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.
They can run the OS, just can't take advantage of Aero Glass.
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
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
all Aero Glass is mostly based on developments seen quite a while ago in OS X [apple.com].
Um... No... There is quite a level of difference between OSX's Graphics and what Vista is bringing to the table. Even Video cards that don't support Glass will be able to do amazing 3D application and animation effects that OSX STILL can't do without the application being written for OpenGL.
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.
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.
Apple seems to be the only company actually treating their computers as a high-quality appliance and not a box of cobbled parts to run Office on.
There are, and always have been highly integrated and expensive Windows-based machines with 'nice' features and extensions like you speak of. They exist in the same price tier as Apple hardware, and sell in about the same volume. But in the Windows market they are drowned out by the less expensive models that that 'the rest of us' can justify spending our money on.