Stop Microsoft

All Things Microsoft => Microsoft Software => Topic started by: toadlife on 8 June 2006, 09:29

Title: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 8 June 2006, 09:29
Okay guys. I just know you're all dying to try what will surely be the greatest OS ever to be released, so have at it!!

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6081301.html

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/getready/default.mspx
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: piratePenguin on 8 June 2006, 10:41
Quote
A Windows Vista Capable PC includes at least:

    * A modern processor (at least 800MHz1).
    * 512 MB of system memory.
    * A graphics processor that is DirectX 9 capable.
Whoops, I ***only*** have 256 MB RAM (it's enough for modern GNOME and modern KDE - even with all the cool+useless compiz effects turned on with Xgl (Vista definetly does NOT beat that stuff out-right)) - so my computer isn't Windows Vista Capable :(
More like - Windows Vista isn't my-PC Capable.

3.5 gigabytes, what the hell? Does it have a PDF viewer this time?

(Ubuntu comes with a PDF/PS viewer, BitTorrent client, IRC client (atleast one), IM client for MSN/Y!IM/Jabber/IRC/other-stuff-I've-hardly-heard-of (GAIM), office suite, DECENT graphics program (the gimp - better than paint), etcetc, all on ONE CD!)
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: emuelle1 on 8 June 2006, 15:27
Windows, out of the box, still requires tons of extra software like Office.

I recently installed SuSE linux 10.1, and just from that install is practically everything I could possibly need on one computer, except maybe some advanced video editing tools.

I put the Office 07 beta on my laptop, and it bogged it down very badly. It won't uninstall correctly either. It was what I needed to begin switching over to Linux, which I've been putting off for a while.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: 7031 on 8 June 2006, 21:02
Wouldn't mind trying it out but it would probably turn out to be crap. I have no computer to test it on, as apperently it rewrites the bootloader....
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 9 June 2006, 04:15
Even if you're running minimum specs it's still gonna be slow as shit.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: pofnlice on 9 June 2006, 15:20
wait a minute...that's recommended
Quote
A Windows Vista Capable PC includes at least:

    * A modern processor (at least 800MHz1).
    * 512 MB of system memory.
    * A graphics processor that is DirectX 9 capable.


This is what you nedd to "get the full vista experience to include the windows aero experience.
Quote
A Windows Vista Premium Ready PC includes at least:

    * 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor1.
    * 1 GB of system memory.
    * A graphics processor that runs Windows Aero2.
    * 128 MB of graphics memory.
    * 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
    * DVD-ROM Drive3.
    * Audio output capability.
    * Internet access capability.


That's one way to get you out there buying new peecees and upgrading all your junk. MS, the corporation software that stimulates hardware sales.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: worker201 on 9 June 2006, 17:17
Quote from: pofnlice
That's one way to get you out there buying new peecees and upgrading all your junk. MS, the corporation software that stimulates hardware sales.
Too bad for Microsoft, I got stimulated into buying a Mac!
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: emuelle1 on 9 June 2006, 21:05
None for me, thanks. I thought about loading it in a VM at some point, but not as my main OS.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: ReggieMicheals on 10 June 2006, 00:19
Who would want to load as much fancy shit that would cap a 512 MB memory card. I'd hate to see how much processor power Explorer eats up this time around. I already see dramatic differences in gaming speed in eDuke32 when I kill Explorer.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: 7031 on 10 June 2006, 10:35
I have had tons of trouble with explorer.exe. Once there was a CPU AND RAM leak casuing my computer to act like a computer with a CPU clocked at 20mhz and 2megs of ram.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: GenuineAdvantage on 11 June 2006, 00:54
What is the problem with sticking with XP if you must use windows? Yuk and yuk x 2, why should I bother with beta testing Vista for MS at this point? Is Vista internet-secure, that's what I really want to know. Who cares about memory wasting.
Title: Its a ram whore
Post by: Lead Head on 11 June 2006, 00:56
I downloaded the 32bit version, its 3200 MB aprox. It took roughly 20 Minutes to install from win2k3.

The initial setup was very easy, defiently simpler then WinXP.

Running: The first thing your greeted with is something asking you if you want to see how your PC stacks up against Vista. Didnt run it. Now, installing anything, running some things or even downloading something from IE prompts you with a dialog box asking if your sure you want to to do. It was defiently slower then my tweaked Server2k3 install.

There was intermintent pauses between minimizing windows, actions werent that smooth. However I think that was do to the fact that my FX-5200 that I was using is damaged and bearly runs 3D mode.

It uses around 380Mb of ram on a fresh install. About 550Mb Page File usage. the install was around 3-5GB, I cant quite remeber as im not running it right now. With just GAIM running,

the CPU usage was going between 3-12%. if your wondering winXP on a 233Mhz K-6 is 0-4% usage while idle. I dont really see vista running
well at all on a 1Ghz CPU, or with 512MB of ram.

It is very "pretty", The way window's minimize seems to be borrowed from OSX, they like "bounce" around when you minimize them

Im running an Athlon 64 @ 2Ghz w/ 1GB PC3200 ram.

