• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

DX10 is do-able on Windows XP [INQ]

stickroad said:
But by the time Direct X 10 games become mainstream Vista would have deveveloped enough for people to feel confident in Vista and know that they can use it without any problems.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I'm no Luddite, nor am I a hater of MS. For me, an OS is just there to allow me to play games and have the odd bit fiddle on when I get bored. I'd happily run Vista now (even if just for a change of scenery), but I'm not massively wealthy and the cost to change is something that's a bit hard to bear. I don't have a DX10 card yet either so I suppose it's all a bit moot at the moment as well :)
 
Problem with vista is that it was 1 step forward and two steps backwards. No os with at least 2ghz(even single core) should be struggling to move files and showing a desktop with icons on it and make the computer slower overall then the previous os. moving windows and copy files on 1mhz machines from yesteryear wasnt exactly a struggle was it ?

its time ms started enabling the optimise function in there compilers instead of churning out a 9 gig os which is only magrginaly more functonal then the previous 1.5gig os ;) They really to to make a new os from scratch with actual goals in mind which include performance instead of just constantly patching previous versions.

still in 2 years it will be time to splash out again when Vista SE is released ;)
Now that Halo2 is out and it actually runs faster under xp, this is the game that shows its not time to downgrade to vista yet :D
 
I think some people seem to forget not everyone plays games.

Their is no one asnwer for Vista yet, cant we just leave it at that. :)
 
Last edited:
Only reason I haven't gone to Vista yet is cost. I have no quarms paying for an OS, but for the 'proper' version it's about £400. I'm not gonna fork out that when XP currently does everything I want and does it well.

If they made it £100 for the retail version I would buy it. Simple as.

This whole game of ultimate/32 bit only, 64-bit, non-aero glass version really peeves me. Apart from those suffering with XP home, no one with less cash has had to put up with an naff operating system because they couldn't afford the 'best' version.

I have considered the OEM version but will be changing my motherboard at some point before I buy Vista, so that would screw me right over and have to buy it again.

Anyway, if DX10 is possible on XP, then great... it wont stop me from buying Vista when it becomes economical to do so. I have a DX9 card but would still get Vista, mainly because it is a newer operating system, and has had less time for people to find exploits for it, not because of DX10 purely.

Once again.. if Microsoft had made the price reasonable to start with rather than stuffing the UK/Europe with the falsely inflated cost, they wouldn't have had to make DX10 a Vista only affair (although i have read a technical article explaining why it couldn't be done anyway).

Matthew
 
Every single version of vista comes in x86 and x64 versions though?
(bar starter that comes only in x86 but you can't get hold of that)
 
I referring to the cost difference if you buy the retail packs. You have to pay uber cost to get the 32-bit and 64-bit ultimate version, but less if you just get the 64-bit vanilla version. It should be all inclusive anyway.

They are treating us like companies. Consumers are MUCH more fickle than companies and tend to change hardware much more often, rather then being locked into an architecture/infrastructure model. So unless you buy the top (read: expensive) version to start with you might be stuffed, or be severely limited with your choices.

Lets be honest here... Vista Ultimate should have been what Vista vanilla should have been anyway. Ultimate should have included WinFS (and there host of touted other stuff I have long forgotten about).

If I get DX10, thrown in, cool. The only reason to REALLY gripe about XP not having DX10 is the cost to upgrade to Vista, which many find hard to justify when they won't get any extra benefit from doing so compared to XP (other than... DX10, no 2GB memory maximum as with XP etc).

Matthew
 
most of you guys spend hundreds if not thousands a year on hardware upgrades yet when it comes to few quid to replace a 6 year old operating system...... :confused:
 
marc2003 said:
most of you guys spend hundreds if not thousands a year on hardware upgrades yet when it comes to few quid to replace a 6 year old operating system...... :confused:
Click to expand...

yeah... because it's ALL about the money isn't it... who cares about functionality, features, how it affects existing games/apps etc etc... ;)
 
Originally Posted by marc2003
most of you guys spend hundreds if not thousands a year on hardware upgrades yet when it comes to few quid to replace a 6 year old operating system......
Click to expand...
Unfortunately not, have a wife that lets me know other things are more important.

Hundreds maybe... but when the cost of the OS doubles the cost of a video upgrade, you gotta wonder. Its the same reason I never bought MS office... way over the top price for software that I never actually get the full potential from.

Matthew
 
Richdog said:
yeah... because it's ALL about the money isn't it
Click to expand...

it certainly is for a lot of people in here. :)

as for your second point, i can't be bothered to discuss that. it's been done to death on these boards already. i run vista with no problems at all and so do lots of other people. admittedly the only frustration i had when making the switch was waiting for someone to hack creative's alchemy so i can use eax in games with my audigy2. but that was done ages ago so it's all good as far i am concerned.
 
lowrider007 said:
of course I spend thousands on hardware b-cos it improves the performance of my system, Vista curruntly does not, when it does I will happily purchase it.
Click to expand...
Thank you thank you thank you, a sensible comment. ;)
 
lowrider sums it up in one.

another thumbs up.

/edit

Maybe we can have a system where we can rate or give users a Thumbs up when they do a really good post. like kudos points.
 
Last edited:
Is it worth getting Vista?

iCraig said:
The conclusive answer is, we don't know.

You're best off installing it on a seperation partition and giving it a good going over. Install everything you have, test everything. Then depending on how you get along, you'll have your answer.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I wish they would release it on XP then I wouldn't have to BETA test Vista until it's fixed, I've just reverted back to XP after a few days trialling my Vista that I blew £60 on.

It's fine in the Windows environment (aside from control panel bug) but running World of Warcraft the game skips and pauses all over the place, in XP it's as smooth as butter.
 
Scougar said:
Only reason I haven't gone to Vista yet is cost. I have no quarms paying for an OS, but for the 'proper' version it's about £400. I'm not gonna fork out that when XP currently does everything I want and does it well.

If they made it £100 for the retail version I would buy it. Simple as.

This whole game of ultimate/32 bit only, 64-bit, non-aero glass version really peeves me. Apart from those suffering with XP home, no one with less cash has had to put up with an naff operating system because they couldn't afford the 'best' version.

I have considered the OEM version but will be changing my motherboard at some point before I buy Vista, so that would screw me right over and have to buy it again.

Anyway, if DX10 is possible on XP, then great... it wont stop me from buying Vista when it becomes economical to do so. I have a DX9 card but would still get Vista, mainly because it is a newer operating system, and has had less time for people to find exploits for it, not because of DX10 purely.

Once again.. if Microsoft had made the price reasonable to start with rather than stuffing the UK/Europe with the falsely inflated cost, they wouldn't have had to make DX10 a Vista only affair (although i have read a technical article explaining why it couldn't be done anyway).

Matthew
Click to expand...
the "oem" version is around £70 on this site :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom