Last message on previous page:
DX10 is a null issue currently. Crysis in DX10 is the same as crysis in DX9 except for a few shader improvements. I think Lost Planet and Bioshock look a bit nicer so if you play those vista is a good option. Call of Juarez is so slow in DX10 that you need crossfire or SLI just to get playable framerates at 1280x1024. Thats what you get when you try to patch a game with DX10 code.

^Exactly

I agree, dx10 is pretty much a passover for most people, there's no reason to try and use it as of now. Anyone with a half a financial sense won't buy Vista, it doesn't actually offer any real improvements over xp. And if you can find one I highly doubt it will be worth the investment with either just the operating system or the operating system and all new hardware and some peripherals. :-p

needless to say there is a LOT of room for improvement... and that can be a positive thing. right?

Well I think DX10 has alot of potential. The problem is the implementation. Currently all games that use it have "tacked-on" DX10 code (some better than others *cough* CoJ) which is obviously going to run poorer than if the game was built on native DX10 code from the ground up. Backwards compatibility has always been the achilles heal of software. It's what makes Windows bloated, all those generic drivers for hardware that shouldn't be running in this decade or hardware that almost nobody uses.

Just keep on ignoring the truth. You can't compare XP Crysis w/Very-high settings to Vista Crysis DX10 as far as performance goes. And in Vista you CAN run Crysis in DX9 and the performance is the same and has been proven so. Also stop saying stupid $hit like "Anyone with a half a financial sense won't buy Vista". Not everybody owns a 6 year old PC. Believe it or not some people have actually bought computers in the last year and probably got Vista, not XP. Vista is also about the same price or cheaper then the comparable version of XP. Home Premium $110 vs XP MCE $115. Also as far as why use Vista, well if I have to read one more "Why does my XP computer detect my 4GB of RAM as 3.25"...

yeah, you're an idiot, no offense. most people already own xp, not to mention the fact that under vista's license you can't transfer it to any new pc, but with xp you can. do you ever think? and yeah, people have bought computers in the past year... it's called linux, that's free... wow, that's 100 dollars less that i have to spend and if i want to play games and ALREADY OWN XP then hey, look, i'm playing games without spending 100 bucks or more, and have a regular os that doesn't get virus' so i just saved even more money on antivirus/antispyware software. really? people don't like spending money on crap they don't need.... well, most people don't, some do. but there are very few people here/any that fall into that consumer category.
and about your stupid "4GB of RAM..." eg. 64 bit linux, 64bit xp. ones free, the other one is not. not to mention the fact that EVEN LESS crap is going to run on shista 64 than shista 32. :-p

k, i'm done for now.

Dude, we get it. You use Linux. You're Uber leet. You must be seeing as you're among the less 1% of people who actually use Linux for personal computing. Also as far as transfering XP to a new PC that's assuming you just throw your old one in the trash. I actually have a copy of Fedora 8 right next to me. But if you want to get into the finances of it, the extra time I would spend on your self proclaimed 'work arounds' would cost me more then just installing Vista64-which I've yet to have a single app not work on the first try. Hey, good for you that you have so much time that you can spend it work arounds that for things that will just work on either XP or Vista. Think about how much time you spend doing extra work trying to get stuff to work in Linux and then multiply that by the hourly rate of even a minimum wage job and Linux isn't financially worth it. BTW I also received my copy of Vista Ultimate for free (actually I made money off getting it, but thats another topic).

wow, you're ignorant. I havn't spent time on workarounds for anything that SHOULD work in linux because it all does the workarounds are for things that arn't standard... because it does things that windows won't do. for instance, run my xbox controller... took me less than 5 minutes to get it up and running in half life 2 where as i couldn't get it to run right at all in windows... you know, hardwireing the xbox port into my motherboard's usb connections. that's a workaround... it actually took less time than i've already wasted on feeling sorry for you...

Um, I've put vista on several different computers (though only one at a time with the same disc).

Have you ever used Windows? Besides that fact that wired 360 controllers work natively with Windows (XP and Vista) I've been using regular XBox controllers with Windows for almost 5 years. I believe I still have the driver if you want it. Actually here's a link that took 5 seconds to find:

http://www.llamma.com/xbox/Archive/xbcd.htm

I'd be careful about calling somebody ignorant when you couldn't even figure out something as simple getting a XBox controller to work under Windows. This is something thats been around for awhile. Maybe Windows is just to difficult for you all together.

PS

How does hardwiring to your motherboard have anything to do with OS? And since you brought up "financial sensability", hardwiring to you motherboard is the financially stupid way to go about this mod. Besides the risk to your motherboard, it's much easier to buy an extension cable for the XBox controller and splicing into a regular USB connector. Then you can use the controller for both XBox and PC via the break away cable with two different connectors, plus you can use the modded controller on any PC, not just the one you hardwired it to.

XP is seven years old.
Let it go.
XP isn't going to disappear.
MS is discontinuing the manufacture of new XP CD ROM's
Licencing discontinues Jan 31st 2009.
MS has not given a date when it will stop supporting XP.

If XP is that important to you, buy a few license keys. I'm certain MS will appreciate accepting your money.

Question to ponder.
Were there many people installing Windows 95 on new computers in 2002?

You CAN compair DX9 on Vista nad XP and thats EXACTLY what I am compairing. And also XP can detect 4GB+ as long as it is XP x64. Even Vista x86 wont see 4GB+

I use Linux (Red Hat and Ubantu ) and Its a great OS for setting up a really protected sever. And you can also do things that you can't do in XP/Vista, for example you can use Linux to Mod the BIOS/Drivers for the 360 and you also have some good security apps for Linux. Let it rest, after all these are all personal views and each view is different so please don't start flaming.

I find linux is only useful for fixing XP after I tried to turn it into vista

Note: Don't try replacing core XP DLLs with Vista DLLs, you will BSOD next time you start up

Shadow7037 93: If you're comparing XP DX9 Crysis VS Vista DX9 Cryis, then please post some results show that XP having some real advantage?
This is Vista DX9 from my PC this afternoon.

Run #1- DX9 1920x1080 AA=No AA, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Overall Average FPS: 32.615

Compared to all the XP benchmarks I've seen on various sites (including Tom's Hardware), these results are pretty much the same with comparable hardware.

Also I understand why Linux is a great OS, probably even more so then people who've justed tooled around with Ubantu to play games. But what annoys the hell out of me is when there's a discussion about Windows and some moron chimes in "I use Linux and it does everything Windows does and more". Anybody who knows a lick about PCs and the technology industry knows that Linux and Windows are no wheres near the same category. It would be like if two people were debating who makes a better truck, Ford or Chevy, and somebody chimed in "My Civic gets better gas mileage!". If you're going to go around touting the greatness of Linux at least learn enough about it to know when it doesn't even belong in the conversation.

Wow! Why did you try that?