Last message on previous page:
Basically, you can't develop for hardware that doesn't exist.

And what hardware didn't exist?



K8 was out long before Intel's first x86-64 offering. The hardware was there. It's just because the industry is so Intel-centric that they don't do anything to take advantage of AMD's innovations unless Intel copies them. Bascially, no excuse. Once Opteron and Athlon hit the market, the hardware for 64-bit was in place.

I guess money walks. AMD's small percentage of market share compared to intel's wasn't going to be enough to move the 64 bit industry. Now that mostly all new systems will be 64 bit it makes sense that the ball will get rolling a lot faster. I just think it's too bad that XP x64 never got a chance to mature. It had potential to be such an awesome robust OS. Just the fact that there isn't much SW support means less spyware and viruses. But now we'll never know if x64 even matters because Vista will be the next thing. I'm just not sure if we'll ever be able to get settled into an OS anymore and that's frustrating.

Photographer, you Legend :-)

lol Guillone got owned. And no more than he deserved. Blaming microsoft because nobody is writing software or drivers for the 64bit version of Vista. LOL.

Microsoft has had a 64 bit platform available for a few years now. Is it Microsoft's fault that developers and hardware companies haven't produced software and drivers because they are concentrating on the 32bit market, because that is where the money is. Consumers are what drives most companies.

Yes you can have your opinion, but, you at least try to make it an educated opinion. All the things you mentioned in your posts Guillone are really odd. Like the web development. I know lots of companies that develope web sites etc. that use Windows, but they don't use asp.net or any other microsoft software.

You mention that you want open source and then say you are going the apple route? Isn't that a contradiction? Isn't Apple really proprietary?

Then you mention the price, that apple is so much cheaper, that a windows machine is much more expensive? You said you would have to spend $5000 for a computer capable of running 64 bit Windows. What about this PC:-
2gb of ram,
a core duo CPU running at 1.85GHZ,
300GB sata2 hardrive,
19 lcd monitor
Vista home premium installed.

More than capable of running Vista 64bit or 32 bit. I could buy this PC today for about 950 dollars. I don't know where you shop, but I would suggest you try a new place. The Mac with roughly the same specs costs about 500 dollars more at least. I don't know where you get your information from, but, in the real world, A vista Pc is much cheaper than a mac.

I too am curious about the "fun factor" that the mac has over the PC. Please explain this? Please!!!

Again, What a post Photographer, well wrote and well delivered :-)

So you persist even though your opinion is based on incorrect assumptions ? Brilliant.

You call an OS that has less than 5% of the market share viable ? Please review Economics 101 and then return to the conversation.

And you can't do this on a MS box, why ? As someone who manages 14 websites, I can assure you that you do not need ASP.NET or any other MS proprietary technology to build a website. How about PHP ? How about ASP ? Heck, how about plain ol' HTML and CSS ?

<snip drivel>

Consumers don't need to access more than 4GB of RAM. That's why there aren't many 64 bit apps in the first place much less ones that are targetd to consumers.

We can tell. Apple is such a raving success story. </sarcasm>

Ah ! The infamous iPod ! What a proprietary piece of garbage !

Really ? Where ? Show me the money !

Oh this ought to be good !

I have and your full of it.

A sign ? Yes that he's moving on and hopefully you're growing up. Now don't forget to brush your teeth and wear your rubbers when it's raining..

LOL ! Guess what I'm running ? Vista ! And the uptime is now at 5 days straight. No crashes. Sound like someones using beta drivers or poorly written applications.

Sounds like a shill working for Microsoft.

Not everyone that can articulate their points better than you is a shill.

