Happiness is a Warm OS

Posted on May 30, 2006 by Scott Jennings| 38 Comments

…bang! bang! shoot! shoot!

Installed Windows Vista Beta 2: Wednesday
Reinstalled Windows XP: Monday

Well, it’s almost there! The deal breaker for me was having to run crappy WDDM video drivers that broke 80% of my games and made half of the remainder run in “Runs Like Ass” mode. Yeah, I’m sure NVidia will issue Vista-Drivers-That-Actually-Install-On-My-Machine And-Don’t-Just-Forlornly-Refuse-To-Run real soon now, but life’s too short.

Oh, and Vista is going to require at least 2g of RAM. Just a heads up. In case you like shiny OS skins or DirectX 10!

Yes, I’m an OS whore. I’ll run ANYTHING. Heck, I ran WoW in Linux for a while just because I could. I am really not the person you should be taking OS advice from.

(On the other hand, I can recommend the Office 2007 beta unreservedly. It hasn’t destroy any of my critical work data yet!)

(Oh, and “Piggies” from the Beatles’ White Album. You should get that, too.)

This entry was posted in Geek, _. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Balasarius

    Bleh. I was going to order my next PC with Vista and 2GB of ram, but I was hoping there would actually be enough ram there for the game to play well, too. :-/

  • Xyntar

    I haven’t gotten to play with beta 2 yet, but beta 1 ran on my system with 1gb of ram nicely. Did a dual boot with a fresh install of XP Pro and Vista was noticably faster. ATI’s vista drivers seemed to work well enough. I could play every game I installed as well as I could on XP… once I got the legacy NIC driver to work.

    I’m in love with Office 2007′s black theme. It’s so easy on the eyes. I don’t mean to sound like an MS fanboi, but I’m cautiously optomistic for the final products.

  • scottj

    > Bleh. I was going to order my next PC with Vista and 2GB of ram

    That should be fine. 1GB will run the OS. 2GB will run the OS and, uh, other programs.

  • D-0ne

    Vista? I don’t own a computer I dislike enough to install it on… Eventually as was done to 98se (in 2003) I will dislike XP enough to upgrade. Hence, I still use Office 97…

    /just saying

  • Xyntar

    I suppose I should note that my experiences above were likely a fluke. I seem to be lucky in that regard. I seem to run somethings on partial Force of Will. Originally, I ran Doom 3 on a system that was well below every single system req at high quality 1024×768 at acceptable framerates. No one believed me without seeing it.

  • http://www.shadowclan.org ogur

    Happiness is a Warm Gun actually……

    I imagine I’ll have to upgrade to XP once I get my hands on Thief III.
    Oh, wait……Vista you say? Oh Noes!

  • Nicademus

    1 gig of RAM for the OS alone??? Are they on crack? Unless it comes with FuFme intergrated and can give me a hummer while I’m doing spreadsheets I’m sticking to XP or Windows 2000 thnx.

  • Fergle F Fergleson

    >>Heck, I ran WoW in Linux for a while just because I could.

  • Wanderer

    The question I have not heard an answer to yet:

    What do I need to do that I can do in Vista and can’t do in Win98 or XP?

    So far, Microsoft’s answers seem to come down to “organize all your music and pictures and stuff” (that’s called a CD rack and Adobe Bridge) and “have this really glitzy skin that’s, you know, really glitzy.”

    “What is the value proposition?”, as the stuffed shirts who have to make up new phrases to mean “stuff you’re selling” would put it. What’s in it for me? From where I sit (namely, in front of a comp with only 1 gig) I can’t see much of anything.

    If Microsoft can’t communicate to me, a curmudgeonly geek, what it is that Vista is supposed to do to make me want to expend the amount of cash involved in not just buying it but making it run, they’re failing at life.

    My only (probably vain) hope is that all the IE-lovers who won’t use any other browser because it’s not from Microsoft (I actually met someone who thought using Firefox was illegal!) will get IE7, every last bloody one of them, and at least I won’t have to spend half my CSS design time building strange hacks to get around the innumerable ways IE is broken. And, of course, I hope that IE7 won’t be broken in all sorts of fun new ways, which it probably will be.

  • http://www.cesspit.net/ Abalieno

    I use Notepad.

    I thought new programs were supposed to be faster, not slower.

  • devilmouse

    > What do I need to do that I can do in Vista and can\’e2\’80\’99t do in Win98 or XP?

    Run DX 10.

  • http://www.eqclerics.org Boanerges

    I doubt that, devil. XP has been out for 6 years. Making DX10 a Vista only product cuts their nose off. Considering that Vista seems to be unable to support any machine not sold in the last year (how many machines running XP will even support 2GB?) they’d be making a colossal mistake (and even Microsoft has shareholders to keep happy). I imagine they’ll include better DVD burner support and new bells and whistles but it’s been such a long run for XP I wouldn’t expect anyone to make any vista-only products for some time to come. Heck, even 2k is still able to run decently (although DX10 probably won’t run under it). Incidentally if you’re running 98 still you really do need to go to a NT legacy OS like 2k or XP. I like not having to format every 6 months or so due to corruption.

