Vista's not perfect, though. It killed support for DirectSound3D and EAX, making games less enjoyable to play (for me, anyway). However, EAX never worked at all in Linux, so I guess I don't feel "trapped" anymore than I do with Linux. There IS still some hope for EAX. Creative has a piece of software currently in beta call Alchemy, that translates DirectSound calls to OpenAL calls. Unfortuneatly, it requires a card with native OpenAL support, so as far as Creative cards go, I don't think it runs on anything short of an X-Fi.
Of course, I STILL want to know what M$ was thinking when they decided to kill the DirectSound HAL...
How would they enforce it? If a company just puts out a binary driver, what's to stop the user from installing it? Can YOU think of a way?
Sorry, but there is just NO way Microsoft could ever enforce that policy. Stop blaming Microsoft for corporations wanting to keep their drivers secret so that their competitors don't use them to improve their OWN drivers.
Re:Does Vista have anything we need?
on
Is Vista a Trap?
·
· Score: 1
I find it odd that you're having stability problems; I'm running Vista Ultimate x64, and haven't had a bit of instability problems. If it wasn't for the fact that I can't get SLI to work on my GeForce 7950GX2 (due to the driver issues you mentioned), I wouldn't even bother to boot back into XP for gaming.
Perhaps you should RTFA before you break out your "cluestick".
Timeline:
Oct 31, 2006 - release of 4532 kernel, which is the first version
containing the bug
Nov 16, 2006 - proof of concept completed; unsigned code running in
hypervisor context
Nov 30, 2006 - release of 4548 kernel, bug still not fixed
Dec 15, 2006 - first attempt to contact vendor to report bug
Dec 30, 2006 - public demonstration
Jan 03, 2007 - vendor contact established, full details disclosed
Jan 09, 2007 - vendor releases patch
Feb 28, 2007 - full public release
Patch Development Time (In Days): 6
It only gives you that message because you're already connected to Live and it detects a patch. If you weren't online, it wouldn't give you that message.
No, there's still a BSoD there; you can set it to NOT reboot automatically if you want, and sometimes you can see the BSoD for a split second before the reboot. But the BSoD is still there.
Windows programs don't NEED installers. Just put the executable on the system and most programs will work; sometimes you'll need to register some files, which CAN be done from a command prompt if you know what you're doing. Installers are just an easy way for a developer to make sure that a clueless user can get their program up and running easily.
As far as why Windows has a registry to begin with, it was created so that there wouldn't be config files in a thousand different locations. Sure, it's easy to change a setting under Linux, but only AFTER you know which of the gajillion different files in it's gajillion different locations you need to edit. No, the registry isn't the most elegant solutions, but YES, it does serve a purpose.
Hmm... I changed my desktop background yesterday... and I typed this up in Notepad before copy & pasting it into Firefox... And I haven't seen a UAC prompt in a week...
I hereby call bullshit on your entire post, have a nice day.
Other than installers, the only programs that I have to run as admin are games that use Punkbuster, which needs the rights to sniff out cheating apps. Other than those, I've never had to give anything root access.
With UAC on, the only difference between an admin account and a limited user account is that Windows doesn't ask for a user name and password when you need to use admin rights; it just asks you to OK it. Unless you OK admin rights to an app, you're still running with limited user rights.
If someone figures out an exploit to make that "OK" automatically, yes, running as admin will be significantly less secure. Until someone figures that out, though, running admin with UAC on is just as secure as running as a limited user.
And as far as users finding UAC "annoying", riddle me this: how is any more annoying than Linux? Linux will do the SAME DAMN THING as Vista's UAC. It'll make the SAME prompts when trying something that requires admin rights as a limited user. The only difference is that Vista gives you the prompts while running as root, too. You can't blame M$ if stupid users disable security features they find "annoying" while praising Linux for doing the same thing.
That's funny, because when I read this the first thing that crossed my mind was, "I wonder if they're going to hold a press conference on an aircraft carrier..."
FYI, it's not "Vista's" Image Constraint Token. It's AACS's. Microsoft was forced to implement it, otherwise you'd never be able to play a Blu-ray or HD-DVD disc on a Windows PC, ever.
Incorrect. If the disc uses the ICT, it doesn't shut the analog connections down, it just downscales the image to 960x540, little better than standard definition, before playing it.
And yet, if they DO use 100% CPU time, GPU time, and memory, then that means the game is bottlenecked on something and frame rates will suffer, so the game will never live up to it's full potential...
Guess that means it's impossible for a game to "live up to it's full potential"...
The point of hibernation is that it doesn't matter how many programs are running. It'll always write the same size file when hibernating, so it'll always read the same size of file coming back up. The number of applications running is largely inconsequential.
