you Microsoft!!!
[ducks]
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
It's that they won't.
I imagine a poor laptop, stressed out by all the demands put on it, on hearing that some 1user wants to install Windows Vista on it goes, "Nuh Uh! Ain't happenin!" and wags it's digital finger at you.
Seriously, though, the rule of thumb with Microsoft is:
If they say you need x Hardware with x Video with x RAM and y speed CD/DVD
then you need to buy 2x Hardware with x+2 Video with 2x RAM and y/2 speed CD/DVD.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I think M$ is betting that if people are willing to get a better video card just to run a $50 game, why not for an OS upgrade? And this coming from a linux user... I feel unclean.
sounds to me like vista is going to blow xp away in the hog department. i cant see anyone interested in productivity and reliability using this anyway if its that intensive. ie most business will likely turn this off to begin with, even on the few systems that can handle it. i do how ever see it pissing off a large number of consumers, not they they will learn by buy god they will bitch. as a side not i downgrade xp to 2000 graphics anyway...
I don't think that this will be as big of a deal as it looks. I seriously doubt that very many people will bother to upgrade their operating systems. My web logs still show plenty of Windows 98 hits (never mind Netscape 4.0!). IMHO, Those that will have to upgrade to Vista will either be geeks who have the required hardware already, or corporations who won't care about 'aero-glass' anyway. Everyone else will just get Vista when they get a new computer. For most home users, XP was a great upgrade because Win 98/ME's tendency to crash was a major annoyance. XP doesn't really crash, so I don't see any particular reason to upgrade.
Oh well. I guess the hardware market has to have some kind of mechanism driving it, otherwise they would all go out of business when people realize that 2ghz is more than enough for anything most people would want to do on a computer. (Besides play the latest and greatest games).
Would it really count as a new version if i can run it my old hardware.
:/
:(
Have had almost no luck upgrading and version to the next. Even this box tho it would run XP would NOT be happy about it. It will not run XP+firewall+AV+terminalemulator without excessive lag (1.6GHz win98).
Isn't it coming out this year? One would hope you could build a machine to run it then!
Oh well, if these stupid online vendor pricing programs worked on something besides win/IE i'd be willing to try something but they dont
Discovering it takes a 2GHz computer now to successfully emululate a dumb terminal was just depressing for the future
I can tell you that my household will be one of the 50% that won't be running Vista, and it's not because I can't, it's because of all the added support for DRM.
I wonder if this is even supported with the new 3D interface?
Can I run Xgl on my AMD 2600+ with nvidia geforce 440mx?
This story seems like a prime candidate for "Microsoft is setting up for a perfect 'switch to Mac' campaign here". Just how much backlash will there be when everyday Ma and Pa PC users are forced to either stick with their current Windows OS because their computer won't upgrade to Vista or buy a complete new system? It appears to be yet another opportunity for Apple to say "bleh...buy a Mac. They just work".
/.ers use that phrase so much? Ack!) would be pretty annoyed if I had to buy yet another machine just to run the new OS. Let's see if Apple will take advantage of this or not.
But...as stated above, I guess it all breaks down to users. Corporate users, everyday users, power users. I for one (why do
"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
im running windows vista build 5270 as i type this on a what 8mb igp, no not agp IIIIIgp, meaning the motherboard port, and im running it fine, personally vista is really nice every time i open compressed folder though it locks up(fix: download WinRAR), it embarasses me to even call a microsoft OS nice, but if they fix the memory leak i might actually give them a smile(not a thumbs up, but unless businss practices change, its the most they'll ever get from me.)
Sounds like even if Vista's interface was key for Vista to run(I have no clue if it can run on a traditional non-accelerated interface), it wouldn't matter. Most PCs that have integrated graphics are from the budget line (and some from the non-budget line) of Dell or another PC maker, and most that buy from them don't ever think of reinstalling unless it completely dies, let alone upgrade to the next version of Windows. I'm more concerned that something like my Radeon 9800 Pro (which is old and lacking features by todays standard, but still decently fast) won't run just because it doesn't support the latest version of Pixel Shader or whatever hardware "requirement" the interface has, but probably doesn't even make full use of.
In undeveloped countries, the consumer controls the market. In capitalist America, the market controls you.
I have not run the beta's so I would like someone who has run them to fill me in here.
But the interface needed to handle the I/O and commands from the CPU to video card so all the graphics can run off the GPU require PCIExpress since AGP is too limited.
I have an athlonXP 2400 and I plan to put in 2gigs of 333mgz ddram and upgrade the processor to an Athlon3000XP. However I dont know if my geforce6600 can handle it because its only pci based.
http://saveie6.com/
...because 9 out of 10 consumers won't be buying it.
