Slashdot Mirror
Vista to be Downloadable (Legally)
ubermiester writes "InfoWorld reports that Windows Vista will be available for legal download as of January 30th — the same day it will be available in retail stores. MS-NBC Online notes that, 'a relatively low number of computer users are likely to get Vista by downloading it from the Internet, but the mere availability indicates that Microsoft is fiddling with distribution methods for the extremely profitable franchise at the core of its business.' It will be available via the MS Marketplace site in conjunction with a Circuit City offering. Additionally, users who decide to 'upgrade' to a more expensive version of the OS can simply activate the features they want by unlocking them via online activation."
Next you'll be telling me you can buy car stereos from a shop, in a box and everything!
Http://www.mininova.org
Http://www.packetnews.com
A relatively low number of computer users are likely to get Vista by downloading it from the Internet.
They're obviously unfamiliar with the concept of Bittorrent.
Too late to be known as Bush the First, he's sure to be known as Bush the Worst.
Selling downloadable software is not a new thing, even for Microsoft. It would be news if they didn't offer a downloadable version.
you could just activate the individual features you are interested in, rather than have to buy say vista ultimate just to get one feature you need that happens only to be in ultimate.
You know what that means?
Paired with the cracked activation server(s), January 31st you will be able to buy the most basic version and almost instantly be able to upgrade to the 'ultimate' for free.
I'll go ahead and say 'I told you so' now, because ms's track record with security has, and always will be subpar at best.
The download manager redownloads those parts that have CRC failure.
...a relatively low number of computer users are likely to get Vista by downloading it from the Internet...
:)
I would say that is accurate. If you're smart enough to be able to download Vista you can download your favorite Linux distro instead with less effort. It also stands a good chance of working with your hardware, unlike Vista.
As much as some can hate Microsoft, this is good and others should follow. At least good for the environment, less hardware, less energy used for shipping. Of course, the ability to burn an Install and Crash/Recover DVD is essential. It even allows reaching the customers faster. I guess it would also be appropriate to continue shipping physical copies for those with limited Internet access and/or want the user manual. (I don't think this will significantly impact piracy. Piracy will occur anyway.)
Animoog.org
I can just see the windows update icon popping up every few days on my windows XP machine.
The following updates are available:
[ ] Windows Vista
Please click the upgrade button to download and have your credit card ready.
I got nothin'
Yeah but this time (unlike buying from a 3rd party retailer), MS will have your credit card details on file, and would be much easier to verify against, than if you lost your licence details after any other kind of purchase.
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
Linux, take that!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Otherwise, I assume this is just an MS attempt to cut down the (minimal) costs they spend on the useless mini-manual and DVD in an envelope packaging.
You buy SuSE, you get 4 manuals that describe, in detail, every function of the system, from installing to CD burning to firewall configuration to scanning/printing.
You buy Windows? You get a 12 page manual that decsribed the on button, and how to use a Mouse. Enjoy!
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Give this a read before buying Fista:
http://seclists.org/isn/2006/Dec/0107.html
In order to download vista please authenticate via "genuine advantage 2007" that only runs on vista.
Okay so I don't imagine myself participating as a consumer, I have to admit that if they play this right, they will be able to sell minimalistic versions of their OS (or pass them out in magazines and newspapers) just to get things started. Then, if people want more functionality, say to burn a CD/DVD or whatever, they pay for it incrementally. It would make the OS feel more affordable. I can imagine many people going for this.
People will need to burn DVD's themselves, and they probably won't be as good at it as a professional orginization designed to print DVDs.
That means more mistakes.
That means more waste
That means LESS good for the enviroment.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I'm just waiting for Windows Vista to appear on Valve's Steam service.
I don't see what the big deal is, I've been downloading stuff "legally" for years...
Carry on.
Microsoft would probably buy the USS Iowa, refit it, and declare war on Sealand.
Just bs=ceause yoyu have a liscense, doesn't mean it's legal to get them from an illegal source.
Also, the liscense doesn't give you permission to get a copy whenever you need one, only a lisence to use the EXACT disk you purchased.
So no, what you are doing is not legal.
