Bill Gates unveils Vista editions, impersonates teapot. - by R Soul
descenterace on 20/5/2006 at 10:12
15... gigs... of disk...
HEY FUCKTARDS! YOU'RE MEANT TO BE MAKING AN OS, NOT A FUCKING MMORPG!
The scary thing is that I've started playing around with 'Avalon' at work and it does seem to be an excellent API for developers. On the other hand, people tend to think that because they can make a computer do stuff that means they're 'programmers'. So I'm expecting the amount of home-generated crapware to go through the roof once the dev tools are freely available.
Y'know the shitty 'file search' and 'disk copy' apps advertised on popups and banners all over the net? The things that took an idiot about a week to put together while they were struggling through Visual Basic For Dummies, that said idiot then decided was so wonderful that they'd try to sell it despite the fact that thousands of other idiots had already written identical apps?
Yes. Those. We'll be seeing a LOT more of them.
CCCToad on 20/5/2006 at 15:21
The major "benefit" here, is for Microsoft, not you.
Do some research on Trusted Computing Protocols.
Vista is the start of an industry-wide effort to crack down on and eliminate piracy. Do to the powers that Trusted Computing has, it is also likely to result, eventually, in a whole lot more restrictions on the average person's web usage than merely stopping piracy.
CCCToad on 20/5/2006 at 15:26
Quote Posted by sluggs
We may have to move to Vista later on. New Motherboards/Graphics cards and all that, will probably only work on the newer OS in a couple of years. I had to change from 98 because nothing installed properly as it wanted a later version of windows! :p I'd probably still be using 95 if my system would work with it!
To append to my previous post.
Eventually, computers will fail to start up if the user attempts to load an OS that does not tie into the computer's built in DRM hardware.
Briareos H on 20/5/2006 at 15:32
Quote Posted by CCCToad
[...]
Welcome to 2003.
CCCToad on 20/5/2006 at 15:34
Quote:
In the USA there's a planed bill, the so called CBDPTA (Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act). First it was callen SSSCA (Security Systems Standards and Certification Act). The new name reads much more harmless. Looks like the first name made it too easy to discover the purpose of this bill.
This bill plans to legally force secure (TCPA-conform) systems. So in the USA it would then not be allowed to buy or sell systems that are not TCPA-conform. Passing this law would be punished with up to 5 years of prision and up to $500.000 fine. The same would apply for development of "open" software. Open means that it would work on systems that're not TCPA-conform.
insits I have at least 5 non-quote characters, this forum does.
David on 20/5/2006 at 15:56
If you're going to append to your previous post then actually append to your previous post.
Bjossi on 20/5/2006 at 16:05
I'll stay with Windows XP Pro until I absolutely need to upgrade. They should be working on an operating system to be user friendly and have useful features and no security holes, not create 10 Gbs worth of useless graphics that do nothing but eat up the power we need to run demanding games.
Ulukai on 20/5/2006 at 19:50
I'm looking forwards to the OS from a development point of view; I have to write optimised, secure .NET based code which runs 24/7 on a daily basis and for corporate environments, the security features and the concepts of DRM & trusted computing have never been more relevant - especially when you delve into the litigation you're opening your company up to if software, video or music piracy is found to be occuring on your premises.
Personally, there is a threshold on the amount of power I'm willing to give an operating system to choose what I can and cannot do or see when I'm at home.
So as a consumer, I'm not so sure. If I begin to find the DRM machinations of Vista stopping me from doing what I want to do with my PC, be it refusing to rip CDs to unmanaged audio formats or the non-playback of video encoded in a particular way I'll stay with XP as long as possible.
Frankly all this "omg teh disk spaece fancy graphics power suck zomg" camp of opinion is hilariously irrelevant, shortsighted and reminiscent of the noises people made when XP was released and 640Kb of RAM deemed more than enough for anyone. You don't need to buy it until the hardware is more affordable and I suspect Vista based OSs are going to be around for a long time. The specs look high today, but that isn't going to be the case for long. You can turn Aero off, and as anyone who has written graphical windows applications will testify, GDI+ has badly needed replacing for a long time.
Tonamel on 20/5/2006 at 20:56
Quote Posted by Gingerbread Man
Why don't they just go back to calling it Windows Resource Pig Edition?
The way it was explained to me, the 3D-ification of the interface was done so they could move all the UI calculations to the (currently unused) graphics card, so they could
free up the main cpu and ram for other things.
I don't know if that actually makes sense, though.
ignatios on 20/5/2006 at 21:02
Hopefully Aero is sensitive enough to free up resources when the graphics card is being used but people aren't playing full-screen games. Windowed games and apps like 3DSMax come to mind immediately, and I'm sure other people could name more.
There's a certain "sense" to wanting to use the hardware sitting in your box, but there's more sense in not running it to the MAX all the time.