    I don’t expect IE7 to be a cure-all to web development woes. I do expect that as Firefox continues to push Microsoft that they will not be content to rest on their laurels like they did after IE6 beat Netscape. Sadly, I believe IE7 will be Microsoft Brand HTML 2.0 (“We mostly support 4.0 standards but you WILL support our browser not supporting certain standards because we ARE the Internet!”). Microsoft: What do we want to support today?

  • scottj

    It’s not speculation. DirectX 10 will be Vista only.

  • Nicademus

    Yeah say that again 9 months after launch when they only have 40% uptake. MS can’t strong arm the entire computing world into new high powered PCs. If they want to make DirectX 10 more than an add on for rich kids with toys it’ll go backwards compatbile at some point.

  • KEtCHUP

    Get a ticket or something today Lum?

    I smell bacon.

  • =j

    Personally, I am reaching the tipping point as far as the manditory-Windows-upgrade-to-play-FotM. If a game requires DX10 to play, I will not be playing it.

    I suspect that I am in the minority here.

  • http://www.corpnews.com Andrew Crystall

    J, I’m with you. There are…a lot more people VERY peeved about this than you might think. OpenGL 2 never looked so good.

  • Turlow

    I’ll state the obvious others are dancing around. MS is making DX10 Vista only in an attempt to force consumers to upgrade. OSes are MS’s cash cows after all. I suspect MS knows most people are satisfied with XP and have no plans to purchase a new OS or computer. By making DX10, and any software that uses it, Vista only, it’s upgrade or don’t use the software. MS is betting most people will upgrade. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

    I think I heard recently that MS is planning on stopping Win2k support soon. Can anyone verify this or is it just one of my delusions?

    Count another in your minority J. I won’t be buying a new box or OS for a few more years. I’m forcing myself off the 2 year upgrade merry-go-round.

  • HitNRun

    This debate will be settled on software. Microsoft can make anything they want “Vista Only”- no one is going to care. Particularly not when caring involves dishing out several hundred to several thousand dollars for a lateral “upgrade.”

    Now, if they can get a game publisher to require DX10, ignoring public outrage and a hit to the pocketbook, and get them to require it for a game that someone actually gives a shit about, then that could open the floodgates.

    Time will tell if such a publisher, or such a game or series of games, will come to Microsoft’s rescue.

  • Elistor

    Sometimes I wish another OS like Amiga OS4.1 actually had a chance at taking hold.

    http://os4.hyperion-entertainment.biz/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=9&Itemid=

    4.1 is supposed to have a hardware abstraction layer that lets you run it on practically anything, not just PowerPC.

  • Brask Mumei

    Since I was using Windows 95 I’ve been trying to use a “Black Theme”. Usually I’d be forced to stop by some crappy program that insisted on hardcoding their black text on the user defined background. Nice to see it is finally cool.

    I wouldn’t be so upset about the latest fashions in computing (3d bevels, gumdrop UI, flat look, black theme) if they weren’t always couched in terms of each one being superior technically. Let’s just admit it is a matter of fashion and aesthetic.

  • http://kfsone.wordpress.com/ Oliver Smith

    At launch prices, Microsoft will easily be able to afford introducing Vista as a “high end” operating system using Dx10 as a leverage mechanism to help bleed dry high end adopters who will revel in their general incompatability.

  • Wanderer

    I’m another one in that growing minority, J.

  • TPRJones

    I finally upgraded to XP this year, just because.

    I refuse to be strongarmed into Vista!

    …

    well, unless I end up needing DX10 for Spore, of course.

  • Kaalinn

    Spore, and games like it, probably will be the deciding factor.
    If MS gets their hands on those and makes them DX10+ only they just might get through with this.

    Luckily Will Wright isnt that much of a coporate whore, and there’s plenty of people around in the industry that aren’t either and still supply great games, like Peter Molyneux, Richard Garriott, and that Jennings guy you might have heard of.

  • http://www.theworldtakes.com damijin

    I feel cold and alone. What is everyone talking about? Who is Vista!?

    Oh dear I miss my TechTV, I’m hopelessly lost without it. Far too lazy to research things without them being broadcast into my eye sockets with a side of Patrick Norton’s kilt.

  • Xyntar

    I would be very surprised is Spore were DX10, it seems far too near completion.

  • http://www.mmogchart.com SirBruce

    I can’t recommend the Office 2007 beta; it looks nice, but messes up some of the charts of my MMOG data, ran slowly, and then ultimately crashed. It didn’t eat the data, but it’s just not there yet. Also, there’s two different compatibility patches people with previous versions of office have to install to read the new Excel format.

    But I’m sure Microsoft will work all that out. And maybe the other components like Word are much more robust. But no Office 2007 for me yet.

