Ok, most of us will not be moving to Vista anytime soon, well I know I won't be. However, was reading something about DX10 and how it's not going to be able to be installed on XP. Here's the problem. If game developers start requiring you have to have DX10 installed, like they do with DX9, what do you do? Just not buy any new games or breakdown and spend the 400$ on a new OS?

I think this is conspiracy by both MS and gaming industry to force Vista upon us all! Damn them!!   ;D

Anyway, wondering what you guys thought.

Well I buyed Vistax86 in January for just 169EUR. Sure it´s the System Builder version, but why should I pay 200more bucks for the support and the package of the DVD ?

I have Vista and I´m really happy with it. You´ll never see bluescreens again  ;D. Works quite good with no errors at the moment.  But at the moment I cannot use DX10 with my old 6800GT AGP   http://forum.voodooalert.de/images/smilies/X-D.gif

[thinkin´] there are a lot of M$ haters around the community boards. [/thinkin´]

€:  I saw a few DX10 screenshots and they really looked like average DX9 graphics.

But I hope MS Flight Simulator X DX10 patch will be the new reference

well,about dx10,I would really bother thinking about it-just take a look at todays games,they are only starting to use true dx9c code-dx10 is waaaaay too far away in the future.dx10 games are not going to happen anytime soon,and by dx10 games I mean REAL dx10 games,not just some lame patches that will add a bit more lightning to the game if you have vista and dx10 graphics card..

vista-lovers (and haters as well),I would suggest you read this: http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html

did I mention having vista and dx10 installed on an old pc such as yours has absolutely no meanig? oh,I just did ;D .you are not able to use your 6800 with dx10 now,and you will never be able to.

sorry to say it,but you totally wasted 169euro..


edit: sorry for being extra spicy today,but my adrenaline is extra high,I had a small visit from a little thiefsie fool,and he took one older pc I had over here for repairs,mmmmmm,too bad I know who he is,and I'm going to waste him good,mmmm yes I will,my preciousss..

Your sure right about what you said.
Sure I my actual computer setting will nevr be able to use DX 10, but I don't bought Vista just to have DX 10 installed. There much more new features.

But why does xbox360/ps3 games looks much more fancier than the most new pc games ?

I don't think dx 10 is the future. We just need the games that support it.
But the most game developers are so lazy. So we have just a few 64-Bit games. And that is really a mess.

Well here's what I'm getting at. If you install any new game as it is right now, it requires DX9c to be installed even if you only have a DX8 based video card. Regardless of what card you actually have, you still have to have DX9 installed. So if games start requiring that you used DX10 regardless what hardware you have in the machine in order to install it what's going to happen?

Are game companies going to have an optional install where it determines what OS your running and only install components that you'll need?

well I think it will work since I had a simillar thing with Battlefiel2 under Windows 2000 Professional with Service Pack4.

the game reported a warning when starting it up:
Use at own risk the program hasn't been tested under this NT based OS, so I clcked the ok button and the game launched and ran without problems.

the Manual of BF2 said runs under XP Pro only I was like yeeaah riiight we'll see about that , and yeaps 2K Pro + SP4 was no problemo.

so about those DX10 app's I'd say jhust give them a go and who knows right :)

Yeah, I'm just looking at NOT having to use Vista any time soon. I went through the beta testing on both release candidates and a couple of revisions and the OS sucks. Not to mention ATI had the drivers messed up and completely fried two of the three x850 pro's I had (120$ they were cheap!  :P). ATI replaced them but still, it was a hassle.

That's my concern. I realize this probably won't happen for a year or so but...

Well the Operating System is not responsible for the bad programmed drivers.

But now Vista is in the Final Retail version available and is much more powerfull.

It´s almost the same speed as XP.

But why don´t change to Vista when ou changed to XP. I cannot understand this.

