If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Justification for DirectX 10 and Vista (was Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card)
"linux57" wrote in message ... I'm interested in some justification for getting upgrades that require this level of performance. For most applications / home PCs, nobody has shown that there is any justification for DirectX 10 or Vista. Huh? Put a naked girl in the desert and a couple guys will show up. Build a road, well many more will show up. In a while... less than year methinks all new games, programs, etc will use Vista, DX10 etc. The road has been built, just waiting for the traffic. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card ...
That answer was BS. There are lots of under $100 video cards that are
just fine for Vista, including Aero. DirectX 10 is another matter entirely; and the only people who will need or want DX10 in the near future will be hard-core gamers. Cessna 310 wrote: No One wrote: Augustus wrote: I'm not sure I agree with the need to upgrade to Vista. It doesn't fix anything that's broken. I wouldn't upgrade to Vista until SP1 and other issues have been addressed. But it doesn't hurt to get your budget card Aero capable. He may have it for 3-5 years. A trully Aero capable card is gonna cost no less than $400. I'll stick to XP, thank you. What advantage does Vista offer that's worth the cost of upgrade? And why does it require a $400 video card to run it? |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card ...
J. Clarke wrote:
Cessna 310 wrote: J. Clarke wrote: On the other hand, there's nothing in it that seems to require hardware acceleration of the new features of DirectX 10. That's a key point, but still does not get back to the basic justification for migrating to Vista. If you don't see anything in it that you need then there is no justification. If you don't want it don't get it. Asking people who have not the slightest clue what you do with your computer to give you a justification for upgrading is silly. For all we know your main use could be to run WordStar on a CP/M emulator. Not at all. The question remains as to why people are upgrading. What is their justification. Personal use is only an indicator as to whether the upgrade will make any difference. BTW, I stopped using CP/M emulation several weeks ago. But I still have a computer that will boot either CP/M and MS-DOS (NCR DecisionMate5). Depends on which 5 1/4 boot floppy is in the drive. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card ...
Cessna 310 wrote:
J. Clarke wrote: Cessna 310 wrote: J. Clarke wrote: On the other hand, there's nothing in it that seems to require hardware acceleration of the new features of DirectX 10. That's a key point, but still does not get back to the basic justification for migrating to Vista. If you don't see anything in it that you need then there is no justification. If you don't want it don't get it. Asking people who have not the slightest clue what you do with your computer to give you a justification for upgrading is silly. For all we know your main use could be to run WordStar on a CP/M emulator. Not at all. The question remains as to why people are upgrading. What is their justification. Personal use is only an indicator as to whether the upgrade will make any difference. Generally people are upgrading because they see some need to upgrade. But what one person sees as a "need" another sees as an irrelevancy. If it won't make any difference then there's no "justification" for the upgrade. BTW, I stopped using CP/M emulation several weeks ago. But I still have a computer that will boot either CP/M and MS-DOS (NCR DecisionMate5). Depends on which 5 1/4 boot floppy is in the drive. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Justification for DirectX 10 and Vista (was Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card)
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:04:54 GMT, "Slap" wrote:
"linux57" wrote in message ... I'm interested in some justification for getting upgrades that require this level of performance. For most applications / home PCs, nobody has shown that there is any justification for DirectX 10 or Vista. My personal opinion (and this is my field), there is no real justification outside of security for the home PC. Huh? Put a naked girl in the desert and a couple guys will show up. Build a road, well many more will show up. What's she look like and which desert...