Not that I care wehere you get you windoze, but what you are saying is right up there with the 'The police must identify themselves if you ask.' idiocy that circulates.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"... windoze ..."
Could this get any older?
Regardless, it's where I stop reading.
I am Homer of Borg. Resistance is Fut.. Mmmmmmmm, Donuts!
Thats a surprise. I've been downloading Linux/Solaris/Unix for how long now?
Yeah you can add the features you want online, but at what cost? Will it be like the $2.99 songs/ringtones for phones, nickel & diming us for each overpriced one?
Good point. Why would Microsoft bother to verify that your current copy of Vista is good? It would be more profitable for MS to just charge your credit card again. This will be a big benefit to customers because MS will make more money that way. It will all be made clearer in the EULA /sarcasm
Through MSDN. You download the ISO and they give you a product key. Will the new download service work the same way?
The bigger news is that Microsoft is also selling Office this way. I know I can't download Word/PowerPoint/Excel through MSDNAA, and I also believe that you can't download it from regular MSDN.
That's probably for the best. He said some really nasty things about your mother after that word.
I wonder if this is a violation of Sarbanes-Oxley Act like Apple says here ..
/ 2127204
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/16
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
I'm never letting this filth touch my hardware but I can use it for testing under KVM/QEMU, how does it perform?
Microsoft has been doing download distribution of VISTA along with license keys throughout the beta program, I would imagine that the system they will be similar. The activation key is created by a server at Microsoft and it's basically the same thing you'd get on the outside of shrink wrapped box. If I forgot the key I can go back to my Microsoft account and retrieve it, or I can keep a copy on a burned CD or whatever.
As for corrupted downloads, in the process of the Vista beta I downloaded probably 10-15 different copies of the DVD ISO as I progressed through various builds and never had a single corrupted ISO, so I don't see that being a problem. If it had been corrupt I would simply have gone back and re-downloaded. I don't see any reason why the new system would not work the same way since there is no danger from a user downloading multiple copies of the ISO.
"The company plans to offer Windows and Office for sale on the Web using technology called digital locker, which can safely store the alphanumeric license "keys" that provide customers with rights to use its products, and resume interrupted downloads."
Sounds to me like they'll just give you a normal product key to print out.
the sad part about it is people actually pay and to get it up their own ass.
I wonder how many Microsoft Points that will cost.
ok...
what about vizta ?
Â_Â
Fine by me, will just get the license key and issue a chargeback on the card :-)
(joking of cause, I'll not be buying software)
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
"MS-NBC Online notes that, 'a relatively low number of computer users are likely to get Vista by downloading it from the Internet, but the mere availability indicates that Microsoft is fiddling with distribution methods for the extremely profitable franchise at the core of its business.' "
The keyword here should be "legally".
I downloaded it from the internet!
The activation server only works for the business edition.
Agreed. It's right up there with the use of "M$".
I guess most people haven't heard of msdn, where literally every microsoft product ever is available in downloadable form.
Besides, it's obvious now that vista is out that nobody cares.
Various reason to explain the discrepencies :
- Poorly designed/optimized code will load all constants ('imediates' in machine code nomenclature) from 64 bits representations rather than 32 bits representations. In other words : all constants eats twice as much space as before.
- Prefixes : On 32-bits processors, you need to use an opcode prefix to specify you work on 16bits instead of 32bits. In 64-bits machine code you have an aditionnal prefix to specify 32bits instead of 64bits data width. In other words, you may need to add more prefixes to have the code work as intended.
- x64 architecture is more recent than x86 (although very similare not like IA64), and microsoft's compiler maybe less powerful at optimizing and/or compacting machine code for x64 than code for x86 (and Microsoft aren't bad at x86 optimization for what I've heard, mainly becuse they only have 1 main target to focus on)
- Some advanced functions are only available in 64-bits edition. (The kernel protecting functions that antivirus vendors have complained about is one example).