Final words. It will sell like hot cakes
Title: Re: Hot keks
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 11 June 2006, 04:01
Quote from: Lead Head
Final words. It will sell like hot cakes

Many people may become grossly obese ... or at least their computer will run like it's big, fat, and slow.
Title: Re: Hot keks
Post by: piratePenguin on 11 June 2006, 04:13
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
Many people may become grossly obese ... or at least their computer will run like it's big, fat, and slow.
And then they'll wonder why for three seconds - and then they'll buy a "more modern" computer to run their POS OS.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: pofnlice on 11 June 2006, 12:17
And they shal all rub ash on thier bodies, beat thier chests and there will be much gnashing of teeth. Lo, they will wrap themselves in sackclothe and throw thier bodies onto the ground. MS will watch on, undisturbed and disinterested. They will ask why and seek out the answers. MS will not answer....

Bla bla bla...it is a beta...

Back in the day, I gave up 95 when I saw 98 was loads better (keep in mind I didn't know about linux then). I gave up 98 and went to 2k pro because a friend gave me a disk, and it was much better. My wife digs XP and I'm kinda stuck with it. Arguably, it is better than 2k. Granted, it's all still bloated, proprietary, nani nani boo boo, I suckered you to crap! They ae getting better...

I'm just wondering, how much is this gonna cost? You know there's thos windows collectors guys too, who'll want all 7 versions of Vista! Time for me to dust off the old peecees and start up my Linux montage again!
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Calum on 11 June 2006, 14:41
my computer's motherboard can only address 768MB of RAM! oh well, looks like i am obsolete. too bad! i suppose i will just have to content myself with running the latest versions of fedora linux with no hardware issues whatsoever for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 11 June 2006, 18:02
pofnlice,
I agree Windows has been slowly improving but it's also growing rapidly. I'm sure I could tweak Vista so it uses a lot less memory by removing half the pointless shit but I don't see why I should bother. Nowadays the default configreation for most Linux distros are about as bloated as XP but there again XP was released 5 years ago so this is pretty stupid.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Xeniczone on 11 June 2006, 21:05
ARE YOU KIDDING the minimum requirments are a pentium 3 at 800mhz or a AMD athlon at 800mhz that is BS.
 
My computer is a pentium 4 at 2.2ghz and vista makes it lag around like crazy. I can't even play halo on vista because it wont load the menu.
 
Quote
It is very "pretty", The way window's minimize seems to be borrowed from OSX, they like "bounce" around when you minimize them

Microsoft has been stealing from Apple from the beginning when they introduced Windows 95.
 
The search at the top right of every window is stolen from mac.
transparent windows are barrowed from mac.
the bounceing and stuff when minimize/maximize is stolen from mac.
the logo for the menu is stolen from mac.
etc...
 
The only real difference between vista and Mac is Mac OS X can run on a 350mhz cpu and still have room to run msn itunes and photoshop all at the same time. Vista can't even run on a pentium 4 at 2.2ghz correctly.

The fastest thing I got out of this damn vista is downloading it in 30 mins.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 11 June 2006, 21:55
Quote from: Xeniczone
Microsoft has been stealing from Apple from the beginning when they introduced Windows 95.

Microsoft actually bought some code of them to use in Windows 3.0, I believe they aquired Paint Brush and Truetype fonts from Apple, I don't know about Windows 95+ though.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: pofnlice on 11 June 2006, 22:25
My point wasn't to say theu would get it right sooner than later...although admittedly it does seem that way. What I should have been more specific about is that it's a BETA. I imagine, since they (MS) are all ready posting stats for system requirements, that would mean they have firmly decided they do not intend to make it compatible for a more broad range of computers, regardless of what hardware is in them. This gets back to the old MES arguements about forced hardware upgrades by MS., just to keep up with thier newest release.

Also, if you've ever read Billy's book, you know this is headed exactly the way he wanted it too. As far as computing power and availability goes anyway.

Bottom line though seems to be the same. They have again created an OS which makes you as the user and customer, totaly dependant on MS for security, upgrades and stability. Regardless of the 3-5 hundred dolloars you all ready gave them, you will still be required to purchase third party programs and office suites and bla bla bla.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Calum on 11 June 2006, 22:36
Quote
Microsoft has been stealing from Apple from the beginning when they introduced Windows 95.


actually they have been ripping apple *and* ibm off since the very first release of microsoft windows (which i think was imaginatively called 1.0)

they even went to court about it i believe, back in those prehistoric days, did they not?
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: ReggieMicheals on 12 June 2006, 20:08
Yeah, they went into court, several times actually.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_vs._Microsoft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_litigation_of_Apple_Computer
Guess who won? Microsoft did in this particular inident.

Think if Digital Research was the company IBM selected to create operating systems for their computers instead of Microsoft. Then again, IBM would've been driven belly up with the high prices of CP/M.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: piratePenguin on 12 June 2006, 20:56
Quote from: ReggieMicheals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notable_litigation_of_Apple_Computer
LMFAO, Apple have done it all :D
carl sagan, hah, can't believe apple did all that!
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 12 June 2006, 21:44
Well I just got it installed on my work PC for the first time on a second hard drive. I didn't have time up until now. The PC is an A64 3000 with 1GB ram and a Geforce 6600 - basically a middle of the road PC right now. It installed much faster than I expected and  it seems fairly responsive. My machine supports the "aero" look and runs it fine.

I have work to do, so I can't play with it much right now. Some stuff is moved around but I didn't have too much trouble finding the control panel thingys I needed.

