In 2007 Microsoft is suppose to be releasing a new windows OS called vista (it's in the beta right now and can be downloaded from MS site) and all new computers being assembled right now are are being made to run this software. However, olders systems, such as mine which is 3 years old now...what a relic eh? will not be able to run Vista.

I was wondering if most of the programs we use are XP based what will happen to them? Poser and a lot of 3D apps are set up to run on XP not Vista. So what kind of mess are we heading for?

Just curious.

Micheál

That will depend on the software developer, and if they renew their Extortion, er, um, License Agreements. This has happened in the past and is probably a direct result of Apple Computers Macintosh Line of computers that were just released which will run all your Windows Programs.

If it is anything like the past, everyone will have to upgrade their software, pay additional fee's so the end user actually pays the cost of Mr. Gates greed, instead of the software developer. Someone should inform Mr. Gates to be careful, the US Government put the Mafia out of business for using similar tactics because the Government couldn't take the competition.

Whether you want to look at it as extortion or a tax to make up for all of Mr. Gates recent losses on Wall Street doesn't really matter, the result is the same.

In a press release yesterday, Mr. Gates has decided to retire from Microsoft as the active CEO and step down into a position of director, or some such thing, so he can spend the rest of his days as a philanthropist.

Sheez, give me a break! Just goes to show you, he really is no better than Al Capone who opened homeless shelters and soup kitchens in the squaller of Chicago in order to win favor with the city leaders and press, who, were all on the take anyway.

Attached Link: PCPitstop Vista article

If you want better performance, you'll need probably twice that for everything, a graphics card, and a DVD drive.

Now, admittedly I think many Poser users will have much more than that on their system (I know I do) but these requirements are most likely only there because of all the "eye candy" Vista will have.

It simply amazes me that Vista will require 15 Gb of my hard drive, while Windows 98 only needed 255 Mb. What's so special about visual effects on the desktop that the operating system needs so much more space? Because I find it hard to believe that all the needed, non-visual features will take up such a large amount of extra space.

I was on the Longhorn Beta team and the mindless crap that Microsoft has is...unbelievable.  Longhorn was to be the actual successor to Xp, but they got it SO top-heavy with wild, wierd worthless crap, the thing wouldn't run on my computer.  After they scrapped the Longhorn BS, they started into developement of Vista.

To quote Han Solo, "I gotta a really bad feeling about this."

SInce Bill Gates has stepped aside, they need to scrap Windos Vista.  I'm not going to get it, because I fear another Windows 2000/ME fiasco. Windows 95,98SE, and Xp have been adequate systems.  Some of the others have been train-wrecks.  I may get the one AFTER Vista, just to see what the guys come up with, without Bill's urge for flash and crap.

Thankfully, XP Pro was built with the option to disable some of the crap (and you can get rid of some more of it with knowledgable tweaking of services and resources).  I have 3GB (actually 4GB, but 1GB is never seen) and actually have 2.78GB on startup.  This isn't bad considering NAV and DOpus are running at startup.'

Windows ME - shudder.  The worst OS besides one that I wrote in DOS many years back.  No, wait.  Mine actually worked even as skeletal as it was. ;)

xpis a good OS...but I can rarely get anything DOS to work in it...and I have aton of GREAT DOS games...

so hopefully, VISTA will at least allow WIN 98+ softeware to work...hoping.

Is VISTA 64 bit OS ?

Dave? google DosBox. works fine for me :)

You will still be able to use windows xp for a few years.

Vista comes in 32 and 64 bit flavor. Oh, and all programs that run on XP currently will still run on XP when Vista is out, so what's the problem here anyway? ;-)

Dosbox?, You're kidding, :scared: I've just cleaned up my attic and did throw away(!) all my old DOS-games and other DOS-software :cursing: :crying: :crying: :crying: At least my wife is happy cause some things were there for years, just catching dust. I had some real relics there, But there is one thing I saved: the original poser 1 from fractal design, complete with box and manual. But that wasn't DOS, I even don't think it would run on windows 3.1either.

IMO unless you want to play the new DX 10 games that will soon be coming along, there is absolutely no reason at all to use Vista. (And there also you could simply set up a dual boot for the games) XP 64 is a very capable OS that gives you all the benefits of 64 bit without any of the crap of Vista and I for one will not touch Vista for my work rig.

