theguyfromspark Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 An interesting comment was made by someone on a forum elsewhere: When MS or Sony release the XBox 720 and Playstation 4 you won't expect the Xbox 720 and PS 4 games to work on the 360 and PS3. MS are aiming for the same cut off in Windows OSes in regards to gaming.
=NukeBlaze= Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Motion2000:Can anyone recommend the cheapest place to buy an OEM copy of Windows Design Premium? I'd rather not have to buy it but might as well I guess. Also, difference beween 32 bit and 64 bit? Which is best for graphic design work, and possible 3D modelling and animation. The most tangible benefit for going from 32-64bit is in the amount of RAM the system can address. 32-bit OSes are limited to a 4GB address space which is shared by system memory, Graphics memory(discrete), and other system resources. For example, if you purchased a system with 4 GB of memory, a 32-bit version of windows may only see 3-3.5 GB of the total 4GB of system RAM. As far as Adobe's Creative Suite 3 premium, the upgrade version is more than half less than the full version. I imagine you don;t have an older version. If you attend university, you may want to check to see if you can obtain a academic version of it, as the acedemic version is the same cost as an upgrade version ( $590 USD vs $1190 USD). When MS or Sony release the XBox 720 and Playstation 4 you won't expect the Xbox 720 and PS 4 games to work on the 360 and PS3. MS are aiming for the same cut off in Windows OSes in regards to gaming. Aye, but there is a large difference between the two. The consoles have a genuine hardware limitation with the previous which is always in the form of a processing increase, and sometimes in the form of hardware architecture change. For example, THe Xbox --> Xbox 360 went from an INTEL/Nvidia base, to a PowerPC/ATI base through which emulation is done on the 360 hardware, via software, to run legacy Xbox games. The big emulation problem was originally Nvidia's GPU microcode on the new ATI console, which there were certain technical and legal baggage. The only prevention of DX10 compatibility on XP is that MS is not going to put forth any effort for the "Software" limitation imposed by the manner in which they created the vista/Dx10 driver interface. Software is considerably more malleable than hardware, hence the issue with the comparison. It shares elements and conveys an idea, but there is not enough in common to technically compare. After all, you can have two systems with identical hardware specifications that sport a DX10 display adapter, which differs greatly from the console comparison. As the beyond3d article mentioned, if anything is to happen, it needs MS's help of which is entirely lacking on purpose for business reasons. The best thought-based solution they came up with on XP is an openGL 2.0 wrapper on DX10. Personally, I don't really care about DX10 features, its the fact that they shunt it off completely from others running anything but vista that has me critical. But, as I mentioned before, I will attempt to assume a state of neutrality on the issue of wether it was implemented from the get go to serve this purpose under the guise of less overhead.
motion Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Which version of Vista do you all have? And in 32 or 64bits? I'm gonna be upgrading any day now and interested what you've all got and why...
KKOB Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 Which version of Vista do you all have? And in 32 or 64bits? I'm gonna be upgrading any day now and interested what you've all got and why... questions questions. hope you don't choose the wrong one lmao
=NukeBlaze= Posted June 28, 2007 Posted June 28, 2007 ^ I replied to your Q above to avoid a double post, but it seems you were quicker than I. THe main reason for using a 64-bit OS is primarily for additional memory addressing. Performance benefits between the two are just not there yet. Just make sure you hardware has 64 bit drivers available if you really want it, otherwise I recommend 32-bit for the time being. The main reason is that adobe's software is 32-bit compiled, hence there will no 64-bit benefit (If any) because of it.
Slaggis Posted June 30, 2007 Posted June 30, 2007 Which version of Vista do you all have? And in 32 or 64bits? I'm gonna be upgrading any day now and interested what you've all got and why... I've got 32 bit becuase I just thought it would be easier and I know I will never have or want more than 4GB of ram. ^ When large clients, such as intel's CEO Paul Otellini, claim they are waiting for a service pack before considering implementation, I doubt whatever Microsoft wants to claim on their PR line. Implementation of SPs has been cumbersome for the IT people due to fear of items no longer working, but this is the same for updates. The XP SPs at least served as benchmarks for the 3 levels of XP, original/SP1/SP2. I do not see how they are going to go the "update route", especially because without the SP lands , I imagine it would drive admins crazy keeping track of the hundreds of combinations of upgrades without these marks of stagnation. Regardless, the official word to my knowledge is a VISTA SP later this year early 2008 more likely, with the RUMOR of no SPs at all. Below is a Vista developer blog, which again supports the mentioned SP1 for vista. SP1 is not the rumor currently, it is the lack of one which is. http://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsvista/archive/2007/04/03/not-a-post-on-sp1.aspx Microsoft said themselves that they want to get SP1 beta for vista out by the end of 2007.
=NukeBlaze= Posted July 1, 2007 Posted July 1, 2007 ^Aye, that is the reason I said the opposite was a rumor. There is still much to fix, and venders with drivers to mend.
motion Posted July 2, 2007 Posted July 2, 2007 I hope Vista is stable enough to use now though because I just bought it for 60 quid. Couldn't be arsed waiting for SP1.
Raining_again Posted July 3, 2007 Posted July 3, 2007 Which version of Vista do you all have? And in 32 or 64bits? I'm gonna be upgrading any day now and interested what you've all got and why... 32-bit Vista Ultimate Ed OEM. was 120 on overclockers. (at the time i bought it) Didn't want to get 64 bit with all the "signed driver" nonsense. I have too much hardware that doesnt actually have any "signed drivers". I hope Vista is stable enough to use now though because I just bought it for 60 quid. Couldn't be arsed waiting for SP1. Yes. I suppose it depends on the hardware and software you have. Finding out that some software actually isnt compatible, had to patch City Life (relatively new game) to even get it to work. Zone Alarm 6 doesnt work. EDIT: Although i must say, Vista copes so much better with dual screens than XP ever did (xp kept switching my screens around :S) and i didnt even have to install a graphics driver.