Oh an BTW, I installed it on a second hard drive, with the first hard drive having a freebsd bootloader, and the vista installer didn't touch the boot loader. I was suprised by that.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: emuelle1 on 13 June 2006, 01:57
I don't know if I'm ready to trust it. I put the Office 2007 beta on my laptap. It bogged the system down really bad, so I uninstalled it. It didn't uninstall right. I had Office 2003 and XP installed, and neither will work at all. Office 07 shows up in my add/remove programs list but when I tell it to remove it says there are no files to remove. 2003 and XP won't reinstall correctly at all, at least, not that they're useable. I spent several hours deleting Office registry keys, and barely made a dent in the total. Other than Open Office, I get the feeling that only a reformat of my laptop will fix all the problems the Office 2007 beta caused.

And so, I'm not even about to trust the Vista beta.

I'm working on switching to Linux, which will be slow. Linux doesn't work with wireless very well, but I need wireless support. I'm installing a Solaris DVD on my older laptop to see if it will do what I need. Since everybody but MS and Apple is going open source, it will benefit us all.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 13 June 2006, 03:52
You're right not to trust Vi$ta.

Actually, Linux does have decent wireless support with madwifi (http://sourceforge.net/projects/madwifi/) and ndiswrapper (http://ndiswrapper.sourceforge.net/)

I recommend madwifi if it supports your card ... if not then ndiswrapper will work ...

Quote
 With ndiswrapper, virtually every miniPCI (builtin), PCI, PCMCIA (Cardbus only) or USB wireless network card works in Linux.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: cymon on 13 June 2006, 04:11
I was rather impressed with Office 2k7 Beta.  The color scheme sucks, but the user interface is pretty damned good.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: emuelle1 on 13 June 2006, 17:34
The UI was nice, but it sucked up so much of my system I couldn't get anything else done.

I'll have to check in to madwifi. I got ndiswrapper to recognize my card, but for some reason my system would not see wlan0.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 13 June 2006, 18:21
I must say it's pretty slick. UAC works very well. It makes running as an administrator much safer and running as a limited user much easier. Also In domain enviroments it seems to have shed an annoying bug from XP where software deployment policies would take two reboots to take effect.

The machines I've ran it on are my dual core beast at home and my desktop PC at work. I don't think the system requirements are really that bad. Even on my machine at work, it runs very smootly and it's only a $1000.00 machine. Any middle of the road computer bought right now should be able to run Vista just fine when it gets released.

One thing I noticed is that Windows update will no longer work through the web browser. There is a control panel applet called "Windows Update" in which you do all of your updating tasks. If you try to go to update.microsoft.com, it will tell you to go to the control panel to do your updates.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 16 June 2006, 23:31
But isn't that stupid?

Surly they should make it so it runs on hardware at least two years old? Personally I'd like them set the minimum requirements for a typical five year old machine.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 17 June 2006, 09:55
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
But isn't that stupid?

Surly they should make it so it runs on hardware at least two years old? Personally I'd like them set the minimum requirements for a typical five year old machine.

I don't see any reason why it wouldn't run on a five year old computer. I just threw out an Athlon 750 machine that would have run Vista just fine. It was six years old.  The computers I tested on ran it with all of the fancy effects activated and it ran very fast - just as fast as XP. ON older machines you would have to turn down the graphical effects (it can revert all the way back to the "Windows Classic" look), but the security features, which I think are the best part of Vista would still be there.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 17 June 2006, 11:46
Don't believe you, my machine is less than five years old and it won't run Vista, unless you've upgraded your five year old machine which is of course cheating.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 17 June 2006, 18:11
Quote from: toadlife
I don't see any reason why it wouldn't run on a five year old computer. I just threw out an Athlon 750 machine that would have run Vista just fine. It was six years old.  The computers I tested on ran it with all of the fancy effects activated and it ran very fast - just as fast as XP. ON older machines you would have to turn down the graphical effects (it can revert all the way back to the "Windows Classic" look), but the security features, which I think are the best part of Vista would still be there.

What are the specs on this "typical" 5 year old machine may I ask ?

Oh, and yes I have to agree XP is faster than an old granny in a tar pit.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: piratePenguin on 17 June 2006, 22:59
Quote from: toadlife
but the security features, which I think are the best part of Vista would still be there.
Oh yes, the wonderful security features (http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=188578&cid=15541632) ;)
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: ReggieMicheals on 18 June 2006, 01:36
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
What are the specs on this "typical" 5 year old machine may I ask ?

Oh, and yes I have to agree XP is faster than an old granny in a tar pit.

Here's the "average" pre built PC specs of Dells in 2001:
866 Mhz P III CPU
SoundBlaster Live!
Nvidia Riva TNT2
200W Power Supply
128 MB PC-133 RAM
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Aloone_Jonez on 18 June 2006, 04:09
And bullshit will Vista run on that, infact XP would struggle to run on a machine that slow which says something as it's the year it was released.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 18 June 2006, 04:19
My point exactly ... I would really like to see toadlife actually support his arguments for M$ will a little more evidence and details ... and less bullshit ...
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 18 June 2006, 04:54
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Don't believe you, my machine is less than five years old and it won't run Vista, unless you've upgraded your five year old machine which is of course cheating.

A typical five year old PC would need a RAM upgrade to run Vista. 512MB of ram.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Orethrius on 18 June 2006, 05:48
Quote from: Toadlife
I don't see any reason why it wouldn't run on a five year old computer.