Obviously, none of you guys have a clue about what my point was with my conversation. I'm not a Mac lover, never owned one and could give a shit.
I've owned a Microsoft box of some kind since 1983. I'm sure they'll fix all the bugs in Vista. They always do. I've built my own and have programmed them on the job and used them for consumer amusement for almost 25 years now.
I could give a shit about which one is best, we'll let all you four year olds argue that one out. I'm retired, don't need a fancy rig anymore. Finally, Mac has managed to figure out how to market to a certain segment of consumer.
And, they are gaining market share. I never said Mac wasn't proprietary. They have always been so proprietary that I never bought one because of it.
Today, however, they seem to have enough off the shelf useful consumer oriented software to pretty much do what the average Joe needs to do.
Surf the Web, make a video, make a CD, watch a movie, etc. Also, their pricepoint has finally become reasonable for what you get. Nice little packaged unit with some apps to amuse yourself with. Vista appears to, according to Tom's article, not me (which is what I was referencing, not engaging in a bunch personal attacks like you assholes) be moving somewhat towards a more limited hardware model than before. It's not that you can't run a cheap video card on Vista, it's that you have to run a fast one to get Ultimate to work. And I understand the pros and cons of why that is. the OS is using the GPU to do some cool tricks if you have the juice to take advantage of it. So, they'll continue to dominate 95% of the space and that's fine. It's just nice to know now we have a legitimate alternative to Bill Gates' vision of what a PC should be. I like choices and basically we've never had one until now. I also like the movement on the Internet that is trying to make the concept of an OS almost irrelevant. I don't think that will ever happen, but it's nice to see them try to develop online apps. It just gets more people into the creative mix and I think that is what leads to faster innovation; not, stifled monopolies. They have the advantage of bringing stability to the marketplace, but it is always disruptive technology that moves us forward. Can you imagine where we'd be if Bill Gates would have bought up the Internet and choked it off? So, yea, Steve Jobs is a proprietary prick, but at least he keeps trying to push the envelope. Gates' business model is like Sony: let the shakers jump on the new stuff and bankrupt themselves and then he sees where the trend is and move in and dominates the space. Great business model.
Also, I know consumers don't use 64bit machines; I just wanted to see the day when A full blown workstation would be available at the consumer level so enthusiasts like myself could have fun playing with it without having to spend an arm and a leg. There are still no apps, that isn't anyone's fault. The market determines that. Leopard will be just as limited on 64 bit apps as everyone because no demand has been created at this time. So, go yell at some Mac geeks and get off my ass. Jesus, you guys are a bunch of doorknobs.

LOL, Sorry guillone if it came accross as a personel attack, but I still dont have a clue what your point is!!

And secondly, I am still waiting for you to tell me what the "Fun factor" is in owning a mac over a pc?

I have vista installed on my parents Pc as a test. It has 1GB ram, Athlon XP 2.4 GHZ, 256 radeon 9800XT and a 80GB harddisk. It runs fine. It's the ulitmate edition with Aero installed. It's not the fastest, but then again the hardware is over 4 years old and would probably cost about $300 today. And if you install 1 GB more ram it runs fairly smooth. Vista seems to be running more resources, but if you read the superfetch article you will understand why. And it works, even on my parents PC, apps might take a while to start first time round, but, a few tries later the apps open really quickly.

And you mention spending an arm and a leg for a 64 bit workstation and again I have to say to you where are you buying your computers? You can a buy a full blown 64 bit workstation for less than a 1000 dollars. Heck, you could probably get one without a monitor for 600 dollars. You can still install open office, you can get loads of free apps to burn CD's you do everything that an average Joe wants to do without buying anything else other than the PC and operating system. Why would you "an average Joe" who is settling for a mac with nothing fancy on it, want the ultimate edition of Vista?

We have never been fighting about which one is best, We have discussing the reasons that you gave for not going with microsoft. And I can't see one valid reason, other than the fact that you hate microsoft :-) That point comes accross loud and clear.

You keep mentioning price and cost and movers and shakers bankrupting themselves to jump on the new stuff. That's after I pointed out to you that the Mac is more expensive, you can get a Vista machine for less.

And despite all you say, the people that have been pushing and pushing the developement of new hardware have been gamers. They have been the ones jumping on the new hardware. Microsoft had to come with up with a whole new operating system to make directx10 available to said gamers.

Which leads me to another point you make, Steve Jobs is a legend for pushing the evvelope. But Microsoft is not? It's easier for a small company to make big changes. Like take linux, that changes all the time without no big fuss, because there isn't enough users to make a fuss. Same with Apple. But when a company likes Microsoft changes it's OS, then people jump on the complaining bandwagon. It needs to much hardware, it is too different, it is blah, blah, blah. Even though the hardware capable of running Vista has been around for 2 years now. And again, you don't have to go to Vista. Just wait until you are buying a new PC then get vista, that's what most of the consumers that I deal with in my business are doing.

It's nice to have the creative mix all right. But with the internet I think that innovation would be there anyway. Because people are inventive and like to try new things. But, you need the stability of a company like microsoft. They provide a uniformity in the business and home user world.

And, lol, truth be told, We all hate Microsoft because they are so successfull :-)

And again, apologies, my last post wasn't mean't to be a personel attack on you Guillone.