(coordinates will do) In a while... less than year methinks all new games, programs, etc will use Vista, DX10 etc. The road has been built, just waiting for the traffic. Although I do agree with you...mostly...:-)) "I think" (which means I really don't know for sure) that most applications will continue to run quite nicely on XP Pro and DX9. I also think *most* applications will be happy with DX 9 for some time to come. I emphasized the most as it certainly will not be all. There are many DX9 cards currently running on Vista (they reportedly sold 90 million copies the first month) and few except the diehard gamers will have the 8800 GTX and GTS cards which are the only ones at present that are DX10 compliant. So the rest including the new computers that are preloaded will still have DX-9 hardware. Justification is a relative term or at least I put it about a step above rationalization. ( usually use the rationalization to create the justification) Where one person is going to say Vista is a "must have" another may say "it'd be nice" to another who would say "I should be able to get along nicely on XP Pro and DX-9". "For me" the only real justification I can see "near term" is the added security with Vista that most users could have had with a properly configured installation of XP Pro behind a firewall. Longer term I am going to want DX10 on at least one "state-of-the-art" machine as that's what it takes to run FSX. (I hope they fix the code in that to work with multi core and share the load with the GPU) The other four machines will *probably* stay as XP Pro until what ever comes out after Vista, or will end up as LINUX machines. They also say Vista is more stable than XP but I've never had a stability problem with XP on 4 machines (recently went to 5) I do a lot of photo editing and one machine is pretty much a multimedia center. it'll be a while before either of those go Vista due to the DRM/premium content and HDCP compliant component availability. When I can play HD DVDs (which ever mode) and use my computer as a high definition equivalent of TvIO, or my 922 receiver then those machines *Might* get changed over. The only real drawback I see for the end user is DRM while I view WGA with mixed emotions as it has both its good and bad sides. OTOH if you are running XP you *WILL* be running WGA if auto updates are enabled. It's on two of the five machines and has not created any problems so far other than the one machine got confused when trying to install it and it took three tires before it'd work correctly. With the installed base of XP out there, it's likely that "for the home user" there is really very little valid justification, or gain to be had by upgrading to vista. IOW, it'd be a very rare home user that would gain anything (or see any difference other than eye candy) by upgrading. So except for a very small percent, the home users could stay with XP and never even notice there was a Vista. OTOH if it had the security most home users could still get by with 98SE. Surfing the Internet and e-mail take very little power. Word processors have become quite bloated. As I work with web pages I think they should ban Front page and Word's ability to convert a doc to HTML. Those two add new meaning to the words "bloat code". One other question comes to mind: How many of the home users have the hardware that would work with Vista without requiring some updating. Some older printers and scanners may create some problems even with the generic drivers available. I'm not so sure I can get a Vista driver for my Nikon LS5000ED scanner which is one of the higher end scanners. Particularly as there is less and less call for scanners with cameras going digital. The home user base *will* eventually migrate to Vista as they replace their old machines with new ones that come preloaded with OS and Apps which would certainly be the safest route. How fast this will happen,or how many will migrate before the next OS is out is any one's guess. There are a LOT of Win 98 and 98SE machines still out there that don't have the horsepower to run XP and Office let alone Vista or the latest version of office, and multimedia apps. OTOH The rest of us might have a *LOT* to gain by the average home user having an OS that enforces the security, that they can't seem to be bothered with at present. I would be nice to see those millions of zombies go away. Still, with the statement that the *NEXT* OS is only a couple years away (I think 09 was listed) Vista may not be much more than an interim OS between XP and what ever comes next. It is an evolutionary step that is pretty much like XP with the security (control of what the user can do) wrapped around the Kernel, plus a few extra features. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Justification for DirectX 10 and Vista (was Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card)
DRM as Micrsoft sees it? I say this because HDCP can be had on a XP system.