Quote from: Toadlife
A typical five year old PC would need a RAM upgrade to run Vista. 512MB of ram.


Okay, by that logic, I could put $5,000 worth of hardware into my 450 MHz P3's box and say that I'm running Vista Ultimate Edition flawlessly on an eight-year-old system.  I'm sorry, but I call bullshit.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Kelsey23 on 18 June 2006, 06:23
Quote from: toadlife
A typical five year old PC would need a RAM upgrade to run Vista. 512MB of ram.

Let's say its a 1GHz PC with 512MB RAM. It'll run Vista ok, but something makes me think it's not gonna cooperate well with Aero
 
 
I for one don't plan on trading in XP for Vista. Infact, once they start to make everything want Vista, I plan on single-booting my x86 as Linux only :-D
 
:macos:  <3
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: inane on 18 June 2006, 06:26
YOU'RE ALL THE FUCKING SAME!!! GET OFF MY FUCKING PORCH!!!

W1NDOWS 5UX0RS!!!!!...

Fuck I'm on Windows right now... only because I bought Macromedia Flash Pro 8. FUCK THE SOFTWARE INDUSTRY! I need an outlet for my creative energy...

Yeah yeah yeah Vista blah blah blah
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 18 June 2006, 06:58
Quote from: Orethrius
Okay, by that logic, I could put $5,000 worth of hardware into my 450 MHz P3's box and say that I'm running Vista Ultimate Edition flawlessly on an eight-year-old system.  I'm sorry, but I call bullshit.

First of all, I never said "ultimate edition". Ultimate edtion comes with all kinds of medi features, which you wouldn't want to even think about using on a five year old box, regardless of the OS.

Second of all, all that would be needed on that example Dell box posted earlier would be a RAM upgrade, which would cost around $60. Not $5000.

With a proper amount of RAM vista sans the aero eye-candy would run fine.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 18 June 2006, 07:00
Quote from: Kelsey23
Let's say its a 1GHz PC with 512MB RAM. It'll run Vista ok, but something makes me think it's not gonna cooperate well with Aero
 

Uhhh. Yeah. I didn't mention it because I though it would be obvious, but I guess the obvious isn't so obvious to folks around here. :nothappy:
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: piratePenguin on 18 June 2006, 07:05
Well Aero must be one bloated piece of shit considering Xgl runs dreamy (by that I mean: no obvious performance difference) on my Athlon XP 2600+, 256 MB RAM, radeon 9600
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: inane on 18 June 2006, 07:36
Quote from: toadlife
Uhhh. Yeah. I didn't mention it because I though it would be obvious, but I guess the obvious isn't so obvious to folks around here. :nothappy:

Yeah anybody who dislikes the actions of Microsoft must be a total idiot... :thumbup:
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Jack2000 on 18 June 2006, 09:00
about the RAM
you know Vista reqs a DDR2 ram not DDR ot SD !
so if you had computer from back then you are screwed
your mother board will not be compatible with that too...
and if you want a healthy system with fat-type of fsys
you are screwed tooo !
so i do not like vista i aint upgrading just for that ...
maby fot Half-life 2 or some other major hit that i like
but not for M$!
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 18 June 2006, 11:46
Quote from: Jack2000
about the RAM
you know Vista reqs a DDR2

No it doesn't.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 18 June 2006, 11:50
Quote from: piratePenguin
Well Aero must be one bloated piece of shit considering Xgl runs dreamy (by that I mean: no obvious performance difference) on my Athlon XP 2600+, 256 MB RAM, radeon 9600

Uhhh, the specs you just quoted would run Vista with Aero.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 18 June 2006, 11:52
Quote from: inane
Yeah anybody who dislikes the actions of Microsoft must be a total idiot... :thumbup:

I didn't say that.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: piratePenguin on 18 June 2006, 11:54
Quote from: toadlife
Uhhh, the specs you just quoted would run Vista with Aero.
Quote from: toadlife
A typical five year old PC would need a RAM upgrade to run Vista. 512MB of ram.
I don't have 512 MB RAM. Xgl runs fine and dandy with 256.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: pofnlice on 18 June 2006, 13:07
To me it seems it's all about obsoleting the 32bit machines in favor of the new 64 bit and getting consumers to
A. Purchase high-end package computers from manufacturers
or
B. Getting the guys who build their own to go out and by all the newest sound, video, mobo, cpu they can. Then sink a shit load of dinero into ram.

Either way, if the operating system is that demanding, it must be more bloat than necessary apps.

How about MS just follow the path of the underdogs for once. Just make an OS that does what it's supposed to? I mean if you had a pool of programmers and engineers like they do, you would expect some insanely crazy and efficient releases...one would think...
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 18 June 2006, 18:26
Quote from: piratePenguin
I don't have 512 MB RAM. Xgl runs fine and dandy with 256.

Exactly ... I mean it requires 512 MB not 256 MB ... in fact even XP has trouble with that little ram (had to upgrade my bro's RAM cuz he had problems and slowness with XP)

Oh, and a good set of RAM cards (512 MB) will cost you around $200 not $60.