Oh and yeh DosBOX rocks, it lets you run almost any DOS based app you can think of and it emulates a VGA card and a SBlaster sound card so you can play all them old games as well. And its free !

To kuroyume0161: Wow! Another Directory Opus user!  Now THAT is one of the best pieces of software I ever bought. I always have at least one lister window open.**

Dizzi:** Oh, and all programs that run on XP currently will still run on XP when Vista is out, so what's the problem here anyway? ;-)

I'll believe that when I see it.

 I still have an old notepad replacement program that I've used since Win95, Notepad+. The ONLY program That I've never had crash or lock up on me. It's my editor for everything text. CR2 editing, obj/material editing...you name it. I really don't like WYSIWYG software(I suppose that dates from having started with computers in 1979). I still do web development with it,even.

---M

That's why I never throw out my old PCs. My old Win98 ones run most of my old DOS games. But then I'm a packrat. Just don't upgrade to Vista. I waited quite awhile before trying XP. Once they get all the bugs out of Vista maybe there will be a new version of Poser.

Khai...YES !!!

got dosbox..and now Super Tetris, believe it or not, works
My wife will be so happy...what a great Father's Day gift !!!!!

Quote - Oh, and all programs that run on XP currently will still run on XP when Vista is out, so what's the problem here anyway? ;-)

Exactly. It isn't like our XP computers will stop working the day Vista comes out. And even when using Vista, chances are that all of your old programs will run too. Microsoft has a verys good history of not breaking 3rd party software with OS upgrades. I have quite a number of programs running on my XP computer that were written well before Windows 2000 came out.

in regard to anti-trust actions by various governments against MS, none have had any effect AFAIK. prosecutors also make a great show of combatting organised crime, including such dubious entities as the "mafia", but it continues to increase unimpeded. Initially there will be a great deal of resistance to vista, which will cause tremendous problems for new and old users alike, but it will follow the pattern of OS X, upon which it was based. the pattern is this: 3rd-party software and hardware developers will stop creating updates and new versions for older machines, thus eventually forcing older machines back into the recycle bin (PRC). early adopters of the new OS will extoll its various virtues in an attempt to cover their mistake of rushing in where prudent individuals feared to tread. eventually a vocal minority of early adopters will begin badgering and insulting users who chose to stick with the older, simpler system. even as it happened with OS X (4 or 5 years ago), so it will be with vista. 4 years from now, y'all will be using it, and the difficulties of the first two years will only be a dim memory.

Quote - To kuroyume0161: Wow! Another Directory Opus user!  Now THAT is one of the best pieces of software I ever bought. I always have at least one lister window open.**
**---M

Oh yeah.  I've been using Directory Opus since its Amiga days.  When I heard that they ported it to Windows, I immediately replaced 'Exploder', er 'Explorer', with it as my default file manager.  If only they would port it to MacOS X, my life would be complete. :)

Robert

The rumours I hear are that Vista is going to be very heavilly slanted to all this DRM crap. It's supposed to be set so that it actively discourages folks trying to copy vids/music and such unless they have all the 'appropriate'  permissions and suchlike. Also , unless you have the 'correct' (eg..expensive, studio-approved0 hardware,) it won't even let yuo RUN it.

Remember the sort of responses we had when Poser 5 first came out.- .things not working and suchlike ? Well..just you WAIT and hear the screams when Vista finally hits the shelves. Pretty well EVERY system and hardawre we have now  will be rendered obsolete. . I won't be even considering looking at Vista for at least 2 years after it's release..by then, they may have SOME of the mess sorted out..

XP killed the 8 bit apps. Vista is being coded so 16 bit apps won't function. So kiss every DOS game out there bye bye (save the ones with Causeway. Maybe). So many of the nifty new toys have been yanked that -this- piece of bloatware is pretty much nothing but XP with aeroglass and DRM to make Sony purr bolted on. And a lot of munchkin mobius security crap that the kiddies will have beaten before the thing goes gold that eats resources and is more kludge than careful design. As for DX-10...... Remember, airscouts, game makers are going to produce for the =installed= base, not the base at it will be maybe 2 years later and after they've gone tango uniform for assuming that people were going to run right out and get Vista cause Unca Billy said to. So far as games go, DX-9c rules until 10 either is ported to XP, or M$ gives away Vista and the hardware to run it on. They'll spend more time with the physics accelerator schemes coming out...