Ollie Posted July 5, 2007 Posted July 5, 2007 I'm still running the RTM and it's a pain, I was going to roll back to XP but now I'm wondering if I should get the retail version, maybe that would be better than the RTM?
theguyfromspark Posted July 6, 2007 Posted July 6, 2007 I'm still running the RTM and it's a pain, I was going to roll back to XP but now I'm wondering if I should get the retail version, maybe that would be better than the RTM? I thought RTM was the Retail version.
Ollie Posted July 6, 2007 Posted July 6, 2007 Well so did I, it stands for 'release to manufacture', but all you guys are saying how great Vista is, but I can't say I have had the same experience.
AeroScap Posted July 6, 2007 Posted July 6, 2007 Anyone got an update last night and now find all your windows bunched up on the right of the taskbar!
Nintenchris Posted July 6, 2007 Posted July 6, 2007 Anyone got an update last night and now find all your windows bunched up on the right of the taskbar! I didnt... hmm and ive just checked and theres no new updates? strange!
=NukeBlaze= Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 I'm still running the RTM and it's a pain, I was going to roll back to XP but now I'm wondering if I should get the retail version, maybe that would be better than the RTM? I recommend to just wait till SP1 and the drivers more refined, in the mean time XP does well save for the GUI "Shing-Sparkle-Sparkle" of vista.
theguyfromspark Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 I've found that a Vista machine that was upgraded from XP is generally more prone to errors and oddities than a machine that has Vista installed on it only.
Ollie Posted July 8, 2007 Posted July 8, 2007 I've found that a Vista machine that was upgraded from XP is generally more prone to errors and oddities than a machine that has Vista installed on it only. That might be the problem then! : peace:
Eddage Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 Has anyone else had a problem whereby the left or right arrow keys would become 'stuck,' so you're not pressing them but the computer seems to think you are? It's happened to me twice today in the space of about 15 minutes?!
theguyfromspark Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 Has anyone else had a problem whereby the left or right arrow keys would become 'stuck,' so you're not pressing them but the computer seems to think you are? It's happened to me twice today in the space of about 15 minutes?! if you have a wireless keyboard it's probably that, test the batteries and the placement of the sensor.
Eddage Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 if you have a wireless keyboard it's probably that, test the batteries and the placement of the sensor. That's what I figured it would be but it's only started since I installed Vista and re-syncing it doesn't seem to solve the problem - I have to log out or restart!
Eddage Posted July 11, 2007 Posted July 11, 2007 !tsop sdrawkcab citsatnaf siht ni gnitluser trats eht ot kcab sevom rosruc eht rettel a epyt I emityreve gninaem kcuts ylbacilpxeni eb ot smees yek tfel eht emit sihT .niaga deneppah s'ti ,tsop tsal ym morf pu wollof oT Edit: In case you couldn't read that it says... To follow up from my last post, it's happened again. This time the left key seems to be inexplicably stuck meaning everytime I type a letter the cursor moves back to the start resulting in this fantastic bacwards post!
theguyfromspark Posted July 12, 2007 Posted July 12, 2007 Probably worth trying a different keyboard just to make sure it's not something further down the line.
Ollie Posted July 14, 2007 Posted July 14, 2007 VISTA YOU BITCH! Sorry, very pissed off atm, I booted my computer up this morning, checked my email, locked it like I always do then went to work. Came home 3 hours later to a screen saying 'Windows failed to start. A recent hardware or software change might be the cause.' So I tried boot normally, just gets to Vista loading bar then reboots without an error, so tried safemode, same thing. Put the disk in, ran a repair, returns a report saying it couldn't be fixed. HELP ME PLEASE! I have so much data that I am supposed to backing up this weekend, and now I can't get to it :cry: EDIT - Right, finally after a few hours, found the problem. I disabled the onboard raid device and Vista booted up, so checked windows update history and there was an Nvidia nForce RAID controller update applied to my computer this morning which claims to have been 'successful'. I haven't yet tried to turn my raid back on, but Vista did finish installing stuff when it finally loaded. Now time to get on the Nvidia forums and find out who I have to shout at about this.
Slaggis Posted July 14, 2007 Posted July 14, 2007 VISTA YOU BITCH! Sorry, very pissed off atm, I booted my computer up this morning, checked my email, locked it like I always do then went to work. Came home 3 hours later to a screen saying 'Windows failed to start. A recent hardware or software change might be the cause.' So I tried boot normally, just gets to Vista loading bar then reboots without an error, so tried safemode, same thing. Put the disk in, ran a repair, returns a report saying it couldn't be fixed. HELP ME PLEASE! I have so much data that I am supposed to backing up this weekend, and now I can't get to it :cry: EDIT - Right, finally after a few hours, found the problem. I disabled the onboard raid device and Vista booted up, so checked windows update history and there was an Nvidia nForce RAID controller update applied to my computer this morning which claims to have been 'successful'. I haven't yet tried to turn my raid back on, but Vista did finish installing stuff when it finally loaded. Now time to get on the Nvidia forums and find out who I have to shout at about this. thats the only problem I've had with vista, they all involve Nvidia somehow. They plain suck.
Ant-Shimmin Posted July 15, 2007 Posted July 15, 2007 Can Ayone tell me how I can set Vista onto wide screen, Having alot of trouble with it. Currently it's a at a 1360 x 768. But it still isn't wide enough and isn't giving me the option to go wider. Help?
Recommended Posts