Page 1 of 2
So you thought XP was bad -
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 3:27 pm
by :FI:Sneaky_Russian
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 4:41 pm
by Deathsledge
yep, think i will stick with my XP home for as long as they allow me too
Gonna Wait as LONG as Possible!
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 5:20 pm
by :FI:Heloego
There's been a lot of negative comment in a lot of places.
The Windows "One Care" package really cracks me up.
May as well let the fox guard the henhouse.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:34 pm
by :FI:Dr_Strangelove
Well I have Vista64 on the way as we speak. Will let you guy know what the story is. I just hope I can install IL2 on it still.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:17 pm
by Gurkesaft
I never understood why OSX looks so gorgeous with only 150MB of RAM and VISTA requires an entire GB just to sit there, looking at you. The only functionality I need is a window that leads me to IL-2. Everything else is ridiculous.
Posted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 7:24 pm
by :FI:Falcon
:FI:Gurkesaft wrote:... The only functionality I need is a window that leads me to IL-2. Everything else is ridiculous.
hear-hear!
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:55 pm
by :FI:Dr_Strangelove
:FI:Gurkesaft wrote:I never understood why OSX looks so gorgeous with only 150MB of RAM and VISTA requires an entire GB just to sit there, looking at you. The only functionality I need is a window that leads me to IL-2. Everything else is ridiculous.
Not that I am saying M$ knows what they are doing, but your Vista system actually learns your program habits and will look like it is using a lot of RAM when it is really not. Vista has Prefetch and other things working to try to speed up applications.
But I get what you are saying. Since I went 64bit, I did also decide to go with 4GB Ram this time around...er.... just in case.
Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:08 pm
by Badger
Hoepfully Vista will recognise all of that 4GB for use. At the moment XP doesn't, it keeps 25% of it tucked away whether we like it or not.
Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:24 pm
by AltarBoy
My upcoming rig will have 4 Gigs RAM also. But I'm gonna wait awhile until buying Vista.
Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 2:33 pm
by :FI:Dr_Strangelove
:FI:Badger wrote:Hoepfully Vista will recognise all of that 4GB for use. At the moment XP doesn't, it keeps 25% of it tucked away whether we like it or not.
That is due to the 32-bit limitation of the operating system. 64-bit does not have that problem.
Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 2:52 pm
by Badger
Fantastic - that's worth knowing and possibly me upgrading! Thanks Doc.
How's the game demo coming along? Are we allowed to know the focus/genre etc. or is it top secret?!
Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 4:05 pm
by :FI:TacticalS!
Something's odd Doc. I mean in another thread M$ is giving away their OneCare and everyone is grabbing it (or so it would seem), but mention a program (Vista) that costs some coin and it's all bad. Double-standard maybe?
No, I didn't think so either.
Anyway I can’t think of any other company I would want to make my OS. Do you think other companies wouldn’t embed their stuff in their OS? And don’t get me started with Linux. While I don’t completely trust Apple’s chairman, I mean the lad always wears jeans, I wouldn’t mind ditching all PCs for Macs, provided all my games properly worked.
I am personally surprised that we haven't heard about a lot of real issues with Vista (those 5 reasons are lame in my opinion). Perhaps the delay was worth the wait. In any event I will not be upgrading my current rig to Vista since I am limited to 1 GB of RDRAM with this old Dell machine. My next one will likely have 4 GB also. Looking forward to the 64-bit architecture and the pretty interface of Vista.
Doc are you buying a DX10-compatible video card or waiting?
Tact - "Bill Gates fanboy?" - S!
Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:09 pm
by :FI:Gurberly
I just wanna know why it is almost twice the price in the UK as it is in teh US
It's not clear where these figures come from, as retail prices for Vista vary. For example, according to the recommended retail prices on Amazon.com and Amazon.co.uk, Vista Ultimate is pegged at $399.99 (203 pounds) in the United States, and $722.85 (369.99 pounds) in the United Kingdom.
Explaining away such a huge disparity in selling prices isn’t easy, surely it can’t just be old-fashioned greed, a ‘charge what you think you can get’ marketing policy? Steve Dunn, Microsoft’s finance director should know, so I asked him to help me out, and here’s what he said: “Microsoft wants to ensure transparent pricing for all its customers. Although the current dollar/pound exchange rate is high comparative to the beginning of 2006 it's not unprecedented in the context of fluctuations over the past few years. Other factors impact the price of Microsoft products, not least the costs incurred in delivering European packaging and settings plus the cost of marketing in many languages. In addition the scale and volume of the US market will drive a price differential.â€
Now I don’t know about you, but that didn’t do the trick for me – it seems to leave lots of questions unanswered, such as ‘why does it cost so much to deliver European packaging?’. I have my Windows XP Professional edition pack in front of me, and try as I might, I haven’t been able to find anything specifically European on or in it at all. In fact the leaflet inside directs me to telephone numbers in the US and Canada if I want support
G
Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:30 pm
by Badger
Good call Mr G.
Well, car manufacturers have called the UK 'Treasure Island' for years, so maybe the ethos is spreading.
Posted: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:36 pm
by :FI:Sneaky_Russian
(369.99 pounds) in the United Kingdom
I can buy a new rig for that with Vista installed