I have a XBox360 HD-DVD drive, CyberLink PowerDVD v6.5, and HDCP complient video card (7900GT) and monitor (Westy 37" 1080p) that works great on my MCE2005 system. ....and I'll 'upgrade' to Vista when SP-1 is released... maybe ;-) SoCalCommie "Behind every great fortune is a crime." - Honore de Balzac "Roger" wrote in message ... On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:04:54 GMT, "Slap" wrote: "linux57" wrote in message ... I'm interested in some justification for getting upgrades that require this level of performance. For most applications / home PCs, nobody has shown that there is any justification for DirectX 10 or Vista. My personal opinion (and this is my field), there is no real justification outside of security for the home PC. Huh? Put a naked girl in the desert and a couple guys will show up. Build a road, well many more will show up. What's she look like and which desert...(coordinates will do) In a while... less than year methinks all new games, programs, etc will use Vista, DX10 etc. The road has been built, just waiting for the traffic. Although I do agree with you...mostly...:-)) "I think" (which means I really don't know for sure) that most applications will continue to run quite nicely on XP Pro and DX9. I also think *most* applications will be happy with DX 9 for some time to come. I emphasized the most as it certainly will not be all. There are many DX9 cards currently running on Vista (they reportedly sold 90 million copies the first month) and few except the diehard gamers will have the 8800 GTX and GTS cards which are the only ones at present that are DX10 compliant. So the rest including the new computers that are preloaded will still have DX-9 hardware. Justification is a relative term or at least I put it about a step above rationalization. ( usually use the rationalization to create the justification) Where one person is going to say Vista is a "must have" another may say "it'd be nice" to another who would say "I should be able to get along nicely on XP Pro and DX-9". "For me" the only real justification I can see "near term" is the added security with Vista that most users could have had with a properly configured installation of XP Pro behind a firewall. Longer term I am going to want DX10 on at least one "state-of-the-art" machine as that's what it takes to run FSX. (I hope they fix the code in that to work with multi core and share the load with the GPU) The other four machines will *probably* stay as XP Pro until what ever comes out after Vista, or will end up as LINUX machines. They also say Vista is more stable than XP but I've never had a stability problem with XP on 4 machines (recently went to 5) I do a lot of photo editing and one machine is pretty much a multimedia center. it'll be a while before either of those go Vista due to the DRM/premium content and HDCP compliant component availability. When I can play HD DVDs (which ever mode) and use my computer as a high definition equivalent of TvIO, or my 922 receiver then those machines *Might* get changed over. The only real drawback I see for the end user is DRM while I view WGA with mixed emotions as it has both its good and bad sides. OTOH if you are running XP you *WILL* be running WGA if auto updates are enabled. It's on two of the five machines and has not created any problems so far other than the one machine got confused when trying to install it and it took three tires before it'd work correctly. With the installed base of XP out there, it's likely that "for the home user" there is really very little valid justification, or gain to be had by upgrading to vista. IOW, it'd be a very rare home user that would gain anything (or see any difference other than eye candy) by upgrading. So except for a very small percent, the home users could stay with XP and never even notice there was a Vista. OTOH if it had the security most home users could still get by with 98SE. Surfing the Internet and e-mail take very little power. Word processors have become quite bloated. As I work with web pages I think they should ban Front page and Word's ability to convert a doc to HTML. Those two add new meaning to the words "bloat code". One other question comes to mind: How many of the home users have the hardware that would work with Vista without requiring some updating. Some older printers and scanners may create some problems even with the generic drivers available. I'm not so sure I can get a Vista driver for my Nikon LS5000ED scanner which is one of the higher end scanners. Particularly as there is less and less call for scanners with cameras going digital. The home user base *will* eventually migrate to Vista as they replace their old machines with new ones that come preloaded with OS and Apps which would certainly be the safest route. How fast this will happen,or how many will migrate before the next OS is out is any one's guess. There are a LOT of Win 98 and 98SE machines still out there that don't have the horsepower to run XP and Office let alone Vista or the latest version of office, and multimedia apps. OTOH The rest of us might have a *LOT* to gain by the average home user having an OS that enforces the security, that they can't seem to be bothered with at present. I would be nice to see those millions of zombies go away. Still, with the statement that the *NEXT* OS is only a couple years away (I think 09 was listed) Vista may not be much more than an interim OS between XP and what ever comes next. It is an evolutionary step that is pretty much like XP with the security (control of what the user can do) wrapped around the Kernel, plus a few extra features. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Justification for DirectX 10 and Vista (was Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card)