For Aero: A graphics card upgrade ... I doubt old graphics card could run Aero without choking remember you need 128 MB of graphical memory (+ $400) ... the processor needs to be at least 1Ghz so you'll need to upgrade that (around $400). In fact you will need 1 GB RAM if you want to run Aero ... another $300 for a decent set or $400 for a good set. What if your mobo won't support some of the hardware ... another possible $200. Oh and you may need a DVD-ROM drive ... ($150). Another $150 for a better power supply 400 W. Plus Vi$ta ... $450

So this will run you around $1850-$2150
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Lead Head on 18 June 2006, 18:59
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
Exactly ... I mean it requires 512 MB not 256 MB ... in fact even XP has trouble with that little ram (had to upgrade my bro's RAM cuz he had problems and slowness with XP)

Oh, and a good set of RAM cards (512 MB) will cost you around $200 not $60.

For Aero: A graphics card upgrade ... I doubt old graphics card could run Aero without choking remember you need 128 MB of graphical memory (+ $400) ... the processor needs to be at least 1Ghz so you'll need to upgrade that (around $400). In fact you will need 1 GB RAM if you want to run Aero ... another $300 for a decent set or $400 for a good set. What if your mobo won't support some of the hardware ... another possible $200. Oh and you may need a DVD-ROM drive ... ($150). Another $150 for a better power supply 400 W. Plus Vi$ta ... $450

So this will run you around $1850-$2150

Saphire x1800GTO 256MB $189 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102021)
Athlon 64 3500 $114
 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103633)OCZ Gold Series 1GB DDR2 Kit $95 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820227046)
MSI K9N Neo-F AM2 Mobo $80 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813130050)
Antec TruePower 2.0 550Watt PSU $90 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16817103931)
BenQ DVD Burner $35 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827101002)

Tex, I have no idea where you get your prices from....The rig above is more then enough to run vista, ontop of that it can play pretty much any game known to man at max quality. All for $603.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: piratePenguin on 18 June 2006, 19:02
Quote from: Lead Head
Saphire x1800GTO 256MB $189 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102021)
Athlon 64 3500 $114
 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103633)OCZ Gold Series 1GB DDR2 Kit $95 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820227046)
MSI K9N Neo-F AM2 Mobo $80 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813130050)
Antec TruePower 2.0 550Watt PSU $90 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16817103931)
BenQ DVD Burner $35 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827101002)

Tex, I have no idea where you get your prices from....The rig above is more then enough to run vista, ontop of that it can play pretty much any game known to man at max quality. All for $603.
Can Aero output to the motherboard LEDs? Now that is impressive! ;)

EDIT: okay, seriously, you forgot Vista itself, and a harddrive, and a case... And $600+ is ALOT of money, considering I built this rig (excluding monitor, kb, etc) for e300 (well over) TWO YEARS AGO, and it runs Ubuntu 6.06, a modern < 3 week old OS, brilliantly. Even in the default of GNOME, which I could easily shitch to XFCE or fluxbox or something else more suited to older hardware.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Lead Head on 18 June 2006, 19:06
Actually, I could have gone alot cheaper.

EDIT, I did CHeaper while still being easily able to run vista

80GB Western digital HD
Foxconn Socket AM2 motherboard
Saphire x1300 256MB video card
430Watt Antec Truepower 2.0 PSU
1GB Ocz ram
AMD Sempron 2800


$409.96 from newegg.com
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: ReggieMicheals on 18 June 2006, 19:36
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
And bullshit will Vista run on that, infact XP would struggle to run on a machine that slow which says something as it's the year it was released.

Actually, it runs as smooth as the Windows 2000 that came on it. Some issues occur when I put effects on full blast, but it gives out a decent performance. I stress decent.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: piratePenguin on 18 June 2006, 19:37
(http://fu.sh.nu:82/WTF/nicechess.png)125mb for that piece of crap! HOW IN THE NAME OF FUCK!?
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: ReggieMicheals on 18 June 2006, 19:39
Christ that's a waste of CPU power.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: piratePenguin on 18 June 2006, 20:07
Quote from: ReggieMicheals
Actually, it runs as smooth as the Windows 2000 that came on it. Some issues occur when I put effects on full blast, but it gives out a decent performance. I stress decent.
Still: you'd think an OS would give very GOOD performace on a typical computer at the year of release...

Give me Ubuntu 6.06 on a typical 3 week old system. Ubuntu will not slow it down.

God I wanna download Vista and see how it runs on this rig with Aero disabled so I can look at the really important things, nameley how it copes (a) with no swap and (b) with loadsa swap being used. I've seen linux in both of these situations and it handled very well. (a) whenever I was messing about with the init system and forgot to enable the swap init script. Swap was disabled for nearly a month and I wouldn't have noticed except I tried to compile mozilla which led to an OOM (out of memory) error that would intelligently kill the compiling process (would windows do the same thing or would it bsod or what..?). And (b) right now, because I've been using over 300 mb of swap consistently for the last day thanks to helping rosetta@home (http:// http://boinc.bakerlab.org/rosetta/) and there isn't a huge performance difference. Programs start a little slower, that's it. Interestingly, ATM, 27% of my ram is cache.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 19 June 2006, 01:08
Quote from: Lead Head
Saphire x1800GTO 256MB $189 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102021)
Athlon 64 3500 $114
 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103633)OCZ Gold Series 1GB DDR2 Kit $95 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820227046)
MSI K9N Neo-F AM2 Mobo $80 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813130050)
Antec TruePower 2.0 550Watt PSU $90 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16817103931)
BenQ DVD Burner $35 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827101002)

Tex, I have no idea where you get your prices from....The rig above is more then enough to run vista, ontop of that it can play pretty much any game known to man at max quality. All for $603.

