K
kirk jim
Enjoy
Note: Beryl runs on far older and simpler display adaptors than aero glass
needs (vista)
Enjoy
Note: Beryl runs on far older and simpler display adaptors than aero glass
needs (vista)
A
Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]
I actually like it, but Linux still loses when it comes to application
compatibility and basic ease of use and device compatibility.
compatibility and basic ease of use and device compatibility.
K
kirk jim
And Vista is compatible? LOL
Vista is creating a worldwide havoc with programs and hardware!
Im surprised they had the nerve to add the name "windows" to vista.
Vista is linux... Im not a linux fanatic... I am a microsoft geek...
I love the GOOD products microsoft made.. like XP for example.
I fell in love with xp from day 1 and have been a super supporter of it.
I have been disgusted by vista since day one, though.
We need progress, not XP ME edition they now call vista.
Give me a break Mr vistaboi.
Vista is creating a worldwide havoc with programs and hardware!
Im surprised they had the nerve to add the name "windows" to vista.
Vista is linux...
Im not a linux fanatic... I am a microsoft geek...I love the GOOD products microsoft made.. like XP for example.
I fell in love with xp from day 1 and have been a super supporter of it.
I have been disgusted by vista since day one, though.
We need progress, not XP ME edition they now call vista.
Give me a break Mr vistaboi.
S
Steve Thackery
It's worth pointing out that Microsoft trialled a wide range of fancy
animations and eye candy in the early days of Vista. After running them
through the useability labs most of them were abandoned because they
hindered, rather than helped, ease of use and productivity.
Compared with the Ubuntu demo, Vista looks to me like a model of understated
elegance!
Steve
animations and eye candy in the early days of Vista. After running them
through the useability labs most of them were abandoned because they
hindered, rather than helped, ease of use and productivity.
Compared with the Ubuntu demo, Vista looks to me like a model of understated
elegance!
Steve
K
kirk jim
Thackery....
I know what you are saying because I have been watching Microsoft
and vista evolution for years. There are videos around that show some of
the ideas they tried. However... the effects are not important.
You can select what effects you want or you don't, and third party
applications will enable you to add or remove and change effects.
Both aero3d and XGL are only platforms, and both can achieve the same
effects if you want them too. Same exact identical effects.
THE POINT IS, that all this could have been done on Vista with less demands
on hardware. For example Beryl runs on an ATI 9000 display adaptor. Vista
aero glass does not.
Microsoft inflated (its the Microsoft way) the needs of super powerful
display adaptors, while the effects were possible with less advanced
cards.
This was done for a specific reason.... the reason was that MS had the
pressure from various other companies
to make vista more demanding on hardware because the market was stagnant,
and it needed an artificial boost.
I know what you are saying because I have been watching Microsoft
and vista evolution for years. There are videos around that show some of
the ideas they tried. However... the effects are not important.
You can select what effects you want or you don't, and third party
applications will enable you to add or remove and change effects.
Both aero3d and XGL are only platforms, and both can achieve the same
effects if you want them too. Same exact identical effects.
THE POINT IS, that all this could have been done on Vista with less demands
on hardware. For example Beryl runs on an ATI 9000 display adaptor. Vista
aero glass does not.
Microsoft inflated (its the Microsoft way) the needs of super powerful
display adaptors, while the effects were possible with less advanced
cards.
This was done for a specific reason.... the reason was that MS had the
pressure from various other companies
to make vista more demanding on hardware because the market was stagnant,
and it needed an artificial boost.
A
Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]
Score 1 for Steve
Score 0 for Kirk
Score 0 for Kirk
F
Frank
kirk jim wrote:
You know this because...you work for a company who put pressure on MS to
make Vista more demanding...or you work for a company that sells
computer hardware and needs to increase sells...or you heard or read
someone else say this and it sounded good and fits your agenda...or this
is simply one more way to establish the fact you're just another MS
hater with all the rest of the MS haters and/or linux losers?
Inquiring minds want to know!
(snort, chuckle, burp)
Frank
You know this because...you work for a company who put pressure on MS to
make Vista more demanding...or you work for a company that sells
computer hardware and needs to increase sells...or you heard or read
someone else say this and it sounded good and fits your agenda...or this
is simply one more way to establish the fact you're just another MS
hater with all the rest of the MS haters and/or linux losers?
Inquiring minds want to know!
(snort, chuckle, burp)
Frank
K
kirk jim
1) Can you tell me what my agenda is, because I have no clue?