SoCalCommie wrote:
DRM as Micrsoft sees it? I say this because HDCP can be had on a XP system. I have a XBox360 HD-DVD drive, CyberLink PowerDVD v6.5, and HDCP complient video card (7900GT) and monitor (Westy 37" 1080p) that works great on my MCE2005 system. DRM as Cable Labs sees it, apparently. ...and I'll 'upgrade' to Vista when SP-1 is released... maybe ;-) SoCalCommie snippage -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Justification for DirectX 10 and Vista (was Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card)
Roger wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:04:54 GMT, "Slap" wrote: "linux57" wrote in message ... I'm interested in some justification for getting upgrades that require this level of performance. For most applications / home PCs, nobody has shown that there is any justification for DirectX 10 or Vista. My personal opinion (and this is my field), there is no real justification outside of security for the home PC. Huh? Put a naked girl in the desert and a couple guys will show up. Build a road, well many more will show up. What's she look like and which desert...(coordinates will do) In a while... less than year methinks all new games, programs, etc will use Vista, DX10 etc. The road has been built, just waiting for the traffic. Although I do agree with you...mostly...:-)) "I think" (which means I really don't know for sure) that most applications will continue to run quite nicely on XP Pro and DX9. I also think *most* applications will be happy with DX 9 for some time to come. I emphasized the most as it certainly will not be all. There are many DX9 cards currently running on Vista (they reportedly sold 90 million copies the first month) and few except the diehard gamers will have the 8800 GTX and GTS cards which are the only ones at present that are DX10 compliant. So the rest including the new computers that are preloaded will still have DX-9 hardware. Justification is a relative term or at least I put it about a step above rationalization. ( usually use the rationalization to create the justification) Where one person is going to say Vista is a "must have" another may say "it'd be nice" to another who would say "I should be able to get along nicely on XP Pro and DX-9". "For me" the only real justification I can see "near term" is the added security with Vista that most users could have had with a properly configured installation of XP Pro behind a firewall. Longer term I am going to want DX10 on at least one "state-of-the-art" machine as that's what it takes to run FSX. (I hope they fix the code in that to work with multi core and share the load with the GPU) The other four machines will *probably* stay as XP Pro until what ever comes out after Vista, or will end up as LINUX machines. They also say Vista is more stable than XP but I've never had a stability problem with XP on 4 machines (recently went to 5) I do a lot of photo editing and one machine is pretty much a multimedia center. it'll be a while before either of those go Vista due to the DRM/premium content and HDCP compliant component availability. When I can play HD DVDs (which ever mode) and use my computer as a high definition equivalent of TvIO, or my 922 receiver then those machines *Might* get changed over. The only real drawback I see for the end user is DRM while I view WGA with mixed emotions as it has both its good and bad sides. OTOH if you are running XP you *WILL* be running WGA if auto updates are enabled. It's on two of the five machines and has not created any problems so far other than the one machine got confused when trying to install it and it took three tires before it'd work correctly. With the installed base of XP out there, it's likely that "for the home user" there is really very little valid justification, or gain to be had by upgrading to vista. IOW, it'd be a very rare home user that would gain anything (or see any difference other than eye candy) by upgrading. So except for a very small percent, the home users could stay with XP and never even notice there was a Vista. OTOH if it had the security most home users could still get by with 98SE. Surfing the Internet and e-mail take very little power. Word processors have become quite bloated. As I work with web pages I think they should ban Front page and Word's ability to convert a doc to HTML. Those two add new meaning to the words "bloat code". One other question comes to mind: How many of the home users have the hardware that would work with Vista without