I've developed a "rule of thumb" - always load on PC's the version of windows that was available for purchase when that type of hardware was common (with one exception - no hardware is suitable for WindowsME)
As Vista isn't out yet, I wouldn't recommend running Vista on any hardware that's currently around. If you do - then prepare for a performance hit.
Yeah sure there are user interface improvments. but I write most of those off as "new skins". Some of the things I'm looking forward to - in about two years when I can afford new hardware - are
- Better handling of new features in graphics cards
- Making use of new features in SATA
- Improved deployment methods for business
BTW - note that the two main things I'm looking forward to are OS aspects (software that interacts between apps and hardware) not just interface bells & whistlesThe most recent Vista build has been reported to work fine with Aero Glass on a Athlon XP 1600+. Thats 4 years old. When XP came out, it ran on four year old computers. Face it, your P166 is over a decade old, and you can't run the latest and greatest out of redmond on it. My brother recently bought a computer identical to MS's recomended specs for vista brand new from emachines for $499. Thats A64 3200+, 512MB RAM, ATI X200 Graphics. That will run Aero Glass just fine.
Faced with such a choice, I think I'd just stick with the fully-functional system I already have. Luckily, there's no such issue anyway, as for 99% of Windows users, Vista doesn't require a new box to run at all.
Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
PC here is over 2 years old, and the Vista Aero Glass thingy works perfectly here (and looks very nice, btw).
Also, the new Patience/Solitaire looks awesome!
Kaetemi
Microsoft announced today a new line of high-end graphics cards, with genuine "Glass-Blown Engine (tm)."
Share and Enjoy!
My old Windows box hasn't been upgraded in a few years and I consider it an old machine, more useful for its hard drives than performance .... and yet its Geforce 5900FX and Athlon XP 2500 aught to be enough for the "high end" system requirements for Vista.
Maybe these were high end when Longhorn was earlier in development, but for any enthusiast they're mid range at best now in 2006. I suppose on-board graphics drag the definition down for the worst PC's, which indeed will hopefully be forced onto better cards after Vista's release.
Oh and why the PC's languishing is because I switched my laptop to a Mac and the desktop is next!
So there's going to be a glut of good machines on the market when it comes out.
Will the new OS still have the animated paper clip? If were going to have to buy better vid cards just for the UI, then I hope MS brings back the paper clip and maybe even gives him a little sports car to ride around in. I mean why not waste even more system resources...why stop at the desktop UI?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I posted my thoughts on Vista's GUI on my website...if anyone cares to take a gander...
http://digitalpixel.net/?p=44
I know this is really a dig at MSFT, but it's all just part of our economy... Beefier hardware requirements will make some people avoid the Vista "upgrade", and others will go ahead and contribute to the health of the hardware industry (as well as MSFT).
Bring it on! Let the market decide, I say.
There are any number of goods and services that I personally don't use, but I love living in a society where they are freely offered to those who want them!
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Get some decent integrated graphics systems
Can anyone explain how a layman can determine whether
his PC has this or not?
One question: Does Aero Glass,that good that I need to buy a new card for it? What's the point? Would I be more productive,click faster with it?
Hmm... does this look familiar to anyone? https://lg3d-core.dev.java.net/ So really, who cares about Vista, other than Microsoft, investors and "analysts" like Gartner??? Is Vista really a reason to send MS your hard earned $$$? Are they going to make agreements with game developers to say, "Make this only run on Vista... because we don't think gamers will have the option of playing on a PS3 or Revolution system"??? Seriously, what's the selling point of Vista? "Security" updates that track your system usage released a week after the gold version?
...They should suggest graphics card minimums for the Aero Glass interface to work properly. I would probably use the nVidia GeForce FX 5200 or ATI Radeon 9500 chipsets as bare minimum for activation of Aero Glass interface. As for the base Aero interface, I would suggest nVidia GeForce MX440/MX4000 and ATI Radeon 8500 as minimums.
This Aero Glass gui sounds an awful lot like Sun Microsystem's Looking Glass. Sun wrote a gui in java that's really cool. You can do all sorts of neat stuff w/ it. This Aero Glass sounds like that. They both eat up resources like crazy too. :-)
Weeks of coding save hours of planning
It's not a Windows problem, it is a Linux feature.
ok dude...read the very first post of this discussion
ok, if you have read and understand the first post, then you have one of two logical options
1. Believe it
2. Prove it wrong
If you do not reply by proving the first post wrong, then you must accept the following statement: this new version of windows (vista) will definitely NOT require most people to 'buy a new box'
it will require some users to buy a new box if they want to use all the features of vista, areo glass, glass blown pipes...whatever
look, i've laid it out as simply as possible...your lame-ass mac propaganda is proven wrong
Thank you Dave Raggett
I know this is a common myth, but truly, trust me. There is a big difference between Vista's graphics and OSX. And I am not so much talking about the UI, the the driver model, the WPF technologies and all the other things OSX or any other OS will simply just not do.