2) How can I be anti MS and linux pro, when I keep saying that the best OS
ever made for the desktop was XP?
3) My assumption is based on logic. I have no proof. Its a hunch.. but I
seldom make mistakes with my hunches.
2) How can I be anti MS and linux pro, when I keep saying that the best OS
ever made for the desktop was XP?
3) My assumption is based on logic. I have no proof. Its a hunch.. but I
seldom make mistakes with my hunches.
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
"the reason was that MS had the pressure from various other companies
to make vista more demanding on hardware because the market was
stagnant"
Please state the source for this fiction.
Or is it no more that an opinion?
to make vista more demanding on hardware because the market was
stagnant"
Please state the source for this fiction.
Or is it no more that an opinion?
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
"creating a worldwide havoc with programs and hardware"
A typical partial truth used to spread FUD.
Convenient how you choose to ignore some very simple facts.
The hardware and software manufacturers and not the operating system
manufacturer are responsible for making their products compatible with
the operating system.
All my hardware works with Vista.
The newest piece of hardware between my desktop and laptop is a nearly
2 year old video card in the desktop.
Other than Aero in the laptop, all works well.
Other than one program, I have not failed in using any of my software
with Windows Vista.
That is not to say there are no compatibility issues, but most are
easily resolved while others are waiting for the hardware and software
manufacturers.
Your feeble attempts to blame only one side while ignoring the
responsibility of the others helps show your true agenda.
A typical partial truth used to spread FUD.
Convenient how you choose to ignore some very simple facts.
The hardware and software manufacturers and not the operating system
manufacturer are responsible for making their products compatible with
the operating system.
All my hardware works with Vista.
The newest piece of hardware between my desktop and laptop is a nearly
2 year old video card in the desktop.
Other than Aero in the laptop, all works well.
Other than one program, I have not failed in using any of my software
with Windows Vista.
That is not to say there are no compatibility issues, but most are
easily resolved while others are waiting for the hardware and software
manufacturers.
Your feeble attempts to blame only one side while ignoring the
responsibility of the others helps show your true agenda.
F
Frank
kirk said:
...."no clue"...is the correct answer.
2) How can I be anti MS and linux pro, when I keep saying that the best OS
ever made for the desktop was XP?
Your opinion...which carries exactly the value of 1.
3) My assumption is based on logic.
....based on logic?
Just what "logic" would that be?
I have no proof.
Now that's what we're talking about. NO PROOF!
Its a hunch.. but I
seldom make mistakes with my hunches.
Your mistake is that you're having hunches.
Frank
T
Tom Scales
Frank said:
If this is true, the Justice Department would be tied up for years.
Collusion is illegal -- big time.
G
Gordon Keenan
kirk jim said:
Enjoy
Note: Beryl runs on far older and simpler display adaptors than aero glass
needs (vista)
Nice demo, but if they could only make Linux more standardized and have more
applications that people use in their daily business ventures, then they
would stand a chance. Bottom line, its not going to have the world-wide user
base that MS has... and IMHO I don't think it ever will.
Vista is certainly bloated, certainly slow considering the sheer power you
need to run it right, but it still does not feel any way as slick as XP
does... so while I'll plodding on with Vista, I will not be getting it
installed on any of my clients computer systems for as long as I can.
K
kirk jim
The hardware and software manufacturers and not the operating system
A classic combination of some partial truth combined with a GROSS LIE,
in order to misinform the world! Why do you lie?
The CHOICE of changing things around in vista was MICROSOFT'S job...
They could have retained compatibility and improved windows in other aspects
that they didn't EVEN CARE to fix. MS did a horrible job with vista...
changing things they should have not even touched, and not even caring about
the hundreds if not THOUSANDS
of things that could be improved... even the head of vista development said
"MS is losing touch with the public" LOL
He was fast to leave MS when vista was finished, because he was sure he
would be lynched for the monstrosity he constructed!
You want MS to do whatever it frikin wants and then FORCE everyone to run
after it?
Is this your pathetic logic? Id we want incompatibility lets all switch to
Linux!
That's what MS is doing... there was no need for such problems since Vista
is NT and XP was NT.
XP was compatible with the previous NT that was win2k. But vista.. oh no..
vista is stupid..
it had to brake a huge amount of programs and drivers!
You are being blind on purpose or by mistake. If you are doing it on purpose
then
you have some agenda and go away to troll somewhere else, instead of
spreading lies!