Note that : on most Linux distribution, the 32bits packages almost uses as much space as the 64bits packages. Therefore it is more a problem of Microsoft not being able to make a smaller install source for 64 bits, rather than inherent to the x64 architecture.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
I think you're getting confused with the idea of software that comes in two flavors of copy protection, either physical disc-based or online-activation based, where traditionally the former is the lesser of two evils.
But as of Windows XP, Windows already uses online internet activation, regardless of where the bits to install come from. So it doesn't make any difference whether you get it over the internet or get it off a disc. Either way, you enter the product key and the OS contacts Microsoft with a hash of representing your hardware and checks to see how that product key has been used before, with some unspecified limit of installs--per-time-unit before they want you to call on the phone and discuss whether or not you're really moving your copy instead of installing it on 20 PCs or whatever.
Additionally, users who decide to 'upgrade' to a more expensive version of the OS can simply activate the features they want by unlocking them via online activation.
Just a clarification, but does this mean Microsoft may be steering the Windows operating system towards being a kind of microtransactions-based product where you purchase a core OS and can then keep tacking on cool plugins features at a premium like Hi-Def content, codecs, themes, and utilities; or is it more like Apple with respect to MPEG-2 decoding in QuickTime, QuickTime Pro, and now 802.11n?
It seems as though the features will be included, but not activated... How long until a patch of some sort opens up that functionality?
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
I called M$ about this one some years ago. They told me there is no problem to copy the windows CD, and use the same install CD on every computer I own if I have a valid license for each computer (i.e. different serial number ) In my case, they were even happy if I copy a friend Windows XP SP2, because I only had the Windows XP normal.
I also had access to legit windows license available only online. You had no choice but to download the ISO or to use a friend CD. ( for info, that was the Microsoft program for student in europe: tons of software with proper license for not much $)
I'm not saying that Microsoft is fair and logical: for example you could not upgrade from Windows Me Spanish -> XP English. Also there was no way to "upgrade" XP Spanish to XP English without buying a new *full* version english.
But after you paid your 'tax' they used to leave you alone ( they didn't even bother protecting their CD against copy )
Off course now with Genuine Advantage, that may be different ( but no more my concern )
Yeah! It would fire chair-torpedoes and be manned by screaming, sweaty orangutans.
Failing that, they could just crash into it.
If I purchase it online, will the pricing only reflect Online Marketing costs, Online Packaging costs, Online Distribution costs, and the same development costs as are associated with the physical product? Or will it be more like traditional vendors where we are in effect paying the whole amount, and therefor paying for part of the physical product?
I highly doubt Microsoft will take into account activity based costing in respect to the product pricing. Especially since it would benefit them to charge the same amount or close to it, and improve the overall profitability of the physical product.
This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
1) Download Vista thru online purchase. 2) Reboot after install completes. 3) Cry like a baby when it bluescreens and you don't have anything to boot from.
Seriously now folks, you don't really think you will be able to download a dvd iso and actually see the key do you. If Anything, even now you are lucky if as a home consumer you have a bootable install cd.
With the trusted computing chip that many system's currently have the MS can send the key straight to the chip, the download mechanism will patch the install on the fly to lock it to your motherboard serial or hardware hash + the key in stored in the chip and MS know longer has to worry about their license being "violated" cause you wanted to move to a newer system!
So, when the tech comes to help you recover your system, the copy they bring won't work for more then a few days unless you buy a new "activation", Bill Gates laugh's all the way to the bank!.
Seriously I've seen it sooo many times, the customer has a valid license, "sticker on machine", or pre those days a Brand Name system with a "Made for Windows 98/2000 sticker, customer has the Book with the License Key sticker", but they had to buy another one because they (or you the hapless tech) can't find the right "flavor" install media.
Simply totally ridiculous MS has created their own little hell that pops up and bites you in the ass just when you think you are done, this is the last reboot and you'll have a happy customer.
because i've been able to do it for YEARS using bsd, and i suspect linux as well?
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
How long will it take to hack this so-called "digital locker"?
\
Somewhat on topic, apologies to be asking questions rather than spouting opinion :-)
0 7/01-17ConsumerOptionsPR.mspx
/sigh/
Re: the "Anytime upgrade" pricing schemes revealed here http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2007/jan
"The manufacturer's suggested retail prices to upgrade to more premium editions of Windows Vista are as follows: Home Basic to Home Premium $79, Home Basic to Ultimate $199, Home Premium to Ultimate $159 and Business to Ultimate $139."