All valid points you make, my friend. I guess the easiest way to describe what I'm saying is: after driving a BMW for 25 years I'll think I'll try a Mercedes. I don't know if it is as good as a BMW but sometimes change is good.
With the release of Vista they haven't given me personally any impelling reason to use it. I like XP just fine. So, I thought it might be time to add a Mac to my household and see if Jobs finally figured out how to make a computer. (hahaha) I'm keeping my two XP boxes though, because I know they work and they're paid for and do everything I need. I didn't really see anything new in Vista that caught my imagination.
Now, the only question is this: is it o.k. if I feel that way? Or, do I need permission from all you guys who hate Apple to try one out?
Can we even discuss Apple as a possibility here at Tom's website or is this a Microsoft only site? Because I would like some honest feedback on both platforms to make a better informed choice without getting flamed for wanting to have the discussion. I know Apple and I know Microsoft, I was here long before both of them and watched the whole enchilada unfold. I remember when this discussion was "IBM is the 600lb gorilla that is trying to crush the competition." The reason we all fell in love with Gates was because he stood up to them and beat them at their own game. David beat Goliath. The reason he got my money and Steve Jobs didn't was because he was open and cheap and Jobs was all proprietary and arrogant. That seems to be shifting now. Apple is changing it's tune and recognizing they need the consumer, not just a small group of stuck up yuppies. Whereas I'm mostly just confused about this release; what exactly do I need it for? And yes, I will wait like always for the smoke to clear and see where we are headed here before I purchase Vista. I was under the wrong impression that Vista was going to move us into 64bit computing and the vendors would be releasing some cool software at the same time to make us want to get that next killer app...nada.

thanks for toning it down a notch, I don't respond well to flaming and sarcasm, too old a dog for that kind of b.s.
Cost wise I see know advantage either way, it's a non-issue. I look at a Gateway 5730XT (I think that is it)with a quad core and they want four to five thousand for it. I was going to get one with Vista Ultimate until I read this article from Tom's Hardware;

So, is this article saying I'm better off sticking with XP? These are things I need to know.
Photoshop is something I use alot. My main intensive needs are Photoshop( I do all the workflow for my wife who is a professional photographer), multitrack audio recording with all the bells and whistles. I use Sonar so they got me covered on the software for 64bit.
I'd like to speed up video editing and start shooting in HD. I need the horsepower to do that and still multitask at the same time. I'm a power hog. hahaha. This P4 3.2Ghz laptop is just not keeping up with me anymore. So, I was all set to jump until, like a dumb-ass, I read this article. I'm still pissed about it. So, I took it out on Gates. hahahaha
He's a big boy, he can handle it. I figure by now, he's got enough of my money to buy me a new PC. lol
Any thoughts?
Peace.

One things that still confuses me (and correct me if I'm wrong) is the resentment of everybody for the money they have paid to MS for their OS ("Bill has got enough of my money...blah..blah" ). How is this any different with a Mac...Apple charges $ 129 for their OSX Tiger version, which surely isn't a big difference from the $ 99-250 (depending on version) you have to pay for a Vista OEM...Sure, when buying a new mac you get the OS for 'free' (as in, factored into the price you pay) but isn't this the same with buying a PC from Dell, or Gateway? See cost is a non-issue in this debate, since both OSes (OSX and Vista) cost money, and they cost about the same for the same functions (Home Premium/Bussines will be the OS fit for most people).

In my experience, the initial thing with Vista was 'oh, it looks fancier, big deal', but the more I use it (my main and only OS since it was released) the more am pleasantly surprised by all the not so obvious improvements. Productivity has increased a lot since apps load faster, and multitasking is SOOO much easier with Aero (much more than just 'eye candy'). New file and folder structure takes some getting used to, but are a real improvement IMO. I have not had ANY performance issues, nor have I had a single moment where I thought; mmm...XP did that So much faster. Photoshop CS2 (One of my most used programs), although not optimised yet to benefit from Vista's new caching systems, runs fine (like it did in XP), and perhaps CS3 (in Beta now) will make more use of Vista's 'performance enhancing drugs'.

As for some feedback with regards to OSX. I have last used Apple in a production environment in the OS9 era, and wasn't overly pleased with them. I have now spent the last couple of days playing around with OSX 'Tiger', and I still feel that way. I feel a lot more restricted in an Apple environment than in a Windows environment (Vista included), and it still REALLY REALLY bugs me that I have no free choice of components (and the components they DO offer are always at least a generation behind, especially where GFX are concerned). This may sound strange is your ears, but I think the reason that apple still has such a small market share is because it is so restrictive and proprietary. Mac users may see that as 'think different', but different in this case means 'think apple' because anything else is unsupported. And the fact that apple now allows XP/Vista to be installed on their hardware surely says something about how Steve Jobs really thinks about XP/Vista, as it may be Apples ultimate survival tactic...Have you not noticed that Apples sales went up, roughly at the same time they introduced Intel and Boot Camp?

