windows vista launched
The problem for me with Vista, as a gamer, is the way Microsoft have gone about this release. People like myself that play the latest games on high-spec machines rely on new graphics cards and driver releases in order to keep our systems graphical capabilities up to speed. Traditionally there are two ways in which 3D graphics are rendered on computers. These are OpenGL, controlled by Silicon Graphics or DirectX, controlled by Microsoft (although they both do more than just 3D). Now, certain games run on both, but the majority will only run on DirectX (that's an oversight by game programmers in my opinion). The issue here is, Microsoft have turned around with this release of Windows Vista and said that DirectX 10 is only available for Vista, and not for Windows XP. This basically boils down to "if you want to play the latest games, you're forced to get a copy of Windows Vista". It'll be interesting to see how this pans out for Microsoft. In a way it's clever… but I hate being backed into making a decision I don't want to have to make.
On top of the whole DirectX issue, and we've known about this for a long, long time, Windows Vista no longer comes with WinFS. WinFS (Windows Filing System) was supposed to replace the ageing NTFS (the current standard within Windows XP) but was scrapped back when Windows Vista was still being referred to as Longhorn. I really, really liked the idea of WinFS, mainly because it was based on the idea of a huge relational database for storing files. Everybody who has worked with databases knows how quick they are… and can see the benefits. Abstraction, Polymorphism, Inheritance…it's like a Computer Scientists wet dream. With some good forethought and forward planning by Microsoft's GUI team, they could have made an absolutely revolutionary piece of software. I'm almost convinced that they've decided to exclude it so they can work on things like the Aero glass interface because of stupid bellends like the guy mentioned earlier, smiling away with his shitty Packard Bell laptop playing the new look Solitaire. As long as it "looks nice" most people don't give a shit how it works. There is something so frustrating about that.
So, yeah. Not too fussed about Vista at the moment — but if I want to play the new Halo (well, I know I'll want to play) or even stuff as forthcoming as the new Unreal Tournament (damn you, Epic) then I'm going to be forced into "finding" a copy. Otherwise, I'll be doing my best waiting for Windows "Vienna"
comments
We love comments at dovka. In fact, we take these comments and put them into a big stew. They're so full of internetty goodness that they keep us full up until lunchtime.
Also: — …
Fix :D
I say all of that to say this; I really think Vista has a lot of potential. The launch was really quiet but I think a lot of that has to do with the fact that Microsoft has learned the hard way that it may be best just to launch a product as best as they can and then attempt to improve it through a stringient spiral development. Case in point is the fact that there is already a service pack in development. We only heard the usual critical outlets report on this in the last few months when in reality the service pack was in development since before Microsoft met the RTM.
In general I think we're looking at an improvement on the old Windows paradigm. If they can do more to protect the kernel I'd say there'd be a marked improvement, but I'm not entirely sure that Vista is worth an upgrade today to make up for the faults of XP that can be solved with good policy and protective use. I really think if gaming is your thing Vista will probably be a needed upgrade but only in two to three years. Carmack has already said he's not jumping on the DX10 bandwagon anytime soon but that he will eventually. I suppose only time will really tell.
Also, the links we love page is not parsing…or whatever you call it…there is array stuff there…
there is much more to it that just a new GUI. There are genuine improvements with Vista (mainly with regards to security) and some other worthwhile additions. Don't misunderstand me, I'm sure that Vista is an excellent piece of software. However, the only real part of Project Longhorn that I was interested with in the beginning was WinFS. That and DX10, but they is being forced on me. As for the links section, aye. I haven't finished it yet. Hehe.
Stubby,
First of all long time no see. And I agree with you, I spent a year working with IIS, Office, Visio, MSSQL2k, At and all the other usual suspects instead of my beloved Linux and Apache. I learnt to like some aspects of Microsoft's programs - so much so that I entered a heated argument with a member from my now-defunkt rpg making website over MS Office vs. Open Office. Microsoft Service Packs get a bad rap which I think is undeserved - iterative development is important, and these days people need to be flexible. I guess that is why Agile programming methods are becoming more popular, and other software engineering paradigms like extreme programming also catching up. But with regards to Carmack and his "I'm not jumping ship", that is probably something to do with his love of OpenGL (and open source in general - i think the Doom 3 engine uses ogg, for example). I'm not especially looking forward to Quake Wars anyhow, and I'll need a DX10 card regardless since there are many more games that will end up using Direct X rendering only.
13. UPGRADES. To use upgrade software, you must first be licensed for the software that is eligiblefor the upgrade. Upon upgrade, this agreement takes the place of the agreement for the software you upgraded from. After you upgrade, you may no longer use the software you upgraded from.
Link: http://download.microsoft.com/documents/useterms/Windows%20V...
Essentially, if you upgrade to Vista from XP, you can no longer use XP….sounds like a big pile of shite.
I AM MICROSOFT.
Also, if $50,000 falls out of my pocket, it's *literally* not worth my time to turn around and pick it up.
A lot of people complain that Aero is un-needed. I disagree, I think that a large group of CONSUMER end-users want a visually appealing desktop, let's face it; you're looking at your desktop for hours a day, it should at least LOOK nice and be eye-catching. For the more performance oriented users, like us gamers (and coders, for that matter) the old Windows Classic can still be used…and I believe XP themes can be used as well. I normally sacrifice the extra CPU to use Aero anyways.
User Account Control (UAC) is a great feature, some people will jump up and point out how annoying it is when it asks about programs accessing the net, or running as background processes. I remember when I first loaded up Vista RC1, and Vista Beta…and I got really pissed with the thing ("Yes, I approve MSN to run, yes allow my winamp web-streamer to run as a background task!"), but, with the prevailance of malware and security exploits, it's NICE to be warned when something is running. Most programs can be pre-approved with the "do not ask again" checkbox anyways (there are a few exceptions, of which Microsoft doesn't really document why). Bottom-line: UAC does enhance end-user security and OVERALL control of running programs and processes. Plus, it can be disabled via Control Panel.
People are slamming Microsoft for releasing security patches already. Microsoft never claimed the OS would be free of security vulnerabilities, no one really can. Even Ubuntu and other Linux OS (as well as Mac) require security patches from time to time.
I could go on and on. But, I think that Vista does what was promised….the execution of those promises though…another story. I do agree with Jon's points about DX10, lack of WinFS