I have, let's say a tricksy way of legally obtaining Vista Home Premium OEM upgrade editions (incl cd key), now I'm planning to sell about 10->20 of these and keep two of them for myself.
What I want to know, or do is basically have these 2 vista copies and their respective CD keys and somehow, sadly buy a copy of Vista Ultimate using the overpriced plan above (fortunately I will have money from selling these other copies)
What I do NOT want to do is be installing home premium and "upgrading" it to Ultimate.
I don't want to have to fiddle around and be for example required to provide a home premium CD key, an XP CD key or an actual physical XP CD itself.
The ultimate goal of all this is that I simply want "the best" version of Vista and a full version, I want it hassle free / trouble free and I want to be able to confidently run it without fear of WGA 2.0 or any other kind of anti-piracy, hassle the user, shutdown the system running - I just want it to work!
To give part of my mystery away, let's just say that I'll be getting these copies in the HP Vista upgrade plan from some workstations that have been obtained and only run XP. (please don't respond to me on the ethical issues of it all)
A lot of us here likely have a dodgy copy of XP and got sick of MS's anti-piracy counter measures like SP1 revoking the original pirated corp CD key, SP2 doing the same! and finally WGA - overall keeping XP trouble free and pirated was frustrating and annoying.
(I actually DO have a legitimate key on the bottom of my laptop but Dell didn't ship me a flipping install CD! So I installed the corp edition but my darn retail CD key doesn't work, so I'm effectively an "unwilling pirate")
Now after having typed all that I do want to stress a few things to the slashdot crowd before the flames or jokes come in!
*Firstly, I don't WANT Vista infact I don't intend to install it until I abso-freaking-loutely have to! but when I do, hassle free, best version - up and running would be nice.
*Secondly, yes I know Microsoft is evil, infact I agree and if I can avoid that install I will wait as long as I can - but knowing I'm doing the right thing by them and that I really do have a receipt for my upgrade to Premium and a REAL CD key gives me some leverage over the phone if the system ever does screw up.
*Thirdly, Ubuntu does kick ass and again as per the 2 above, I'll stick with it if I can but having Vista there "incase" (I am a gamer) is handy.
*Finally, the machines I'm obtaining the CD key from (or COA rather) to upgrade to Vista, really honest to god will never ever be required to run Vista EVER.
You guys know how draconian Microsofts licensing schemes are - the fact of the matter is a large corporation has purchased these machines and said large corporation has it's own corp CD key for XP - if and when they go to Vista, the CD key that will be used will again be a high end volume corp CD key - I'm just liberating the CD keys that we were FORCED to buy in the hardware, think of me as a freedom fighter.
I look forward to any comments, anything along the lines of "it shouldn't have to be this way" I certainly won't disagree with!
Finally finally btw, anyone else planning to do something similar?
It's not like linux distro's haven't been doing the same thing for ages. The fact is the only difference between windows basic and windows ultimate DVD is the license keys.
MSFt has stated all along if you wanted to upgrade from basic to ultimate, all you have to do is visit a website to get a new key, enter that and the software will be enabled. So are people just finally starting to understand what MSFT told them was going to happen six months ago? heck i will not ever run vista, just like I have never run XP( i tried and failed a couple of times) Vista Ultimate doesn't have a single new feature for me. I have been doing everything it can do far easier, on lower hardware, and at a much lower price than $400.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Ever heard of Bittorrent?
;-)
"Women are just like ninjas; They lie even when it is more convenient to tell the truth." ~ Unknown
oops I hit submit instead of preview.
Vista doesn't have anything useful for me. I have no compelling reason to pay for it, yet even I understood what MSFt was planning for distributing Vista. it's both smart and stupid. Smart as it saves money and a lot of secondary headaches, stupid as they are going to be going through a lot of license keys and will have to be revoking them in case of crackers.
