K
kirk jim
This discussion was significant so I pulled it out of the thread...
I am posting my reply to stephans post.. under this reply, you will see what
was said before by stephan and another guy.
Stephan gives the technical background on what is going on with vista and
its need for powerful cards.
I call this a conspiracy theory, because it is only a huch.. you are free to
take it into consideration, or throw it in the trash.
--------------
My post.
-----
Stephan, I have read many people saying the same things....(that aero could
be done with far less powerful display adaptors)
That is why I believe that MS did this on purpose.
Can you imagine, the increase in sales for NVIDIA and ATI?
Do you think MS is doing such radical changes in vista if tons of money was
not deeply involved?
You see, there is a hidden truth here.. and the truth is that there is a
battle to keep
the MS monopoly as stable as possible. MS helps ATI and NVIDIA to boost
their sales,
and ATI and NVIDIA make sure they do not release their drivers to the Open
Source community.
There is a whole battle about this.. if you look around you will see it.
Linux without the proper
drivers is stuck on crappy and unstable graphic display drivers. Although
XGL looks neat,
there is a huge problem, since although many cards are capable of doing such
effects,
if you dont have the correct driver then things crash or dont work at all.
Lack of drivers is the number 1 problem of Linux. The linux community needs
to find a solution for this so bad,
that it has offered to provide free services to the companies to help write
driver code for linux.
In other words ATI who will be making billions of dollars, will also get
free linux driver programmers!
However even though the open source community will be offering this, you
will see that they will be totally ignored!
This is not because they are truly ignoring them.. it is because of the
ATI-NVIDIA-MS alliance!
Can you understand the amounts of money that are involved?
The same conspiracy is going on, on all aspects of hardware. MS makes sure
the next OS
will be bloated so much that you need a new generation computer for it to
work properly on.
This bloat is by design, since it is very possible to have compact and
efficient applications and whole OS's that
could run on a fraction of the resources windows vista needs.
This forces more people to take money out of their pockets and into the
vendors wallets.
By MS helping companies sell more new computers, they get in return full
support of PRE-INSTALLING
windows on their machines. Its not easy to get a linux machine or a pc
without an OS installed.
Sure you can if you look around, but most buy computers like they buy DVD
players.
They have no technical knowledge.. they go to a store and buy whatever
catches their eye and have the money
to pay for.
Now after me taking the time to explain the background of things, you will
understand that behind my claims
there is a logic and insight on whats going on. I just dont explain
everything in each post, because if I did,
I would be writing books here... lol I am also not saying if all this is all
negative.. I can assure you that
there is a positive aspect to what is going on. But knowing this and
accepting it, is different from not knowing the truth.
However, because your post was serious enough, I took the extra time to
write this.
This hunch I have may not be totally correct, other things may be into play
that I cannot know...
however it seems to fit perfectly whats going on, and the trends we see
around us.
---------------------------------
Prior posts
-----
Well I was mostly referring to Aero, not Vista as a whole. As far as Aero
goes, my take on it is this.
With the release of DirectX10, MS is eliminating the fixed function pipeline
(something I do not like at all). All prior versions of DirectX have had
this. The FFP basically exists to allow someone to render geometry without
the need of pixel and vertex shaders. This still exists from the days when
pixel / vertex shaders didn't exist.
The FFP though has limitations. Many of todays effects used in games are not
possible with it as they are too dynamic. However, there still are *many*
things the FFP is perfectly capable and fine for using, UI's being the #1
thing games use it for.
Now Aero uses DX9, not DX10. So why am I bringing that up? Easy. I suspect
that MS implemented Aero entirely using Pixel and Vertex shaders for future
DX10 compatibility. So my guess is, they are using either PS2.0 or even 3.0
to implement Aero.
This causes lower end or older cards that don't have the appropriate level
of Pixel Shader support to not be able to use Aero even though the video
card itself would be perfectly capable of doing so via the FFP.
Pixel shaders though are beyond overkill for the simple alpha blending Aero
does. The identical effect can easily achieved via setting the appropriate
texture blending flags in the FFP.
Now MS could have done the same thing games do. Games will usually provide a
FFP fallback when appropriate pixel shader support is lacking. That may
result in reduced visual quality *if* the same effect cannot be achieved
via the FFP, but everything is still usable. In Aero's case though there
wouldn't be a visual difference even as all we are talking about here is
simple alpha blending. A legacy TNT2 can do that...