On 64bit...TBH I think Vista may well be the OS to move us into 64bit, but that move will occur when the market is ready, and the limits of 32bit are no longer acceptable...Not because an OS forces it upon us. Many users will move from 32bit to 64bit during the Vista lifecycle, but at their own pace. I myself have taken a more cautious approach with my new PC (Vista 32bit), after spending 2 years struggling with support for my previous PC running XP64 on AMD64.

The more I use Vista, and the more I read about it on Driver forums and OpenGL forums, the more I think this article was written at a bit of an unfortunate moment (hey, we all want to be the first to tell the story!)...Right before some major driver releases, and well before Software developers have gotten around to making sure their Software can make the most of Vista.

All these discussions have gotten me on a bit of a fact finding journey the last couple of weeks, and I am rediscovering Operating Systems I have left behind a long time ago (Linux, MacOS, even Win98...) but not once during this journey have I felt the urge to drop Vista and go Mac or Linux. That is my experience, and I have found most FUD on the various blogs to be uninformed and biased BS. If I read somewhere that Vista or any OS 'breaks' something or restricts something or slows something down, I am not the one to take that as a universal truth, and the enthusiast in me makes me want to find out for myself. I almost every case with Vista, I have been pleasantly surprised to find out that often the opposite is true (at least on my Rig...)

One last thing...In the last few years, I too have often felt the urge to get myself an Apple, since I have to admit there is something very attractive about their hardware and software (design that is). But everytime I ask myself 'What on earth would I do with it...?', and in my case that question has remained unanswered...

Yeah agree! MS has done us (wanna be geeks) a favor and all vendors. By creating a new OS for us to work with. MS has made a more user friendly OS
I should say i have had Apple for two years.. And Nothing would run on it except Applsoftware. ( i was very limited)
Apple is great for ppl who can't think for themselves. I have friends that bash MS. But they don't know how to copy and paste.

I have upgraded to vista from feb 1st. Yes there are a few drivers missing, But over all it the best thing i did. Vista has great WOWs. But more than that. Has some owesome features, over xp. It went flawless.
I did a reload on a reformated drive with xp. Ran update. then loaded vista ulitmate. And it has ran without a hitch. I have loaded a few games. It got stuck on BF2. But, after updateing it. Boom again ran with out hitch.
I have a moble 5 pda.. for danest thing i couldn't get it to work very well with XP. But with vista. I pluged it in. Vista found the device. requred a d/l and Boom there it was. ready to sync. Man that was the best!

About Nivida.. they are working to get the drivers out. (due in time)

But i guess what i'm tryying to say... bashing it before you try it kinda.. B.S.
So If you haven't loaded it yet ( Any OS) Don't bash it before you ride.
I'm riding a awesome ride! Peace on earth!

Actually I think all of the nVidia drivers are posted. Finally. I installed the NF4 drivers on my system and was pleased to note a slight but detectable increase in performance.

My system is racking up some serious Vista uptime. No crashes and no reboots except after the installation of the NF4 drivers.Running fast and smooth. Is Vista a huge update in the GUI from XP ? Not to me. I have it setup almost exactly like XP. But it's what's under the hood that counts. XP is a 5+ year old OS that had been seriously revised and updated 2X with numerous other patches. Vista rolls all of that and more up into a coherent platform. There's only so much one can do with an old platform before it's time to make a break and start fresh. In 1.5 years Vista will be flying on dual and quad core systems. Hopefully there will be significantly more 64 bit apps that are much better written to take advantage of Vistas capabilities.

Well, I should make a note to my comment.
From the Nividia release:

http://us.download.nvidia.com/Wind [...] _Notes.pdf

About mid way down.

ForceWare Graphic Driver (Release 100 Notes)

NVIDIA SLI Technology
On SLI-ready systems, the NIVIDIA Control Panel now includes SLI controls 3D settings Catagory task page.
This driver has limited support for NVIDA SLI techonlogy on top DirectX
9.0 and openGL applications for GeForce 8800 GPU only.
NIVIDIA will continue to provided driver updates for NVIDIA SLI on an ongoing basis to add new product support.

So I have 2x7950gt xfx extremes on board. And i can't use them!
Yes my chips work and one card works (I think).
But when i plug into my second card to sli.. NO GO!

So, I see they have SLI for 8800 cards sorta.
But for the masses out there that bought 2 cards to run on SLI.
Sry out of luck at this time.
So In DUE time NVIDIA Hopfully will have it together!

So, once again it early on the ride..... tick-toc.. tick-toc...tic-toc.. lol

Peace on earth!

xxxxyyyy

Thanks for your insight. Those are very useful comments for me, I appreciate it.

thanks for the info, what are your opinions of the Gateway 530XT quad-core for this new Vista OS? That is what I was looking at before I got sidetracked on this article. Any hardware considerations? Or does it look like a runner?
thanks