To put it simply no Internet no Vista for you. (minus the 30 day grace period)
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Going back a few years, NT 3.1 was available in Server and Workstation versions. However, "Server" required that you already purchased Workstation, as inside the box was a brief manual and a 3.5" floppy disk. You converted WS to Server by applying the software on the disk.
In other words, all the software was installed on one version, but some extra bits were only enabled by coughing up extra money to unlock them.
"She's furniture with a pulse"
Sounds good, until that one feature you want requires twelve other features to be installed. It'd be just like yum, except instead of asking if it's ok to download 350MB, it asks if it's ok to charge you $350. Sign me up!
You guys are behind, I've been downloading since Windows 95 by a variety of methods:
IRC, ftp, http, and torrents.
It's a cookbook!
http://www.dieblinkenlights.com
This other OS has been available for download at pcbsd.org for a while now and works great. Oh yeah, IT IS COMPLETELY FREE. So... why should I care that you can pay, then download a copy of Windows Vista? If you are a member of the MSDN network fine, but I'm not, and I have no intention of ever using Windows again unless I am somehow forced to by the US government. If that were to happen, then I would probably commit suicide after screaming: "LIVE FREE OR DIE!"
Is this a favor or a threat?
...or maybe just us some of his SS-18s, with the warheads refitted.
Problem solved!
"She's furniture with a pulse"
Hey, nice username, x2A is 42 in hexadecimal, it is also my blog's url: http://x2a.org/, nice to see it in the wild. Cheers.
Freedom is strength, Ignorance is peace, War is slavery.
The early adopters are generally the tech savvy ones, and in the past (think Win95 and XP launches) they are the ones who have been queueing up at midnight to buy the copies on the launch day.
This then provides extra free publicity, as the queue story inevitably gets picked up by the TV news media, which in turn will drive extra sales, as "Joe Average" sees that and thinks "Must be good, if people are prepared to wait up until midnight for it".
However, this time round, the tech savvy early adopters will be sitting at home waiting to download it. So no midnight queues. No TV news coverage. No "Joe Average" sales (at least not in the first couple of weeks)
"She's furniture with a pulse"
Whether it's for general use, or just to have a look, who wants a locked-down, glorified media OS on their machine? I sure don't.
We ordered a few copies of Vista at work, and the ONLY way to get it was via a download
Been there, done that. I had the choice of downloading either the x86 or the x64 version. As I don't have a 64-bit processor that cut down on my choices.
Of course this was through my MSDN subscription and the DVDs turned up a couple of weeks later, anyway...
Consultancy: If you're not part of the solution, there's money to be made in prolonging the problem
Yet ANOTHER way to copy Linux!
Not strictly true, the license gives you rights to use the software according to the terms of the license agreement., I've bought "license packs" from MS that were just a few sheets of paper with some stuff printed on them, it was assumed that I already had the install media.
Tech Data and other vendors sell "install media only" MS disks for everything from XP to Exchange Server that don't include the license (or install key) for use.
I've also bought licenses from MS for a new product and used them to legitimize the install of older versions of the same product from older media, this was expressly allowed by the license terms.
Have you ever really read one?
Generally IMHO the OEM License anly allows use of the product on the original hardware, this is partly the justification for the OEM version being cheeper then the full version which allows for moving to different hardware,
No, its not microtransactions. There are six tiers of Vista, similar to the tiering you already see in most name MS products: Home User, Professional, Business, yadda yadda. Each comes with a different feature set and price point. If you want a feature that your version doesn't support (example: you're Home User Basic but you really want the Aero look&feel), you say "Alright, upgrade me to Home Premium!" and pay $LOTS rather than saying "Alright, unlock Aero!" and pay $LITTLE.
0 6/02-26WinVistaProductsPR.mspx They probably have a product chart somewhere.
You can see the general sketch of the system here: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/feb
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
i already have it thanks
Ya can hardly call it "locked down" if your first act with it is to bypass paying for it by downloading a cracked version *lol* come on!!!