Saphire ... never heard of it. Anyway, you forgot Vi$ta ($450) bringing it to $1053. Besides, I was going for reliability not cheapness ... got my prices from froogle, not the cheapest, but something more reliable. As in the hardware won't break soon after you buy it as has happened to me several times when buying cheap ... now I only buy things that are not as cheap, but more reliable.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: WMD on 19 June 2006, 02:18
I have yet to have anything from Newegg fail on me.  This includes the ~$800 computer I put together two years ago.  You seem to be misguided.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Lead Head on 19 June 2006, 02:27
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
Saphire ... never heard of it. Anyway, you forgot Vi$ta ($450) bringing it to $1053. Besides, I was going for reliability not cheapness ... got my prices from froogle, not the cheapest, but something more reliable. As in the hardware won't break soon after you buy it as has happened to me several times when buying cheap ... now I only buy things that are not as cheap, but more reliable.

Erm...Saphire is signle handedly ATI's biggest and most reliable manufacturer, look around. Antec power supplies are amongst the highest rated, OCZ is known around the globe as pretty much the ultimate ram manufacturer, Wester Digital is reliable Athlon 64 3500s are awsome CPUs, MSI makes kickass mobos and BenQ is nearly the largest maker of DVD drives. Even google everything...
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 19 June 2006, 02:34
Quote from: piratePenguin
I don't have 512 MB RAM. Xgl runs fine and dandy with 256.

XGL and Aero have nothing to do with RAM. They have to do with the video card installed.

You could always splurge and spend the $20 bucks it would take to uprgade your system from 256 to 512 RAM. ;)
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 19 June 2006, 02:37
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
Anyway, you forgot Vi$ta ($450) bringing it to $1053.

That's insane. Vista will not cost $450.00.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 19 June 2006, 02:37
Quote from: Lead Head
Erm...Saphire is signle handedly ATI's biggest and most reliable manufacturer

ATI and reliable should not be in the same sentence.

My definition of reliability is that a component last without major problems for at least 10 years under normal use.

2 major companies that fail this are Creative and ATI ... and many cheap ones as well, I remember there was a cheap HDD that broke in 2 weeks, and other components you might find say in a Compaq. You get what you pay for ... cheap is cheap.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 19 June 2006, 02:39
Quote from: toadlife
That's insane. Vista will not cost $450.00.

It will cost at least $300 ... XP Pro was $299 when it was released ... shouldn't expect Vi$ta to cost less. Rumors are it will be around $450 ... who knows if they are true.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 19 June 2006, 02:59
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
It will cost at least $300 ... XP Pro was $299 when it was released ... shouldn't expect Vi$ta to cost less. Rumors are it will be around $450 ... who knows if they are true.

So you pulled that price out of your ass. That's what I thought. ;)

Anyhow, almost nobody pays retail price for Windows. They buy OEM copies with their new machines, or the parts they buy for their new machines.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Lead Head on 19 June 2006, 03:10
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
ATI and reliable should not be in the same sentence.

My definition of reliability is that a component last without major problems for at least 10 years under normal use.

2 major companies that fail this are Creative and ATI ... and many cheap ones as well, I remember there was a cheap HDD that broke in 2 weeks, and other components you might find say in a Compaq. You get what you pay for ... cheap is cheap.

What are you talking about!? Some guy had his radeon x1900 XTX super cooled under a phase change cooler, but he forgot to switch the cooler on, the core of the video card got hot enough to melt the the plastic bracket holding the evaporator on, the card STILL worked after being expose to 90*C+ temperatures...If thats not reliable, I don't know what is. ATi's lastest GPUs are extremely reliable. They shouldn't be any less reliable then nVidia considering ATi's and nVidia's chips are both made in the same place!

Cheap does not always mean cheap. Alot of companies clear out their excess stock and incase you havent been paying atention to the lastest GPU/CPU news, ATI is locked in a price war with nVidia and AMD is locked in a price war with Intel. What does this mean? The customer wins.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: cymon on 19 June 2006, 03:11
Quote from: Lead Head
Saphire x1800GTO 256MB $189 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102021)
Athlon 64 3500 $114
 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819103633)OCZ Gold Series 1GB DDR2 Kit $95 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16820227046)
MSI K9N Neo-F AM2 Mobo $80 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16813130050)
Antec TruePower 2.0 550Watt PSU $90 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16817103931)
BenQ DVD Burner $35 (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16827101002)

Tex, I have no idea where you get your prices from....The rig above is more then enough to run vista, ontop of that it can play pretty much any game known to man at max quality. All for $603.


Wow, someone's been out of the hardware loop.  Two GB of RAM is soon becoming the new gaming standard.  Also, no dual-core processor?  Don't bother with multitasking then.  I'd take an X1900XTX if I'm going ATi, which I'd never do because their linux drivers are shit.  You also don't even list a case.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Lead Head on 19 June 2006, 03:14
Quote from: cymon
Wow, someone's been out of the hardware loop.  Two GB of RAM is soon becoming the new gaming standard.  Also, no dual-core processor?  Don't bother with multitasking then.  I'd take an X1900XTX if I'm going ATi, which I'd never do because their linux drivers are shit.  You also don't even list a case.