Of course, it should be noted that there IS a way to have Windows leave the hibernation file alone unless you tell it to hibernate again; that is, a hibernate once, resume many kind of situation. It's a trick often used when building a car PC. You get the system to the point where you'd want the system to start from, then tell it to hibernate. From then on, it'll resume from that spot. If you can get your system to work properly with hibernation, it's just about as fast as you'll ever get it to boot.
if any big brother organization wanted to track you they could triangulate your cell phone signal, use credit card records...
Credit card records can only show that you've been in a specific store, but not you precise location; you could leave the store and they'd have no idea where you are until you made another purchase. On the other hand, most cell phones have GPS capabilities for 911 purposes, which could very easily be used to track on individual...
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, I STILL want to know what M$ was thinking when they decided to kill the DirectSound HAL...
How would they enforce it? If a company just puts out a binary driver, what's to stop the user from installing it? Can YOU think of a way?
Sorry, but there is just NO way Microsoft could ever enforce that policy. Stop blaming Microsoft for corporations wanting to keep their drivers secret so that their competitors don't use them to improve their OWN drivers.
I find it odd that you're having stability problems; I'm running Vista Ultimate x64, and haven't had a bit of instability problems. If it wasn't for the fact that I can't get SLI to work on my GeForce 7950GX2 (due to the driver issues you mentioned), I wouldn't even bother to boot back into XP for gaming.
Here, let me see that stick...
It only gives you that message because you're already connected to Live and it detects a patch. If you weren't online, it wouldn't give you that message.
No, there's still a BSoD there; you can set it to NOT reboot automatically if you want, and sometimes you can see the BSoD for a split second before the reboot. But the BSoD is still there.
UAC prompts are NOT that common, and UAC prompts when copy and pasting is a myth. Please, let it die.
Windows programs don't NEED installers. Just put the executable on the system and most programs will work; sometimes you'll need to register some files, which CAN be done from a command prompt if you know what you're doing. Installers are just an easy way for a developer to make sure that a clueless user can get their program up and running easily.
As far as why Windows has a registry to begin with, it was created so that there wouldn't be config files in a thousand different locations. Sure, it's easy to change a setting under Linux, but only AFTER you know which of the gajillion different files in it's gajillion different locations you need to edit. No, the registry isn't the most elegant solutions, but YES, it does serve a purpose.
Hmm... I changed my desktop background yesterday... and I typed this up in Notepad before copy & pasting it into Firefox... And I haven't seen a UAC prompt in a week...
I hereby call bullshit on your entire post, have a nice day.
Word.
Other than installers, the only programs that I have to run as admin are games that use Punkbuster, which needs the rights to sniff out cheating apps. Other than those, I've never had to give anything root access.
I know, that's a dim view of humanity, but frankly, when I look at the world, that's what I see.
With UAC on, the only difference between an admin account and a limited user account is that Windows doesn't ask for a user name and password when you need to use admin rights; it just asks you to OK it. Unless you OK admin rights to an app, you're still running with limited user rights.
If someone figures out an exploit to make that "OK" automatically, yes, running as admin will be significantly less secure. Until someone figures that out, though, running admin with UAC on is just as secure as running as a limited user.
And as far as users finding UAC "annoying", riddle me this: how is any more annoying than Linux? Linux will do the SAME DAMN THING as Vista's UAC. It'll make the SAME prompts when trying something that requires admin rights as a limited user. The only difference is that Vista gives you the prompts while running as root, too. You can't blame M$ if stupid users disable security features they find "annoying" while praising Linux for doing the same thing.
I think this image says it all...
That's funny, because when I read this the first thing that crossed my mind was, "I wonder if they're going to hold a press conference on an aircraft carrier..."
AOL is a crime against the Internet.
And believe that Mr. Thompson has purty lips...
But for the record, there were ALWAYS legit uses for BitTorrent. It's just that they're legitimate POPULAR uses now.
FYI, it's not "Vista's" Image Constraint Token. It's AACS's. Microsoft was forced to implement it, otherwise you'd never be able to play a Blu-ray or HD-DVD disc on a Windows PC, ever.
Incorrect. If the disc uses the ICT, it doesn't shut the analog connections down, it just downscales the image to 960x540, little better than standard definition, before playing it.
It must be nice to be able to intimidate the FSM into doing your bidding...
And yet, if they DO use 100% CPU time, GPU time, and memory, then that means the game is bottlenecked on something and frame rates will suffer, so the game will never live up to it's full potential...
Guess that means it's impossible for a game to "live up to it's full potential"...
Of course, it should be noted that there IS a way to have Windows leave the hibernation file alone unless you tell it to hibernate again; that is, a hibernate once, resume many kind of situation. It's a trick often used when building a car PC. You get the system to the point where you'd want the system to start from, then tell it to hibernate. From then on, it'll resume from that spot. If you can get your system to work properly with hibernation, it's just about as fast as you'll ever get it to boot.
I'm sure Spider Man is standing by to lend his expert knowledge in to field of webology.
"Back to reality" implies that he's been there in the past.