The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
If I was buying Vista, I'd want to know that I could sell or transfer the license just as easily with a downloaded version as a boxed copy. Say 6 months later I belatedly see the light, decide to upgrade my machine to Ubuntu and sell my Vista license on eBay. I imagine that it'll be a lot harder to convince people it's genuine without a box, a physical DVD and a holographic sticker. Plus, I have to pay for a blank DVD to burn the download on.
Regardless of the software you're buying that's a terrible value proposition. It doesn't make sense to me unless they're offering a substantial discount.
On the other hand, I think this will actually be a good thing in countries like the UK where retail prices never reflect a fair currency conversion. (You poor Poms really do get screwed) A guess a lot of that mark up is tax, which for the moment most governments don't seen to have caught onto yet...
One of these days I'm moving to Theory - everything works there
And then, if a download did happen to be corrupt, one would assume that Microsoft would let you download the software as many times as you want (I mean, you paid for it, right??) I've seen way too many companies put a limit on the number of times a piece of software may be downloaded and it's just an absurd business model. Bandwidth isn't *that* expensive.
This scheme sounds like it will make it easy for crackers to upgrade their systems without paying or even downloading anything. Interesting.
how is this moderated to insightful and not troll?
Stop posting FUD. They distributed it as an ISO to all of their volume customers and have been to beta customers since it went into beta.
How would you be able to do a clean install if they didn't give you an ISOs?
I suspect because what I said has some truth to it - it IS a locked-down os - with all the new DRM, it is entirely Microsoft's intent. It *was* done to appease the owners of the various content factories. Since when do two unfortunate facts constitute a troll?
You could just get a Mac.
Oh wait.
Perl, n. A language spoken by Eskimos.
It's not FUD. He's right about a hell of a lot of it. Especially the last part, I have about a dozen Windows machines at home and have had to play that stupid "right media" game...God forbid a valid key just damned activate what you loaded, but there's a difference between an upgrade, a full version, an enterprise version, and who knows what other versions there are.
This is definitely a good idea. No one needs a retail box for software.
I can't remember a downable OS from MS or Apple, ever.
That's just because you're not thinking back far enough.
I fondly remember downloading System 6 for my Apple IIgs from apple.com -- for free. I may have gotten System 5 that way, too (it was a long time ago). The computer came with System 4, which was handy because Paintworks Gold wouldn't start on 5 or 6 (until we discovered the bytes to change in a hex editor).
I also remember when it became apparent the Apple II line was truly dead, and then discovering that Apple had the *gall* to charge customers who'd bought their hardware for something as stupid as the bits to an OS upgrade.
When I went off to college a couple years later, I ended up buying a PC to install Linux on. Even though Linux was young (Linux 1.0 was just out!), I was a poor college student, and even though the UI sucked ass (and in some ways still does), it felt right to download the OS on 3.5" floppies and feed them into the installer, just as I had on my Apple IIgs a few years before. I wasn't some rich guy who could blow $100 a year on software upgrades, nor was I going to be a schmuck running an old version of the OS.
I've bought 2 Macs since then (a G4 with 9/10.2, and a Core Duo with 10.4), because they're still nice machines, but I never bother to upgrade the OS, because I always end up gravitating back to Linux. Apple taught me at a young age what to expect, and that's downloading the OS off the internet. All you need is an internet connection, and a can-do attitude, and you can do anything.
Microsoft engineers have to work out one minor bug in the Vista download system. The download keeps getting quarantined by user's malware scanners.
I agree, but funny how you've been labeled "Flamebait" because your opinion goes against Slashdot group-think.
From http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/docs/HOWTO/Advoca cy
It'll be available for illegal download on January 29, 2007.
http://outcampaign.org/
I've always downloaded (Legally) all the software I needed for free.
> It's a great gaming OS
Windows Vista Ultimate +3 games(well you get hearts, minesweeper and solitaire..) $450
(above does not include any hardware, add $1500 for semi-decent gaming system)
Microsoft Xbox 360 core ($299) + 3 games of your choice (~$150) $450
Nintendo Wii ($250) + 3 games of your choice ($150) $400
Sony playstation 3 basic ($499)+ 3 games of your choice ($150) $650
(add $1000 for semi-decent tv for consoles)
Truly great gaming platform, no doubt..