Wtf? I was trying to make a CHEAP and good vista ready rig. not to mention the amount of apps that use dual core CPUs are very little. 2GB of ram is not becoming the standard(yet). It will soon, but 1GB of ram is the norm. The x1900XTX is overpriced and will be CPU limited until Conroe hits the streets, even then it will still be slightly CPU limited. Why spend $500 on an x1900XTX when the x1800GTO can still play any game maxed? you would assume the person upgrading would already have a case. Like I said, the goal of the above assembled rig is to make a good vista ready gaming rig. not "teh uber high end".
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: WMD on 19 June 2006, 03:42
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
and other components you might find say in a Compaq.

Be careful there.  My brother's computer is a 7-year old Compaq Deskpro (500MHz P3, 384MB RAM, 10+80GB hard drives).  Nothing in there has ever broken.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: worker201 on 19 June 2006, 03:46
Quote from: piratePenguin
Oh yes, the wonderful security features (http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=188578&cid=15541632) ;)
I thought this reply from the link was especially noteworthy:
Quote
When autorun is turn off for all removable media, and can only be turned on with an administrator password, and there is no override for "special DRM encoded media", then I will believe that MS is concerned about security. Until then, they are doing the minimum neccesary to meet a current PR, while making sure that control of MS Windows stays out of the hand of the end user, and in the hands of MS and it's partner advertisers.

When you wrap shit in pretty paper, it's still shit.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: cymon on 19 June 2006, 04:40
Quote from: Lead Head
Wtf? I was trying to make a CHEAP and good vista ready rig. not to mention the amount of apps that use dual core CPUs are very little. 2GB of ram is not becoming the standard(yet). It will soon, but 1GB of ram is the norm. The x1900XTX is overpriced and will be CPU limited until Conroe hits the streets, even then it will still be slightly CPU limited. Why spend $500 on an x1900XTX when the x1800GTO can still play any game maxed? you would assume the person upgrading would already have a case. Like I said, the goal of the above assembled rig is to make a good vista ready gaming rig. not "teh uber high end".


I have yet to see why you have put an ATi card in there.  ATi is crap.  Why someone will spend 500 dollars on a video card is the same reason Tiger Woods doesn't buy golf clubs at Wal Mart, because the 500 dollar card outperforms the 200 dollar card.  The number of applications using dual cores will rise, there are already dual core patches for games.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Lead Head on 19 June 2006, 04:42
Quote from: cymon
I have yet to see why you have put an ATi card in there.  ATi is crap.  Why someone will spend 500 dollars on a video card is the same reason Tiger Woods doesn't buy golf clubs at Wal Mart, because the 500 dollar card outperforms the 200 dollar card.  The number of applications using dual cores will rise, there are already dual core patches for games.

Well lets see, the x1800GTO and 7600GT are both on the same pricepoint, the x1800GTO outpeforms the 7600GT in almost everything.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 19 June 2006, 05:42
Quote from: Lead Head
Well lets see, the x1800GTO and 7600GT are both on the same pricepoint, the x1800GTO outpeforms the 7600GT in almost everything.

Well there is more to a Video card than raw performance. Many people avoid ATI because to this day, they still write very shitty drivers. Even if ATI drivers didn't suck, they would still be a no-go for me because they don't support FreeBSD at all.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: cymon on 19 June 2006, 05:44
A video card isn't worth shit if there's no drivers.  ATi's drivers are poor quality, so there goes any advantage of a more powerful card, especially on Linux/BSD.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Lead Head on 19 June 2006, 06:16
Quote from: toadlife
Well there is more to a Video card than raw performance. Many people avoid ATI because to this day, they still write very shitty drivers. Even if ATI drivers didn't suck, they would still be a no-go for me because they don't support FreeBSD at all.

Yes, but their drivers since the 6.x have been getting progesivley better with every version

EDIT:Odly enough, they support BeOS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon)

EDIT: What do you mean there goes the advantage? ATI is ontop of the ORB and still leads in games, nVidia has to resort to QUAD SLI to keep performence up. Plus nVidia said they were gonna have HDR+AA support with 7900 series. They didnt.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 19 June 2006, 07:19
Quote from: Lead Head
Yes, but their drivers since the 6.x have been getting progesivley better with every version

EDIT:Odly enough, they support BeOS.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon)

EDIT: What do you mean there goes the advantage? ATI is ontop of the ORB and still leads in games, nVidia has to resort to QUAD SLI to keep performence up. Plus nVidia said they were gonna have HDR+AA support with 7900 series. They didnt.

I've been hearing the "ATI's divers have been getting better" schtick for years now, and my experience tells me it's simply not true.

For a long time at work we specified that our machines get Nvidia only cards, because we had all had bad experience with ati drivers and didn't want to muck around with driver issues. Recently we bought five computers and our vendor shipped them with ATI x800 cards. The drivers cause random lockups and the machines were virtually unusable until a new driver came out about a week later. The driver was so bad that even Microsoft released the updated driver via Windows update.

In 2004 we bought some Alienware laptops for everyone in the department and the Radeon 9600 drivers have caused periodic BSODs ever since then. I finally got a new driver a couple of months ago and havn't had a bluescreen since. Look like it only took them two years to get that one right.