No, I don't trust you. Everything in Windows Vista's graphics architecture is derivative from that of Mac OS X.
Here's a handy buzzword translation guide for you:
Windows Vista technology - Mac OS X technology
Direct3D - OpenGL
WPF (Windows presentation Foundation, "Avalon") - Quartz
WDDM (Windows Display Driver Model) - Quartz Extreme
XPS (XML Paper Specification, "Metro") - PDF
Aero Glass - Aqua
Flip/Flip 3D - Expose
ClearType - (generic) sub-pixel rendering, "Font Smoothing."
Now name something...anything...that Windows Vista can do that can't be done already in Mac OS X.
The US free market: two halves of a government-granted duopoly are free to set the market price.
You'll see people modding up totally flawed arguments based on things that aren't true just because they're anti-microsoft.
Even if he had said it, lacking vision of how computers would need more than something that was astronomic cal 25 years ago (in the 80's I had PCs with only a few KBs or only ONE like the ZX81 and such) doesn't mean anything today, taken totally out of context.
The anti-microsoft trolls modding crap like this up are only making slashdot users look retarded. Time to grow up... Hate microsoft all you want (not like I care), but stop modding obviously ridiculous posts up like this!
That is, assuming that lack of EFI support is the only major thing currently preventing XP from booting an intel Mac (iMac Core Duo, MacBook Pro so far).
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
The big problem I have with Slashdot is that there are a lot of smart people, but they seem so ignorant
and hostile about Microsoft that it's just outrageous.
There is so much FUD and just plain mis-direction about Microsoft's new OS coming mainly from this crowd
and linux that it's almost pointless to respond.
The fact is that the people can still run Vista without the Aero interface
and that the intergrated hardware is so terrible that it's almost worthless for games as well (not just talking about brand new games here).
Vista is a lot more than just a graphics upgrade, sure you might have to use classic mode for integrated graphics because they are horrible
at most any type of graphics. I mean some games don't even work at all with them and some emulators won't either. I would never use this horrible
hardware.
Vista has a re-written from the ground up networking stack, that is currently using compound TCP/IP and IPV6 Native all the way through to the API.
The speed should be able to easily beat Linux networking stacks because of compound tcp/ip. The stack also uses multi-core processors so that each packet is scheduled to the different processors. Networking stack has been moved into user-mode.
Vista has a re-written sound system for the latest in 5.1/7.1 dolby surround sound and volume control per application and built
in user-mode and not in the kernel.
Much better multi-tasking and smoother to be less glitchy like when doing file copies or other. There have been major enhancements in the kernel
to provide for better error handling and smoother and faster performance.
Much better security (As good if not better than Linux - yeah I know the people here are going to be quite upset about this).
Much better stability because of moving drivers out of kernel mode and into user mode.
Direct X 10 which has been re-written from the ground up and added a lot of features that do not exist in OpenGL 2.0.
and drivers for DX 10 that have no legacy.
I could go on, but Vista is a major deal. Now Vienna isn't as major of an upgrade, basically there will be a new interface from the ground up (no more Windows 95 look anymore).
If I wanted eye-candy and stability I'd run Enlightenment...
Wait a minute. I *do* run Enlightenment. Eye candy--Good. Stability--Good. Security--Good.
I guess I don't need Vista.
Anyway, who in the Sam Hell wants to read text that's skewed. The 3D stuff is just a gimick, totally worthless in the real world. My Enlightenment configuration gives me all the eye candy I could want.
Hey, Rasterman. We need to see E 17 this year. I hope, I hope.
If that's just for transparent windows, I can get them with OS-X, gnome-terminal on Linux, even on my XP box with a NVidia card -- without having to upgrade my hardware ;-)
Besides, I don't need transparent windows. I need real security and stability.
So, what's the fine point of upgrading to Vista? Why should I care that many PC's won't work with Vista-- they'll still work with Linux for that matter?
MS outmoding a bunch of computers == I can finally build my cluster
...
OS X ain't got shit for games, period.
Yes there's Blizzard and Id titles and a few others but there's no Halo 2 (yet), and there's no Halflife or Halflife 2. Which means no Counterstrike, no Counterstrike CS, no anything that requires Steam.