You could buy x360, wii and decent tv and still have some money to spare, where your vista rig doesn't even have any games yet.
There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
Will the bandwidth wasted on downloading Vista be more or less than the bandwidth of the continuous patching required to keep earlier versions of Windows almost safe?
Given that there are already exploits around, do I plan for yet again higher bandwidth for patching?
Just musing..
You're right, this seems to be an even better reason.
It'ld also explain the Windows / Linux discrepencies.
For 32bits backward compatibility, Linux distroes usually don't include a second complete 32 bits version of the full library but some kind of wrapper that help the programs access the regular libraries (somewhat reminiscent of the extenders in the old ge of 32bits-games-on-16bits-msdos)
That'll explain why Linux 64b distros are only a few MB more than 32b, whereas Vista is a whole more 50%.
Also note that, to in order to have compatibility with binary plugins, both linux distros and windows have to ship firefox and IE in 32 bits versions... (Although, for firefox on Linux, there are people trying to make 32b-plugins-to-64b-browser plugins. Using GCJ (or the future GPL Java) and Gnash is another alternative although a little bit more buggy)
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
...and you're still off by a few weeks.
There is no Total War, Civilization or SimCity 4 on consoles. Thus, consoles are worthless to me.
Sega Saturn (used, $20) + 3 games of your choice ($6.00) $26.00
Enjoy your Die Hard Arcade! I'd come over and play too, but I'm enjoying Company of Heroes and WoW too much...
OK, this sounds like a fanboy post, I'm really just trying to point out that different games appeal to different people and are worth different amounts of money.
And while I certainly wouldn't trust any of my data to Microsoft, I really don't care if they lock down my game saves. That's the only purpose of my Windows partition (when I have one). Run games. All I ever see of the system is the "games" bit of the start menu. And the installer of the latest CD/DVD I have bought.
Whether the thing underneath is XP or Vista and whether it locks down office and media files certainly isn't my problem since I would never consider putting any in there in the first place.
As another poster pointed out, Vista might eventually become required to play PC games. Whether it is a "great gaming platform" is actually completely irrelevant to me (what's a great gaming platform anyway?). I don't write the games, I just press keys and move the mouse about. As long as the stupid thing works, that's all I ask of it.
Of course, if it happens that I'll eventually *have* to upgrade to Vista, I'll get the cheapest version I can get away with that actually runs games. If it doesn't have Aero gadgets or whatever kind of TV integration I really couldn't care less. I have all the gadgets I could want and then some on my KDE desktop, and I even run Beryl every now and then when I really want to go over the top.
Yes, I *could* get some kind of console and be done with the Windows thing. But I've tried all kinds of console games through the years and I just don't like it. I tried though, I really did, but it doesn't work with me. The Wii seems to have a few new ideas though, so maybe that one will finally win me over...
In the meantime, I'll stick with the Windows games (if I can ever manage to reinstall Windows on the new motherboard).
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
You make a good point, but to insert some requisite Sony-bashing in here, the PS3 games are $70, not $50. Of course, Xbox 360 games are $60 as well, but as your entire post (and, most likely, the entire discussion) is effectively a bash on MS, I'll go easy on them.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
Cute, but I already have a Vista-capabale PC and a shelf full of games, and can get Vista Ultimate OEM with a hard drive for around £180. If I bought a console, I'd need to buy games and a TV (which believe it or not I don't currently have). Of course it depends on your definition of "decent TV", but mine starts at a cost of around £1000, given the one I used to have.
It's official. Most of you are morons.
We got Windows Vista Business available for download here at my school (INSA of Lyon, France), via the MSDNAA. Restricted to only one physical user by license, but I suspect it's not a software limitation, just as when I got Windows XP Pro from the same source and installed it for the whole family to use back at home (don't tell anyone).
This
"It's a great gaming OS"
How do you know this ? From the Betas and RC's ??!!
Doesn't it take a extended amount of time and follow through to judge performance ?
Vista still has to go through one generation of games before we judge it on anything...