  • http://www.mmogchart.com SirBruce

    (About Vista)

    Even if Vista adoptionis rapid, I can’t see a game maker risking a Vista-only game and only reaching less than 50% of gamers themselves, because a lot gamers will still be on XP for years. Maybe developers will support both DX10 and DX9, so if you really want the maximum shiny, you have to have Vista…

    In 3 years, though, DX10-only might be possible. But I might be beta testing DX10 games in a year or two anyway. So maybe I should go ahead and get Vista now; I have to upgrade to new hardware this fall anyway.

  • http://www.eqclerics.org Boanerges

    It\’e2\’80\’99s not speculation. DirectX 10 will be Vista only.

    Well then. Not the first stupid MS idea but I guess it is indeed their way of making it a mandatory upgrade. Well that and…

    I think I heard recently that MS is planning on stopping Win2k support soon. Can anyone verify this or is it just one of my delusions?

    Already happened actually. MS announced in 2003 I think that they would only offer 5 years of support for their OS before cutting it back to only legacy updates (stuff like Windows Update would be available but not kept current). XP was the exception (hard to cut off support for your only current product) but I guess that part of the DX10 decision was that XP is officially outside the support window. So given the DX10 decision Vista will probably mean that XP support is getting cut off shortly thereafter.

  • Larast

    So, whatever happened to that whole antitrust thing? Because I know I just love being forced to buy and use a bloated product from a company I hate.

  • Xyntar

    I seem to remember someone saying that XP would get an upgraded version of DX9 that would kind of fake DX10 so DX10 games would still run (for atleast the first iteration of DX10) but just lack some of the pizazz.

  • Xyntar

    So, whatever happened to that whole antitrust thing? Because I know I just love being forced to buy and use a bloated product from a company I hate.

    You aren’t forced to buy Vista anymore than you’d be forced by buy an Xbox 360. If you want to play a game, you have to have whatever the game requires to play it. PC Game companies make games for whatever OS is going to get them the widest distribution. You can always go another way. You can play some games on Linux or Mac.

    Besides, it won’t be like all games released post Vista will be Vista only for quite a while. Like SirBruce said, it’ll be several years before that happens.

  • Larast

    You can play some games on Linux or Mac.

    This isn’t true for the vast majority of PC Games though. And of the ones that do work on multiple platforms, many are an absolute headache to get working.

    Besides, it won\’e2\’80\’99t be like all games released post Vista will be Vista only
    for quite a while. Like SirBruce said, it\’e2\’80\’99ll be several years before that
    happens.

    The problem is that it still happens. Do you really think have a single company in almost complete control is a good thing for users?

  • Ghiest

    —–
    So, whatever happened to that whole antitrust thing? Because I know I just love being forced to buy and use a bloated product from a company I hate.
    —–

    You are not forced to buy a damn thing though, if you wanna use software that is based on a certain platform then you are forced to use that platform and any hardware asociated with it.

    As much as im not forced to buy a console because I want to play console games, if I wish to play the games I have to buy the console.

    It has been this way for years, get used to it.

  • Xyntar

    The problem is that it still happens. Do you really think have a single company in almost complete control is a good thing for users?

    They don’t have complete control. The game companies have complete control. If you want to play the game they make you have to play it on the setup they designed it for. It would be another thing entirely if MS made the OS and all the games. The anti-trust thing (IIRC) was due to MS packaging and so heavily integrating IE into the OS that allowed them to completely crush the rest of the browser market.

  • Ian

    See, you guys are nerds just like me. You say “hell with that!” when you hear DX10 only on Vista. Thing is, Bill Gates knows that the other 90% of the population will just hand over the dough because “it’s the new thing, haven’t you gotten it yet? you can’t play this new game without it!”

    Buy a whole new $2,000.00 computer with a $200.00 OS just to run a $60.00 program or game that “The Joneses” don’t have yet? No problem!

    Most people = suckers.

  • Robert

    They don\’e2\’80\’99t have complete control. The game companies have complete control. If you want to play the game they make you have to play it on the setup they designed it for. It would be another thing entirely if MS made the OS and all the games. The anti-trust thing (IIRC) was due to MS packaging and so heavily integrating IE into the OS that allowed them to completely crush the rest of the browser market.

    By MS packaging and so heavily integrating DirectX into the OS it allowed them to crush any development of an open source OpenGL alternative.

    How is this not similiar?

    I will admit it doesn’t seem like the Linux community has really realized just how important gaming is to PC users.

    The key to MS’ success has been gaming. It has been the force that has driven adoption of their OS by most PC users.

    If there were an open standards gaming API, standards set by a body akin to the W3C setting HTML, XHTML, and XML standards, video games would be available on the Mac and Linux and Microsoft would have far lower sales of their operating system.

    I bet the biggest reason Apple is now using Intel and enabling dual-boot is they have realized that lack of video games on their system has kept their market share lower than it otherwise would be.

    By keeping gaming proprietary Microsoft has been able to force PC gamers to use their OS. They leverage their existing marketshare to brow beat users into buying their technology.

    If there were open standards, they would lose.