http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2007/tc20070315_101834.htm?sub=techmaven
I can deal with 'dangerous', but not 'slow'......
I can deal with 'dangerous', but not 'slow'......
Jumblemo said:http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2007/tc20070315_101834.htm?sub=techmaven
I can deal with 'dangerous', but not 'slow'......
MadMatty said:vista is slow on anything other then the latest and greatest 64 bit based systems.
Did you actually read the article, or did you just stop at the title?Jumblemo said:http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/mar2007/tc20070315_101834.htm?sub=techmaven
I can deal with 'dangerous', but not 'slow'......
jeffa123 said:Snip
You're not.scratch said:I'm sure I'm not the only one who skipped straight past your postg because even just looking at it burnt my eyes!![]()
scratch said:Have you ever heard of paragraphs?!
I'm sure I'm not the only one who skipped straight past your postg because even just looking at it burnt my eyes!![]()
Had to be done.jeffa123 said:The only problem we have between the XP and Vista O/S is that we have had 4 years of operating experience with XP... And hacking it to pieces! means that speeding up and slimming down XP can be done very easily with our current end user experience.
Whereas Vista has entered a new almost server end system with all the bells and whistles of XP and some even of OS X along with a new DirectX completely rewritten and remapped with Open AL as A Sound and Video I/O which will take software houses months to get around.
Gone is Direct Sound and Direct Video which were the foundation of DirectX up to and including DirectX9.0C.
With DirectX 10 We have a multi system which can be mapped in many directions including multichannel sound, Imagine instead of 7.1 sound, A multilayered sound system which can give you 256 layers of sound. Just as you would lay down a track in a sound studio for real. No more improvised sound overlay software. All you will require is the Hardware to support it.
For a sound entheusiast this is what they dream of. For Video we have (when implemented) full Hi-definition support and better overlay and texture handling. ( Hardware must be for DX10 )
This is all better implemented from a 64 bit Version of the O/S because of Memory mapping and process handling. Admittedly you can get the 64 bit version of XP but it doesn't support DX 10 and Open AL. So the future looks better for Vista than for XP. But this all takes time to implement. It wasn't so long ago I was Chugging along on an ISDN line then came ADSL which when first introduced wasn't an Always on connection. In 5 years it has progressed to 16mb from 256K when I first had it installed.
Progress is a funny thing. It is fully criticised and taken to pieces but unjustified because the people criticising it sometimes just haven't taken into account how old their setup is if it is to make it in todays marketplace.
I was running Ultimate on a 3 ghz P4 with 6800 Ultra and 2 GB of DDR Ram the other day and it still gave me a good setup compared to XP. Don't go round blowing things out of proportion because Vista didn't work for you.
I'll bet you will be one of the first ones back piping up how good it is if you had an up to date rig.
If you can't move with the times don't criticise someone who is. Stay with XP if that pleaes you and you perhaps like to sit around running software and hardware in an old environment, not wanting to get the full potential out of your system.
I hope I don't hear more threads like this FLAME thrower!