PS.: Maybe my English is not that good, but who cares  :P

wrote on 28.03.07 at 18:53:40:

It´s almost the same speed as XP.

why having "almost the full speed" if you can have "full speed"? especially if you can have "full speed" by NOT buying the new OS? that means "full speed" will cost you exactly 0$.and you cant beat that price,can you? ;D

that trash they have pounded into vista will always hog your hardware,and be it 1% or 10% slowdown,its still an unnecessary stress on hardware..

and this is NOT a matter of hardware drivers.just read through the stuff I have linked..

I just went through and read that. That's insane. What MS is doing with Vista is just crazy. Talk about wanting to control your every move. With the hardware requirements there's no wonder there is no sound drivers for my CL X-Gamers card. The requirements for driver support because of what MS has done with "media protection" alone is just absolutely nuts. I can't believe that the manufactures are even going for this.  

How did you find that article? Sooner or later I'm going to have to go Linux and bring out my old Atari 2600 again and start playing the games the way they were meant to be played.   :P  

I just got a copy as a gift and don't plan on loading it anytime soon.

My fastest machine is a 3.2 Intel P4 with AGP X 8. I have a X850 but I'm afraid I'll smoke it on Vista.

Should I wait until I get a PCIe motherboard?

just wait till ATi launches the R600 I'd say, then you can make a choice between which VGA you would like to use for Vista I would go for a Voodoo5 since Vista drivers are in progress ;D

DX10 is surely used (as usual) to create a break-point between Vista and previous Versions at some time.

I wouldn't touch Vista behind 12-inch armoured Glass with robotic Arms in a nuclear waste processing facility.

I assume, however, that Game and GFX developers will run 2-fold and press MicroSoft at least for further DX 9.0c updates to include many of their new Hardware features, since Vista is coming along very slow and many will never use it.
After all, an OS which is controlling, hampering and spying upon the User (rather a client who payed alot for a piece of contentrated malware) is not acceptable for everyone.

I'd say buy whatever Hardware is desired and run it with Linux, Win2000 or XP...

heh even 98SE with the UnOfficial Service PAck's run great, it's alot like 2K but with the speed of 98SE and the stabillity of 2000 Pro :) my 98SE + UOSP 2.03 setup can even handle NTFS files memory up to 4GB no instabillity problems for that part. 98SE + UOSP 2.03 is still the best setup for 3dfx people it even supports DX9.0c so I wonder in the new DX patch would work with 98SE as well?


wrote on 29.03.07 at 10:17:55:

I wouldn't touch Vista behind 12-inch armoured Glass with robotic Arms in a nuclear waste processing facility.

hahah I find that a very good one FalconFly ;) Personally I would do the same ;)

well I'm gonna get it. but not very soon.
because dx 10 graphics seems to be nice. I want to use it too  when I have dx10 videocard

wrote on 29.03.07 at 13:30:03:

heh even 98SE with the UnOfficial Service PAck's run great, it's alot like 2K but with the speed of 98SE and the stabillity of 2000 Pro :)

I totally agree. But there is one reason not to use Windows 98 - it can only see and use a maximum of 768MB RAM. Even with 768 it's problematic, but 512MB works just fine. The only problem is - that's not enough :(

heh no problems with the UnOfficial Service pack mine clearly sees 1022MB a 1024MB of ram, since the max amount may vary.;D
just go here and your troubles are gone 8)
http://exuberant.ms11.net/98sesp.html

your windows 98SE shall get a nice Windows 2000 Professional look:
http://www.imagehosting.com/out.php/t387459_98SE2.1a.jpg
You'll also have the stabillity as reliabillity of 2000 Pro, your OS can also make usage of the NTFS file system as it can have the same max amount of ram that 2K can get 4096MB aka 4GB :)

I even added 1x 512 to my dual 512MB setup it clearly read 1536MB of ram sometimes 1534 it varies sometimes :) same with 2x 512MB :)

btw we won't need Vista for DX10 heh good call this one!
http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/

This will not help.