I'm not too sure about Vista. I don't need all that visual rigamarole eating up CPU cycles. I want my PC to remain a PC and not turn into some kind of Mac.

XP64 works fine on my rigs (Athlon64 3500+ and Athlon64x2 4400). The main problem is drivers. I'm rather lucky, I have nVidia chipsets and graphics cards, and those work out of the box with XP64. Other chipsets and graphics cards have quite a lot of problems AFAIK.

I've tested both Poser 5/6 and Vue 5 Infinite on XP64. They run in WoW mode, about as fast (or slow) as under native XP32. MS did a pretty good job with their Win32 emulator there. Stability of Poser and Vue was the same as under XP32.

When 64bit versions of Poser and Vue are released I'll switch to XP64. Not Vista. At this time there is no good reason to use XP64, I stick with XP32 for now.

It is simply amazing how much FUD actually gets aroudn abotu MS products as "fact". "I heard Vista will be powered by human fetuses!"... "I heard Vista will sleep without wife!".

Relax. And lets look at some facts based on (gastP real experience from actually runnign the OS.

• We are running the beta of Vista (MSDN member) on several 4+ year old machines. In each and ever case Vista is as fast or faster than XP. That includes on the 256meg Celeron 600mhz box.
• In short... if you can run XP, Vista will run. If your video card is old, or the drivers suck, then you may not get semi transparency effects in the UI theme called "Aero Glass".
• Vista does, in fact, have some really cool features that make it a definite upgrade from XP aside from the UI. I won't list them here because there isn't any poitn in an argument. Go ahead and actually look into it if you want.
• Vista has some great security enhancements. The reality is that with a decent admin XP is secure - but few people admin their home boxes well enough because it is a pain in the ass. Vista solves 99% of this.
• Vista is not a haven for "DRM crap". They support an industry standard that is REQUIRED for any device / software that is goignt o play HD encoded DVD disks. Thats it. Don;t liek it? Don't buy those disks. Problem solved. If they didn't support the standard then you wouldn't be able to play those disks and peopel woudl bitch and moan.
• Even as a beta, Vista is really stable on 4 of the 5 machines we have it on.
• We have no widespread problems running modern software. Whiel some older packages fail... modern ones are fine so far.

Look... the beta is free. Go check it out, set up a dual boot and try it. If you don;t want to do that - fine. But it is amazing to hear all the FUD and uninformed rumors that go around.

I am a beta tester of the Vista system and have a thread here going about it.  So far, I really like the system.  It is easier on the eyes than any other windows system, the interface is really easy to use once you get use to it, I still have problems with, by trying to make it work like winxp rather than as vista.  I truly didn't think that anything could out perform winxp, but a full version of vista is going to leave winxp in the dust.  It has so many neat things going in it, that I can't wait.  This is going to be the system, I think that will be around for a long time.

I am not an employee of MS nor am I getting paid for being a beta tester.  As a matter of fact right now, being a better tester is causing me more problems in doing my stuff on my computer than it might seem it worth.  For thing, MS hasn't gotten a complete set of updates of all the drivers for the various 3rd party software as yet.  For example, my external DVD burner, won't burn new backup DVD's yet, it will play the ones that I have already, but I can't make new ones as of yet.  But that right now isn't a big problem.

The best thing about Vista as far as I am concerned it just how smoothly it makes using my computer.  Things just go more smoothly running Vista.  Oh, Poser 5 runs great on Vista actually better under Vista than under winxp.  I haven't had P5 lock up once under Vista yet and I have done things that under winxp would lock it up every time!

so what accounts for P5 not locking up in Vista?

Quote -  Oh, Poser 5 runs great on Vista actually better under Vista than under winxp.  I haven't had P5 lock up once under Vista yet and I have done things that under winxp would lock it up every time!