requiring some updating. Some older printers and scanners may create some problems even with the generic drivers available. I'm not so sure I can get a Vista driver for my Nikon LS5000ED scanner which is one of the higher end scanners. Particularly as there is less and less call for scanners with cameras going digital. The home user base *will* eventually migrate to Vista as they replace their old machines with new ones that come preloaded with OS and Apps which would certainly be the safest route. How fast this will happen,or how many will migrate before the next OS is out is any one's guess. There are a LOT of Win 98 and 98SE machines still out there that don't have the horsepower to run XP and Office let alone Vista or the latest version of office, and multimedia apps. OTOH The rest of us might have a *LOT* to gain by the average home user having an OS that enforces the security, that they can't seem to be bothered with at present. I would be nice to see those millions of zombies go away. Still, with the statement that the *NEXT* OS is only a couple years away (I think 09 was listed) Vista may not be much more than an interim OS between XP and what ever comes next. It is an evolutionary step that is pretty much like XP with the security (control of what the user can do) wrapped around the Kernel, plus a few extra features. Uh, security in Vista is not "wrapped around the kernel". Security has been in the kernel since NT 3.51. Anybody who is NT certified has known how to lock down just about everything since some time in the mid '90s. What's different in that regard with Vista is that out of the box it's fairly well locked down where with earlier releases the administrator had to configure the security policies himself. If you go into the group policy editor you'll find that it is pretty much the same in NT4, Win2K, XP, and Vista. Access control lists are pretty much the same as well. So is the handling of security within the registry. As for the "next OS being two years away", If that's what Microsoft says _now_ and it's going to be more than adding some new bells and whistles to NT then expect it sometime around 2011. Remember Windows 2000? Which was supposed to be NT5 and to be shipped in 1998? Microsoft is not good at hitting OS release deadlines. -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Justification for DirectX 10 and Vista (was Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card)
Right, I forgot about them. So worried that their precious premium content
might get recorded to a DVD or HD for later viewing. Eff 'em, it's only a matter of time before someone busts their protection scheme (racket) - BluRay and HD-DVD has already been hacked, less than a year after release. SoCalCommie "Behind every great fortune is a crime." - Honore de Balzac "J. Clarke" wrote in message ... SoCalCommie wrote: DRM as Micrsoft sees it? I say this because HDCP can be had on a XP system. I have a XBox360 HD-DVD drive, CyberLink PowerDVD v6.5, and HDCP complient video card (7900GT) and monitor (Westy 37" 1080p) that works great on my MCE2005 system. DRM as Cable Labs sees it, apparently. ...and I'll 'upgrade' to Vista when SP-1 is released... maybe ;-) SoCalCommie snippage -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Justification for DirectX 10 and Vista (was Looking for a "pretty good" PCI-E video card)
SoCalCommie wrote:
Right, I forgot about them. So worried that their precious premium content might get recorded to a DVD or HD for later viewing. Eff 'em, it's only a matter of time before someone busts their protection scheme (racket) - BluRay and HD-DVD has already been hacked, less than a year after release. The thing about BluRay and HD-DVD is that they don't get to send a tech into your house to hook you up. The cable company does and they can shut off your service if they see anything they don't like. SoCalCommie "Behind every great fortune is a crime." - Honore de Balzac "J. Clarke" wrote in message ... SoCalCommie wrote: DRM as Micrsoft sees it? I say this because HDCP can be had on a XP system. I have a XBox360 HD-DVD drive, CyberLink PowerDVD v6.5, and HDCP complient video card (7900GT) and monitor (Westy 37" 1080p) that works great on my MCE2005 system. DRM as Cable Labs sees it, apparently. ...and I'll 'upgrade' to Vista when SP-1 is released... maybe ;-) SoCalCommie snippage -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) -- -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Which Printer Is Pick Of The Crop "The Best" In Your Opinion My"Shortlist" | Heidy | Printers | 8 | March 17th 07 09:07 PM |
Force "medium present" or "device ready"? | Mike Richter | Cdr | 5 | October 23rd 06 12:12 AM |
Samsung ML-2150 (2152W) (1) suddenly prints all pages "almost" blank and (2) error message "HSync Engine Error" , not in user manual | Lady Margaret Thatcher | Printers | 5 | May 4th 06 04:51 AM |
Downside of changing "Max frames to render ahead"/"Prerender Limit" to 1/0? | Jeremy Reaban | Nvidia Videocards | 2 | March 31st 06 04:24 AM |
ASUS A8V & ATI AIW 9600 "inf" "thunk.exe" error message? | ByTor | AMD x86-64 Processors | 5 | January 13th 06 06:50 PM |