What is going to happen is games will require you to install vista. Age of empires 3 refuses to install on windows 98. Believe me I tried, and all I got was a warning box that said this application will not install because you do not have xp, Then it said "please upgrade your operating system"

Well that Hacker found a way around it, this can Be done, there is no way people are gonna listen to MS with their sh*tty plans ::)

Since all they want is to do earn an extra more money from their clients and force them to buy Asta La Vista, then I'm like nick-off you MS basterds, the way that the 19 year old Hacker did is possible, all what MS did is make a code in DX10 so you won't be able to use it in older NT OS'es and that code has been cracked, really Vista is the biggest BS OS that ever was made or even invented!

It doesn't even look professional since there's a load of crap in it, it's like WinXP pro but then there's like 6000 times more crap in it, I can understand that it ins't a safe thing to work with and that it's in most cases 40 to 60% slower than Win2000 Pro as the Unentended version of XP Pro... ::)

Also a reason why many see it as Asta La Vista, it will cost you money and if you have troubles with it it will only cost you extra :')

Anexample Ya know the game Battlefield2 + it's Mission Pack Speacial Forces?

Well that game's manual specification data says that this program requires Windows XP, So what I did was oh yeah really? Heh I got the game and installed it under Windows 2000 Pro just to see if that BS was really true ::) which wasn't.

the game installed without problems then when I started running it I got this message saying:
You are about to run this program on an unknown Operating System, use at own risk  ::) hahah D'oooh!

after clicking the OK tab the game loaded properly and I could even download updates and it kept on running fine even with internet as LAN battles there were no problems.

MS isn't that smart as they seemed to be, even putting ghey like tekst's on the games also from EA for example thereby also forcing the people to go to XP Pro back then, teh n00bs

And hey if the most gamers refuse to take Vista MS will have to make DX10 work on XP Pro @ least ;)

wrote on 25.04.07 at 05:04:22:

This will not help. What is going to happen is games will require you to install vista. Age of empires 3 refuses to install on windows 98. Believe me I tried, and all I got was a warning box that said this application will not install because you do not have xp, Then it said "please upgrade your operating system"

Try installing it to a winxp pc. Share the folder on lan and mount it on the win98 pc as a network drive. Works for me.

Oh I got the game working on a computer with xp awhile ago. I attempted the network launch but to no avail.Works fine on my  voodoo5 nonetheless in my dell xps r450

there is no need ofr Vista if you want DX10 to run.

http://alkyproject.blogspot.com/2007/04/finally-making-use-of-this-blog-i.html

this ALKY project enables to use DX10 on other platforms than windows, also MAc OS X can now run DX10 games

this isn't ready yet, but this is interesting

wrote on 29.03.07 at 18:58:47:

heh no problems with the UnOfficial Service pack mine clearly sees 1022MB a 1024MB of ram, since the max amount may vary.;D just go here and your troubles are gone 8) http://exuberant.ms11.net/98sesp.html

This is great, 10x!!! I'm moving back to win98!  8)

wrote on 16.05.07 at 15:55:18:

This is great, 10x!!! I'm moving back to win98!  8)

Norries mate always glad to help ;)

Is there any DX10 games released yet? there is few vista only games but are they made with DX10. I'm gonna have HD 2600XT soon but don't have vista yet. when Crysis hits the market only then I'm gonna buy Vista, maybe.

well after reading this DX10 test all compettitors collapse togeatehr like a falling house of cards:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3029&p=1

it seems that DX10 is far too heavy for that hardware of today as the review discribes.

the only cards that were do'n relatively wel were the 8800 GTX as Ultra's where as the 8800 GTS models kinda were between 2900XT and GTX in most cases.

Also the reason why DX10's won;t be out within a few years since the hardware of today isn't good enough so there by espeacially the mid end as low end cards they don't veen stand a chance, forget about Crysis heh, unless you can run it in DX9.0c mode.