Then there's 3dStudioMAX, Rhino, and a load of CAD packages.
Not all professionals can just pick up and move, and everyone who uses a computer for Entertainment Purposes Only has about 15x the game library on Windows.
(People with the cash and resources own both but not everybody has the money or the space)
seriously, there's no reason for the pretty 3D interface. It's getting pretty old now, it's almost bad that Apple keeps making their OS beautiful and run decently on old video cards (of course Apple has the decency to avoid integrated graphics). Because as long as Apple makes beautiful OSes, Microsoft will try to copy the features even though they don't realize that Apple is just making things look nice and it really isn't helping MS. i.e. Microsoft screws it up, it runs slowly on old machines, and just ends up looking goofy.
So unlike how Apple fans seem to think that Mac OS X is good for computing, it's actually bad because it takes Microsoft away from its best interface - Windows 95
Cutting the rate of growth is not a cut in the education budget. But then as a liberal, you wouldnt understand that. Maybe when you folks embrace reality, you might win the big elections. Mod away, I've got karma to burn.
My machine won't run Windows Vista.
Sure, it meets all the specs. But it won't run Vista all the same.
I watch with glee and hope that M$ suffers tremendously at the hands of large companies and regular consumers that are just not willing to upgrade their hardward to Captain Amazing levels, and are pretty pissed that they get to have a threadbare UI as a substitute.
Thank God I'm switching to a Powerbook on my next purchase. Maybe I'll get an inexpensive linux laptop, too just because I can and look at pretty windows with E or Gnome or whatever. I just can't imagine that M$ will come up with a new UI so amazing that I will start shitting bricks immediately when I see it because I need it so badly.
Pretty windows or sufficiently functional windows and $1000 in my pocket? Gee. I just can't decide.
When game companies start cranking them out for Macs and Windows machines simultaneously (Blizzard does this, but not all), there will be no reason for me to touch a Windows machine again.
Yes why not switch to a fringe system that can't run any of your current software...
Oh, come now. We all know nobody wants to run all those viruses and spyware.
besides, it's less fringe than Linux, and people here are always barking about how folks should switch to Ubuntu. [ducking]
I can't wait to see that 60% CPU usage at idle due to the new interface. This is going to rock!
This will justify my purchase of a fancy new dual-core system. One CPU for the interface and one for everything else.
Something I just noticed on the official MS Vista website; http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/presskits/windo wsvista/images/image017.jpg
Are they copying Apple's Spotlight right down to the name?!
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
Who cares about this GUI? I am more interested in the CLI, heard it will be greatly improved, allowing to automize more tasks in a batch job.
/., it would be way more interesting to learn about the other improvements, like details on how security is improved etc. or if webdav gets better integrated with explorer or even better: with the filesystem. Or [fill in your major annoyance about XP shortcomings]...
And do they solve other issues, like the dvorak keyboard hell on XP which lacks international charater support, can not remap the ctrl-c/v/x keys, forces me to write down my password as a combination of unremindable charaters as with the logon it still thinks i have qwerty. And no, i do not want to spend 200 euro on a hard-wired keyboard.
I understand MS markets this new GUI. But here on
How glassy a window looks doesn't care, i have real windows here with a nice view to the outside world, my PC is ment for other tasks.
A glitch a day keeps the bugs away.
It's a funny feeling to see a trainwreck happen in slow motion. The more I read about Vista, the more I want to stay well clear of it and the more problems and trouble it seems to be.
I most definitely does not in any way sound like the revolution it was originally announce to be, years ago.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
a neomagic 256 grafic chip?
... on the overall electric consumption.
what is the impact of this transparent look and feel on the electrical grid, on third world waste dumps ?
I wonder.
I am not Remy Mouton, unfortunately: http://remy.mouton.free.fr/art/
After all Aero Glass is mostly based on developments seen quite a while ago in OS X.
Repeating this again and again doesn't make it true. In fact, there are no significant features in Aqua that weren't known and used previously in UIs. In particular, Apple invented neither animation, nor hardware acceleration, nor transparency as part of the UI.
If anything, Apple deserves a good deal of criticism for misrepresenting the Aqua style of GUI as the result of Apple research.
if ya gotta buy a new box to run Vista, then why not just simply make the switch
Indeed, why not make the switch? After all, if it is cutting edge GUI features you desire, Gnome has both Vista and Aqua beat.
This means more clueless MS zombies throwing out perfectly good hardware in order to upgrade, which means more free computers to run GNU/Linux/BSD/OpenSolaris/plan9 for MEEEEEEE! Thank you, Bill Gates! (And when my basement Beowolf cluster attains sentience, it will "thank" you, too!)