OK, games advertised as coming out as DX10 only games will need it, but stop continuing the hype that this still "untested" OS is the cats meow for games...or anything else for that matter....wait a year then we'll see. I hate reviews before the end of the first act.
End of Line.
Find me a console with a good MMORPG.
There are some things a computer is just better at.
As far as I am concerned it is a great gaming OS because all the games "I" want to play run on it. It has nothing to do with whether or not a game "could" be made to run better on a different platform. It has everything to do with the games I play will probably NEVER be ported to other platforms. Therefore it is the ONLY gaming OS for me.
Saying that, I have been running Vista for over two months now (via MSDN subscription). For most of that time I have been running beta drivers for nVidia and got much lower frame rates than XP. With the official release of nVidia's drivers a week or two ago it is closer to XP performance with the games I care about, but still not quite up to par.
Vista still have issues with display drivers and sound card drivers (mainly that they aren't optimized for vista yet). Especially the X-fi Soundblaster driver for vista 32 from creative, it hogs up to 20% cpu usage just by playing music. So unless the company fixes these problems before Jan 30th, gaming experience on vista will be much worse than in XP. it reminds me the time when XP first came out, and how it sucked at gaming back then compared to windows 98, although Microsoft is trying to focus more about this issue this time around, I think we'll still see the same trend now to some degree. Check this article written just few days ago: http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/17/gameplay-on ly-gets-worse-with-vista/
People who are forced to develop for the brain-dead weirdness that is CAPI-NG and can't get copies of Longhorn server yet.
But man it sucks.
Oh, so you are saying they released EVE Online for consoles? Great news it is!
If you're going to troll, at least pick something that isn't so easily proven untrue. PS3 games are $60 just like 360 games. There isn't a single PS3 game that costs more than $60, and there are some that cost less.
You're really clutching at straws now, aren't you?
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
It doesn't apear to be MS bashing as much as the I need this computer to play games bashing. In other words he was going after the ops mentality more then microsoft. Suppose you already have the $1500 computer without an MS OS license, upgrading the OS and comming to within 30-60 dollars of an actual price of the consoles solutions he mentioned, you still don't have the games on vista for near the same pricing levels.
If you were to grab a console and 3 games, leave the $1500 computer there with a XP install to play the games not availible on the console, you still have a net gain or savings compared to buying vista alone to play some games. So even if the the actual games cost more then specified, you win by not going with vista. Now you have a console plus a computer for less then the cost of vista alone and 3 games alone. Interestingly, you can substitute some of the console games for PC games in the same situation and have games for both setups even.
No game that I'm aware of is going to be released "Vista only" in the near or short term future (within a year or so). Unless it is some microsoft promotional thing. It would be like releasing a game specific to "linux only" this early in the Vista adoption stage. And frtom my understanding, Even the oem versions won't take advantageof the full game benefits so your looking at missing out on momentum there too.
You're really clutching at straws now, aren't you?
I'm not sure what my biggest fan means above, but I imagine he things that the M$ upgrade train and Vista are going to be good for the environment. That's something I wish were true but intentional waste of computers has been very bad where they usually end up. Next you will tell me that the intentional waste of Vista will be good for the economy.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Every store I've seen selling PS3 games is charging $69.99. Maybe they're gouging locally.
How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
I imagine he things that the M$ upgrade train and Vista are going to be good for the environment
No, I think that you're so desperate to bash Microsoft that you're pulling arguments out of your arse. How exactly did your post above relate to the comment above it? Not much at all.
By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
No "Maybe" about it.
So far I've picked up two games to have fun with. The requisite copy of "Resistance: Fall of Man" for ~$60, which I'm enjoying even though I don't usually go in for FPS's. Heck, I've even jumped into on-line games (death matches and the like) for the first time (don't usually bother), and its been a blast. I also picked up copy of "Full Auto 2". Again, not a genre I usually go for, but it looked fun. Not sure, I haven't played it much. It was about $40.
On a related note, the PlayStation Network game "GearShift" looks like much more fun than "Full Auto 2" for $10. I tried the demo and loved it, I think I'm going to download the full version over the weekend.
This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.