A classic combination of some partial truth combined with a GROSS LIE,
in order to misinform the world! Why do you lie?
The CHOICE of changing things around in vista was MICROSOFT'S job...
They could have retained compatibility and improved windows in other aspects
that they didn't EVEN CARE to fix. MS did a horrible job with vista...
changing things they should have not even touched, and not even caring about
the hundreds if not THOUSANDS
of things that could be improved... even the head of vista development said
"MS is losing touch with the public" LOL
He was fast to leave MS when vista was finished, because he was sure he
would be lynched for the monstrosity he constructed!
You want MS to do whatever it frikin wants and then FORCE everyone to run
after it?
Is this your pathetic logic? Id we want incompatibility lets all switch to
Linux!
That's what MS is doing... there was no need for such problems since Vista
is NT and XP was NT.
XP was compatible with the previous NT that was win2k. But vista.. oh no..
vista is stupid..
it had to brake a huge amount of programs and drivers!
You are being blind on purpose or by mistake. If you are doing it on purpose
then
you have some agenda and go away to troll somewhere else, instead of
spreading lies!
J
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
"a GROSS LIE"
An accusation with no basis in fact.
More than likely typical for the rest of your post.
You can NOT prove I lied.
And I did not lie.
However you made a FALSE accusation.
More of your character displayed.
If you had anything of value to say after that, it was missed.
Your apparent need to spew this slander is telling.
--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org
An accusation with no basis in fact.
More than likely typical for the rest of your post.
You can NOT prove I lied.
And I did not lie.
However you made a FALSE accusation.
More of your character displayed.
If you had anything of value to say after that, it was missed.
Your apparent need to spew this slander is telling.
--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
http://www.dts-l.org
K
Kerry Brown
Have you ever actually used Linux? Have you ever tried to upgrade a Linux
program let alone the kernel? It is very common to end up with mismatched
libraries, programs that don't work because the kernel was changed, etc.
etc.. Just trying to figure out if a program will run in a particular distro
then trying to figure out if you have the right libraries then making sure
installing the right libraries doesn't mess up something else can be a
nightmare. If you stick to one distro and get all your programs from their
site you will probably be OK. That would be like relying on Microsoft to
supply all your programs.
S
Shane Nokes
Actually kirk jim as usual you're wrong, again 
Most of the issues with applications not working properly actually have to
do with the developers of those applications not programming them correctly.
Developers invoking a non-standard call to a part of an application, for
example.
Requiring an admin account to run a program invoking UAC prompts, for
another example.
There's numerous examples of this. The developers should just get off their
lazy asses & write good code and stop blaming Microsoft.
Not to mention the fact that those same developers have had chances to work
with the code to get the latest app versions Vista Ready and failed to do
so.
Most of the issues with applications not working properly actually have to
do with the developers of those applications not programming them correctly.
Developers invoking a non-standard call to a part of an application, for
example.
Requiring an admin account to run a program invoking UAC prompts, for
another example.
There's numerous examples of this. The developers should just get off their
lazy asses & write good code and stop blaming Microsoft.
Not to mention the fact that those same developers have had chances to work
with the code to get the latest app versions Vista Ready and failed to do
so.
S
Stephan Rose
Frank said:
Well disregarding the various claims he makes as to why MS inflated the
hardware requirements, I'm not even going to go into that...there is one
bit of truth to what he said.
The hardware requirements *are* ridiculuous. I am sorry but, they are. As
for my reference, easy...I'm a programmer for a living. I write software
that uses 3D Accelerated graphics to display 2D Content. So I know how
fancy little UI's like Aero, Beryl, etc. work beause they do the same thing
I do.
I can display over 20,000 objects totalling over 200k polygons on a friggin
6 year old pentium 4 notebook with a video card from that at 20ms-30ms per
frame. That includes transparency effects.
What aero does is not complicated. All it is doing is displaying alpha
blended 2D polygons with texturemaps. That's it. This does not require the
level of hardware support MS wants for it.
Game's have been doing it in their own UI's for many many years! Everquest
has had alpha blended and texture mapped user interfaces since the late
90's but the same hardware is supposedly incapable of handling aero?
Gimme a friggin beak...the requirements *are* inflated. As to the reasons
*why* MS inflated them...I can't comment on that.
--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6
å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰
C
Charlie Wilkes
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?
Charlie
S
Stephan Rose
Charlie said:
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...
--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6
å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