This really is a feautre..not a bug.
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
ROFL! I didn't realize if my AC, power windows or power steering break down that my entire car would become a useless heap of junk. And larger engines DO get lower mileage, but they last longer because they're made for heavier use.
is a great problem for Microsoft's Vista marketing. However they had similar problems with memory needs for XP and it didn't show up like a big blocker (partially because memory prices went down at a time before XP release). There are very cheap graphic cards out there which can run Vista desktop in full power ("aero glass"), starting from radeon 9500/9600 of nvidia fx 5200. A slightly less intensive UI variant will probably work fast even on radeon 8500, Geforce 4 (NOT MX!) or i915(and maybe even older variants?) intel IGP. Some of those cards, can cost as much as $20 second handed. XGL for example will run fine on r200 ati cards, it is the same level of acceleration as Avalon.
God, this gets old. I've been hearing the exact same thing, with every-single-release of a Windows OS from 3.1 all the way up Win XP. And now, of course, we hear the same thing about Vista. But the reality is, history will repeat itself. Everyone will eventually upgrade to Vista. And IMHO, Vista will probably become the best OS ever produced by Microsoft.
Are you kidding? Vista has much higher requirements and DRM that has generated a lot of bad press - enough for even normal people to notice it. It has a confusing mess of versions and the people who actually take a look at the different versions are appalled by the ridiculous "Starter Edition". Most people don't see any reason to upgrade besides "new stuff won't be released for XP". And every half-educated user who looks at Vista's feature list eagerly awaiting all the exciting new stuff becomes more and more disillusioned as the deadline gets pushed further back and feature after feature disappears from the release while Mac are discussing with the Linux crowd about who has the better implementation two years before Vista ships.
Windows Vista is one of the best arguments to switch to Linux or OS X. At least a half dozen people I know are in the process of getting a Mac or making ther system dualboot-ready in order to emancipate themselves from Microsoft before Vista beceomes a necessity. I love it, really.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
*sigh* I forgot to escape the brackets. The subject sould have read: "Vista > XP. Vista way, way > XP"
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
And how long does 2k take? 35 seconds? Is this worth a major-version OS upgrade to you? It's rock solid, so you're not booting it more than once a day, and that's if you turn it off at night. XP is not much more than bringing 2k to the home user. I've never found 2k sluggish (at least no more sluggish than XP)...
Telltale Games: Bone, Sam and Max
Spending money on crap they don't need is almost the very definition of modern economies.
In this particular case, if people are just going to do the same things why would they upgrade?
You mention "efficiency" - that implies an overall goal. Can you tell me what the economic goal of society is? I can't, but I don't think you want it planned, we all know how planned economies work out.
For example, by your argument, nobody should buy dry-clean only clothes, because they have to spend additional money in order to maintain them. Those clothes do the same job as Wal-Mart clothes. I am sure if every single dry-cleaning business in the world disappeared, it would have no negative affect on the economy...
Nobody ought to buy cell-phone ringtones either - the phones already ring. Nobody needs professional sports - that's a huge industry. Aside from food, and shelter, what does anyone need?
The point is that nobody makes you buy Windows Vista (even if it is "bundled" with some hardware - you'd only be buying that particular hardware if the entire package was a good deal for you.)
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
the thought that aero glass will continously use my cpu/gpu and stress my notebook batteries scares me. i guess the distinction "n hours for office use, n/2 hours for 3d gaming" won't exist anymore in the future...
I hear ya. I'm running OS X on a late 1995 PowerMac 7600, thanks to XPostFacto. I bought the box specifically because it was so upgradable (processor on a daughter card, 3 free PCI slots, 8 ram slots). Processor is now upgraded to a G3. One PCI slot now has an ATA133 controller, one has a Firewire/USB card and one is still free (maybe I'll drop a Radeon in that one). RAM slots are now full, with 1GB installed.
-- "At Microsoft, quality is job 1.1" -- PC Magazine, Nov. 1994
Actually you are incorrect in this statement.
It was stated in the very first post that "Back in 2004, Microsoft announced that Longhorn would automatically detect a computer's graphics capability [com.com] and show one of three GUIs: Aero, Aero Glass (the really high-end interface) or a classic Win2K-style interface."
One cannot assume that 'very few Vista users' will see the Win2K interface. Hell I'm on a WinXP computer right now and turn on the Win2K interface cause WinXP is gaudy. I fear the WinVista might be the same but then again...who is going to be using Vista???