| Author |
Windows Vista ... Free? |
Ragglock
Marshal
BIOnics Industry Syndicate
Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1955
From: Denmark
|  Posted: 2006-06-09 03:08
i would not recomend this for anyone yet ....
do what i did with xp wait for vista SP2 then install it, out of the box working versions is the way to go 
either way i can stick with xp sp2 for now other reason, vista cant run on my MacBook Pro yet .
_________________
P:@12 C:$38
LOVE the smell of human flesh in the morning smells like MVictory
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2006-06-09 05:06
Vista can't duel boot with other OS's yet due to the way it works. It's plastered all over the site, hence it won't work with Mac's, and any other OS at the moment.
_________________
|
Eledore Massis [R33]
Grand Admiral
Templar Knights
Joined: May 26, 2002
Posts: 2694
From: tsohlacoLocalhost
| Posted: 2006-06-09 05:40
i have worked with almost all windows beginning at 2.1 to today.
(even tested 1.0 just for the funn.)
The thing that i find in windows history is that visual concepts and easy usability always gain.
but to lost to stability and crapability.
vista wil be the first that finaly wil gain strability but as was with the comming of xp with its wizards it almost looks imposable to understand the underlying concepts. (e.g. networking & security.)
same thing is going on with linux however, linux already had modular buildups from the beginning.
i can talk like 20 a4's about all of this but my end conclusion wil be.
vista looks nice but i hate all those jack in a box that comes with it.
_________________
DS Discordion
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2006-06-09 07:19
Large image:
http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/7131/rar2qt.jpg
http://img86.imageshack.us/img86/2488/untitled1lf.jpg
[ This Message was edited by: BackSlash *Jack* *SL3* on 2006-06-09 08:06 ]
_________________
|
Axalon
Vice Admiral
Joined: June 15, 2003
Posts: 442
From: East Windsor, NJ, USA
| Posted: 2006-06-09 13:52
Well, didn't mean to come off as an uneducated Linux fanboy (even though I like Linux), I was just pointing to alternatives. I could have just as easily cited Mac OS X's Quartz Extreme as another implementation of hardware-accelerated eyecandy.
It is built from the ground up? That would mean that you started on a blank slate, which Microsoft didn't.
Quote:
|
From Wikipedia:
Microsoft announced on August 27, 2004 that it was making significant changes. "Longhorn" development basically started afresh, building on the Windows Server 2003 codebase,and re-incorporating only the features that would be intended for an actual operating system release.
|
|
Like I said, built on Windows Server 2003. I'm not saying that its just Server 2003 with DWM glued on, but that it isn't a complete redesign of the NT kernel. The new kernel is a large update and in turn, does go up one version number (Vista is NT 6.0, while XP was 5.1, and 2000 was 5.0), but saying it's been "rewritten from the ground up" is pushing it. Vista development did restart "from the ground up", but that was simply a switch from using the XP codebase to work off of to using the Windows Server 2003 codebase.
However, Vista's successor, codename "Vienna", is supposed to be a complete rewrite, but development on it hasn't started yet.
As for the FX series, you're right on that one, so, I was wrong there.
I should have also noted that the steep requirements for Vista are mostly due to DWM (the eyecandy). With DWM turned off, it does indeed run rather snappy.
Protected mode is also a good idea, and may actually merit using IE again, seeing that with Protected mode, it is currently more secure than Firefox.
Yes, Vista is an improvement over XP. It's just a matter of deciding whether or not upgrading for those new features is worth it.
Edit: As for the whole lack of dual-boot ability, I assume this is a new thing, seeing as I was able to easily dual-boot with Vista before. I'm certain this is temporary and will eventually be fixed.
And as for the MacBook Pro issue, did you actually try it? I was pretty sure that the EFI bootloader (where it lets you choose between OS X and Windows) just chainloads NTLDR off of the MBR and NTLDR would just think its the only OS installed. I know someone did install a version of Vista on his iMac (build 5308, I believe, maybe this was before the bootloader rewrite?). I don't have a MBP, so I can't speak from experience, but that is my understanding on how it works.
[ This Message was edited by: Axalon on 2006-06-09 13:58 ]
_________________
|
BackSlash
Marshal
Galactic Navy
Joined: March 23, 2003
Posts: 11183
From: Bristol, England
| Posted: 2006-06-09 15:18
You cannot dual boot Vista beta 2 because of the way it edits the bootloader (as I found out). If you managed to get it working, then you're one freaking lucky individual.