Attached Link: http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/9891/

Everything I am reading just backs up what I read or heard before. That the program is resource hungry, bloated, top heavy, packed full of unneeded gadgets, buggy and so on. Not to be rude but I'd sure like to know what machine specs you folks running vista are using.

I ask this because there are many here that only have one PC and it runs everything As a matter of fact that goes for a lot of folks. And it's not some "decked" out super gamming machine, 100gig HD, multi processor, All the memory I can cram into, all the bells and whistles machine. Just something they can run Poser on and their favorite paint program or even a small modeling program. Vista sounds like it will eat most of this up.

And I'm sorry but MS track record of security SUCKS! A Microsoft OS is not out but a few months and the hackers have already chopped it to ribbons. Then MS sends you these daily, annoying patches and updates to try to stay ahead of the hackers. It seems the more crap MS puts into one of their OS the easier it is to hack. And if you think for one minute that this Vista is going to be any safer then feel free to unistall all your spyware, virus protection and firewalls. 'Cause it aint gonna happen.

And what version of Vista do you buy when it's out of beta and on the shelves? There is like...um..6 versions? Does this mean that if you purchase the version you can afford that you're screwed out of something you wouldn't have got if you had purchased the next version?

No, I'll sit back and observe and wait (much like I did with Poser 5) till a more stable program is created.

Micheál

I'm not sure if a web site called macdaylinews.com is a reliable source for information about Microsoft Windows.

Quote - I'm not sure if a web site called macdaylinews.com is a reliable source for information about Microsoft Windows.

Oooo you're right....but it doesn't explain why this new OS has to be so full of shite and it's just not this piece of info that states it. Like MS is going to be anymore forthcomming. They have a nasty way of producing crap and gift wrapping it like a fine present.

Micheál

Dosbox, hmm? just went through storage the other day, and found Descent 1, Heretic, Doom, and Wolfenstein 3d..all of which lock up (actually just wink out) in Win 2k..;) have to check that out..thanks for the tip.

Always remember a tip from the past- don't by version x.0 of anything (to update it, just wait until the first service pack release..be it Win, Poser 5 [couldn't resis..;], or anything..;) Learned this with Dos 3.0..;)

Quote - - We are running the beta of Vista (MSDN member) on several 4+ year old machines. In each and ever case Vista is as fast or faster than XP. That includes on the 256meg Celeron 600mhz box.

• In short... if you can run XP, Vista will run. If your video card is old, or the drivers suck, then you may not get semi transparency effects in the UI theme called "Aero Glass".

Nice fairytale.... try using Vista or XP on a 256meg Celeron 600mhz and play a DVD in it. Wonder why some people I know upgraded their system to run Vista more comfortable and some of them used pretty advanced systems already. No Vista for me, I really don't trust Microsoft at all after seeing how many unneccessary stuff they run in the background in XP, just to gain access to my system(s). The only reason I ever upgraded to XP was to keep on using Vue 5, but I still regret the upgrade at times. I'm used to it by now, but I still prefer win98.

Quote - so what accounts for P5 not locking up in Vista?

In genera; Vista is a more efficient OS. It handles resources better and makes better decisions on scheduling and memory allocation. It is quite possible this might have a beneficial effect on P5. I am also curious to see if the USB Drive acceleration stuff might help Poser and other high memory applications.

Quote - "Vista PC should have a DVD-ROM, 1 GB of memory, a 1 GHZ CPU, and a 40GB hard drive with 15GB of available space. Over 80% of portables and 80% of business PC's do not meet this spec. This does not include Vista's video memory requirement of 256MB."

:: shrugs :: There is a lot of info, good and bad, flying around. That's one of the reasons the most intelligent thing to do is gauge by what actually works - and what you can see with your own eyes. That's part of why MS making the beta publicly downloadable is so cool. You can just try it for free.

I am simply relating what actually works... what I have seen with my own eyes. Vista runs as well or better than Windows XP on the same hardware one very machine we have tested it on. Of the systems we have tested it on, only 2 of them met or exceeded the specs you listed.

Quote - This was from an article I was reading that was included in on of the posted threads here.
Here is yet another article on how testers are not happy with Vista (link at top).

Obviously there will be much balanced information on a Mac site. Hey, while your at it why don't you learn about the recording industry and copyright law from Slashdot? :: rills eyes ::

The Vista beta is free. People should just download it and try it. Why listen to rumor, FUD and bullsh*t when you can just try it?