Bottom line: ATI's puts out too many unstable drivers.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: inane on 19 June 2006, 08:34
(http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/3562/desktop1io.jpg)


Ok well here's my current XP partition... with litestep I think it looks better than Vista could plausibly hope to look. Notice that it only takes up 19 mb... it seems that Microsoft can't even take a hint from it's third party developers.

BTW the litestep theme is Go! and the native vistual style is Glitch. Both are untouched.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: pofnlice on 19 June 2006, 14:04
Ati is for some and not for others. I have a Radeon 8500 LE in this one and it runs smooth and fine. Never had any problems with it.

Another older computer of mine is running and OLD ASS Radeon 7200, no problems at all.

One of my other systems (my SUSE puter) has a Nvidia Geforce 4, MX 4600. CRAP. It's why it's on my linux machine. I can't use it to play games in Windows, and support for it is better in Linux, except that I loose 3d emulation with it.

Besides all this kewl hardware bragging...and tech talk...and callin bullshit, I think you all proved the point of what I was getting at. At least an upgrade will be necessary to run it...
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: Orethrius on 19 June 2006, 14:19
Quote from: toadlife
So you pulled that price out of your ass. That's what I thought.


Actually, considering pricepoints of XP, and the fluctuating claims between UE being $250 - $380 and everything in between, I don't think that final estimate is too far off - and the situation did not warrant your flippant remark.

Quote from: toadlife
Anyhow, almost nobody pays retail price for Windows. They buy OEM copies with their new machines, or the parts they buy for their new machines.


Yeah, and if Microsoft ever decides to shore up that loophole, millions of vendors, users, and so on have just become pirates.  Congratulations, you need to buy ANOTHER copy!  That whole issue really only exists because the manufacturer edict is that "Windows OEM may only be sold with new computers"... it doesn't specify what constitutes a new computer (I know a couple places that sell it with Cat-5).  If Microsoft can make vociferous claims that every copy of Windows that fails WGA is pirated, what makes you think they're going to claim anything else for perceived distribution violations?  After all, they'd only get more business from the deal.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 19 June 2006, 18:22
Quote from: WMD
Be careful there.  My brother's computer is a 7-year old Compaq Deskpro (500MHz P3, 384MB RAM, 10+80GB hard drives).  Nothing in there has ever broken.

Well, he probably got lucky, my first PC a Compaq broke in 3 months. And I know many other people who have had problems with their compaqs ... and I've had lots of experience with them in computer science classes ... nobody wants to use them because they blow goats. Dells are at least 100x better and just as cheap.

Quote from: toadlife
So you pulled that price out of your ass. That's what I thought. ;)

Here is my ass:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/30/windows-vista-ultimate-450-us/

http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/4463/53/

I never pull things out of my ass ... I pull them from Google's ass :)
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: WMD on 19 June 2006, 19:47
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
Well, he probably got lucky, my first PC a Compaq broke in 3 months. And I know many other people who have had problems with their compaqs ... and I've had lots of experience with them in computer science classes ... nobody wants to use them because they blow goats.

Those were probably consumer-level Compaqs.  That's the trick.  The Deskpro is a business machine.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: cymon on 19 June 2006, 22:02
Quote from: Jack2000
about the RAM
you know Vista reqs a DDR2 ram not DDR ot SD !
so if you had computer from back then you are screwed
your mother board will not be compatible with that too...
and if you want a healthy system with fat-type of fsys
you are screwed tooo !
so i do not like vista i aint upgrading just for that ...
maby fot Half-life 2 or some other major hit that i like
but not for M$!


Processors and motherboards require DDR2, not operating systems.  Vista doesn't care whether you're on DDR or DDR2.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: toadlife on 19 June 2006, 22:14
Quote from: H_TeXMeX_H
Well, he probably got lucky, my first PC a Compaq broke in 3 months. And I know many other people who have had problems with their compaqs ... and I've had lots of experience with them in computer science classes ... nobody wants to use them because they blow goats. Dells are at least 100x better and just as cheap.



Here is my ass:

http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/30/windows-vista-ultimate-450-us/ (http://www.engadget.com/2006/05/30/windows-vista-ultimate-450-us/)

http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/4463/53/ (http://www.itwire.com.au/content/view/4463/53/)

I never pull things out of my ass ... I pull them from Google's ass :)

Thanks Tex. :)

If XP pro was $300.00 when it came out in 2001, that would translate into $325.00 adjusted for inflation today. So, if those guesses are correct, ultimate will be more expensive that XP Pro was.  But ultimate is media center/tablet PC edition rolled into one, so there are more features. One of the lesser editions would probably suffice for most people. I'm curious what the other version will cost.

I still maintain that quoting retail prices is not realistic, as almost no one pays them, and the idea of Microsoft "cracking down" and preventing people from buying OEM versions sounds far fetched to me. One of the things you give up when buying OEM version is support from Microsoft. Providing support is expensive, which is why OEM versions cost so much less. When you buy a retail version, you are entitled to a certain amount of free phone support directly from Microsoft. With OEM versions, Microsoft offloads the responsibility of support to the OEM. If you buy an OEM version from newegg, then the "OEM" is you.
Title: Re: Vista public BETA released
Post by: H_TeXMeX_H on 19 June 2006, 23:16
Quote from: WMD
Those were probably consumer-level Compaqs.  That's the trick.  The Deskpro is a business machine.

Oh ... still I bet an equivalent (business machine) Dell is better and just as cheap.