There are a few cons to Vista that I saw, but those will probably be fixed.
#1 Whenever you run an exe file it asks you if it's safe and is allowed to run. Problem being that it doesn't SAVE the fact that you said "yes". This is probably just a glitch, and windows defender can be disabled...
#2 Drivers - but that's an obvious one, that's going to be tricky untill Vista's actual release.
#3 DarkSpace wouldn't run :'(
#4 Took a while to install, but this is probably due to my crappy UDMA133 hard drive that's beyond slow and hasn't been fully formatted in over a year.
Pro's...
Hah..
#1 Biggest improvement I saw was Windows IE 7 64bit. This baby ran like the freaking wind, and then some. I even downloaded Firefox, Avant and Opera to see which was faster. Opera was the closest to performing like IE 7 64, but it ran so quickly, and it's so much easier to use, and dare I say it... Better than Firefox. It really did just feel like a nice lite version of IE 6, with bells, whistles, and some added security and speed. Real big thumbs up to Microsoft on this gem.
#2 Drivers - WTF, yuo g0t them twic0rz backy! I know. I had an entire CDRW of 9 drivers ready to install. Came Vista, had it in and noticed that I was conected to the internet... Now, XP HATES my network card with a passion, Marvell aren't that well known, and need special drivers for it... But Vista didn't even need drivers for it. It doesn't need drivers for ANY network card. It just scans what your card can do, and writes its own driver. Not only that, but detects your routers settings, and gives you a neat little "Broadband router" button you can click on to go directly to the settings page. That I found very cool.
#3 Speed. I've said this before, OMFG it goes fast. It takes just as long as XP to boot, but once it's in.... DAAAAAAAAMN. You open the taskbar and see "59" processes. That scared me, but all of them where using no memory what so ever, and sitting in a tiny pagefile. It seems that it just keeps the EXE location in memory ready to just fire them in there when they're needed. Ran Half life 2 for two hours and went back to Vista... Well, I'm sure we've all experienced the 5 minute wait for our machines to return back to normal. Not so with Vista. I have no idea what MS did, but woosh. Woosh indeed. It does use more memory than XP, but only 100 MB from what I saw, and that went DOWN when I started to run games. Another thumbs up to MS.
#4 Rebooting. Haha, I love this. I installed the ATI drivers from CD, even though I had some MS ones installed, they weren't the latest. So anyways, I boot up the install. I was a little impatient the first time, thought it had crashed (I waited 30 seconds, didn't move, silly me). After a minute or so, the install was complete. "Driver installation succesfull". EH? WTF? LOL? Where's the reboot? What I didn't realise, was that when the screen "flickered", it was rebooting windows, NOT the hardware. Vista no longer needs a hardware reboot unless something's changed in the loadup. The drivers did prompt me to reboot, but only because of the driver interface that ATI uses, and even that was only because it added itself the startup process.
#6 Usability. I found it so, so, so easy to use. Vista explains everything. It even rates your machine. It took about 10 minutes to run on my pc, and gave me 9.5 for my CPU's -.-, but it was fancy. It took EVERYTHING into account. Even down to how many ALU's I had on my graphics card. This means that instead of "minimum system specs", windows will now have a set of ratings for each area of the machine intended for gaming. So if a game has a graphics rating of "5" and your card is a "5.9", you go get it, it'll run perfectly. Anyway, it was just real easy to use. The new startmenu took some getting use to, but that's so much easier than what we have now. I can't wait for vista to come just so I can use that baby...
#7 Info. Like I said above, there's so much information everywhere. There's even a performance monitor that monitors every aspect of your machine, right down to how the heat may be affecting your machine if it gets too hot (I got no such warning thank god!). My favourite little thing though? Has to be the new file transfer. Tells you how fast your HDD is transfering and how long it'll take, what files it's done, what file it's on, how many files are left, and how many that totals up to in size. And going back to speed for a second, it's actually TONS faster to transfer smaller files now. But yeh, kickass little changes everywhere.
#8 Pimp. Vista looks sweet. Buttons GLOW, screensaves... Dear god, I'd never thought I might actually like one, but I want one now! There's little buttons everywhere and those little widgets on the side are so kickass. <3 Aero so much.
This is only from a little mess-about spree I had with it earlier today. Will most deffinatly have another go some other time, but I'd advise all of you to just have a little go with it, and play around, see how you like it.
- Jack
_________________
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