I am posting my reply to stephans post.. under this reply, you will see what
was said before by stephan and another guy.
Stephan gives the technical background on what is going on with vista and
its need for powerful cards.
I call this a conspiracy theory, because it is only a huch.. you are free to
take it into consideration, or throw it in the trash.
--------------
My post.
-----
Stephan, I have read many people saying the same things....(that aero could
be done with far less powerful display adaptors)
That is why I believe that MS did this on purpose.
Can you imagine, the increase in sales for NVIDIA and ATI?
Do you think MS is doing such radical changes in vista if tons of money was
not deeply involved?
You see, there is a hidden truth here.. and the truth is that there is a
battle to keep
the MS monopoly as stable as possible. MS helps ATI and NVIDIA to boost
their sales,
and ATI and NVIDIA make sure they do not release their drivers to the Open
Source community.
There is a whole battle about this.. if you look around you will see it.
Linux without the proper
drivers is stuck on crappy and unstable graphic display drivers. Although
XGL looks neat,
there is a huge problem, since although many cards are capable of doing such
effects,
if you dont have the correct driver then things crash or dont work at all.
Lack of drivers is the number 1 problem of Linux. The linux community needs
to find a solution for this so bad,
that it has offered to provide free services to the companies to help write
driver code for linux.
In other words ATI who will be making billions of dollars, will also get
free linux driver programmers!
However even though the open source community will be offering this, you
will see that they will be totally ignored!
This is not because they are truly ignoring them.. it is because of the
ATI-NVIDIA-MS alliance!
Can you understand the amounts of money that are involved?
The same conspiracy is going on, on all aspects of hardware. MS makes sure
the next OS
will be bloated so much that you need a new generation computer for it to
work properly on.
This bloat is by design, since it is very possible to have compact and
efficient applications and whole OS's that
could run on a fraction of the resources windows vista needs.
This forces more people to take money out of their pockets and into the
vendors wallets.
By MS helping companies sell more new computers, they get in return full
support of PRE-INSTALLING
windows on their machines. Its not easy to get a linux machine or a pc
without an OS installed.
Sure you can if you look around, but most buy computers like they buy DVD
players.
They have no technical knowledge.. they go to a store and buy whatever
catches their eye and have the money
to pay for.
Now after me taking the time to explain the background of things, you will
understand that behind my claims
there is a logic and insight on whats going on. I just dont explain
everything in each post, because if I did,
I would be writing books here... lol I am also not saying if all this is all
negative.. I can assure you that
there is a positive aspect to what is going on. But knowing this and
accepting it, is different from not knowing the truth.
However, because your post was serious enough, I took the extra time to
write this.
This hunch I have may not be totally correct, other things may be into play
that I cannot know...
however it seems to fit perfectly whats going on, and the trends we see
around us.
---------------------------------
Prior posts
-----
Charlie said:What do you suppose Microsoft did to make Vista so demanding of hardware
resources? Did they do it on purpose, or did it just happen because of
sloppiness?
Well I was mostly referring to Aero, not Vista as a whole. As far as Aero
goes, my take on it is this.
With the release of DirectX10, MS is eliminating the fixed function pipeline
(something I do not like at all). All prior versions of DirectX have had
this. The FFP basically exists to allow someone to render geometry without
the need of pixel and vertex shaders. This still exists from the days when
pixel / vertex shaders didn't exist.
The FFP though has limitations. Many of todays effects used in games are not
possible with it as they are too dynamic. However, there still are *many*
things the FFP is perfectly capable and fine for using, UI's being the #1
thing games use it for.
Now Aero uses DX9, not DX10. So why am I bringing that up? Easy. I suspect
that MS implemented Aero entirely using Pixel and Vertex shaders for future
DX10 compatibility. So my guess is, they are using either PS2.0 or even 3.0
to implement Aero.
This causes lower end or older cards that don't have the appropriate level
of Pixel Shader support to not be able to use Aero even though the video
card itself would be perfectly capable of doing so via the FFP.
Pixel shaders though are beyond overkill for the simple alpha blending Aero
does. The identical effect can easily achieved via setting the appropriate
texture blending flags in the FFP.
Now MS could have done the same thing games do. Games will usually provide a
FFP fallback when appropriate pixel shader support is lacking. That may
result in reduced visual quality *if* the same effect cannot be achieved
via the FFP, but everything is still usable. In Aero's case though there
wouldn't be a visual difference even as all we are talking about here is
simple alpha blending. A legacy TNT2 can do that...