Quote - Everything I am reading just backs up what I read or heard before. That the program is resource hungry, bloated, top heavy, packed full of unneeded gadgets, buggy and so on. Not to be rude but I'd sure like to know what machine specs you folks running vista are using.

One test system is a Celeron 600+ (like 660 or so) with 256Meg of ram and a 40gig HD. The video card is an Nvidia Geforce 4 series generic (PCNY?) 128 meg. The soundcard is a built on, but SB compatible. It works just fine. Its slowish, but so is XP on that box. We do not get Aero Glass on hat machine.

We have a p4 series CPU laptop with 512meg and a Nvidia 256meg video card that works just fine as well. Its a 800mhz system.

Quote - Vista sounds like it will eat most of this up.

You keep saying "sounds like". I am telling you what it IS like.

Quote - And I'm sorry but MS track record of security SUCKS! A Microsoft OS is not out but a few months and the hackers have already chopped it to ribbons.

Their "track record" is not as bad as it seems. But then again if you get your MS news from a  Mac fansite you'll never really know anything about that.

The simple reality is that flaws in MS products are highly publicized because it is the dominant OS in the world. It is a big target and flaws have a large impact.

Quote - Then MS sends you these daily, annoying patches and updates to try to stay ahead of the hackers.

Yeah.. much better to not get updates.

Look, I admin a fair number of Linux boxes of various flavors as well for clients... and if your not updating them almost weekly your not paying attention. The Linux OS is a kernel hung with a lot of code form a lot of different groups - almost none of it having had a serious code review. There are hundreds of utilities, kernel drivers, patches and misc stuff that can and does have flaws in it constantly.

At least with MS I get my important patches from one place. No OS in the modern world is beyond the need for constant updates and patches.

Quote - It seems the more crap MS puts into one of their OS the easier it is to hack. And if you think for one minute that this Vista is going to be any safer then feel free to uninstall all your spyware, virus protection and firewalls. 'Cause it aint gonna happen.

One of our test machines runs only the security tools that ship with Vista by default, is Internet connected and used and has acquired ZERO viruses, bots, spyware or other crap. The reason is simple... it is much easier to run Vista as a non-admin user. Additionally under Vista IE runs with dramatically reduced privileges (b below those of the current logged in user even). These things alone make it a much, much safer system that way.

Even on Windows XP, a "out of the box" SP2 install with all the recent patches is fairly secure. Add the available from MS for free tools and your doing OK. Of course the "M$ is the sux0rz" websites won't mention this.

Quote - And what version of Vista do you buy when it's out of beta and on the shelves? There is like...um..6 versions? Does this mean that if you purchase the version you can afford that you're screwed out of something you wouldn't have got if you had purchased the next version?

You get the one with the features you need. I don't really see how that's confusing at all. You look at the feature lists, you pick the stuff you want / need and then you decide if it's worth the money. Like any other tool you might need.

Hell, Softimage XSI comes in three versions. Lots of tools have versions

In general? Most people will want the "Home Premium" edition. That is the one that has all the stuff you have in XP home, all the Vista upgrades and includes what used to be called "Windows XP: Media Center". Most Windows XP Pro users will go to "Vista Business". It's really not that complex.

Quote -
No, I'll sit back and observe and wait (much like I did with Poser 5) till a more stable program is created.

By all means, wait as long as you want. The choice is, as always, in the hands of the consumer.

Quote - Nice fairytale.... try using Vista or XP on a 256meg Celeron 600mhz and play a DVD in it.

What is the problem? Since DVD decoding is 99% a factor of the video card (hardware decoding always helps) and the drivers, why would this be a problem?

However no, I have not tried using software DVD decoding on Vista on that machine yet. I wouldn't be surprised if it failed... that machine couldn't do it well under XP either.

Quote - Wonder why some people I know upgraded their system to run Vista more comfortable and some of them used pretty advanced systems already.

I have no idea. Then again I don't know what you consider an "advanced system". Of courese we live ina  world where a 1gig ram, 2.8mhz system with a 17inch LCD monitor can be had for less than 700$ (even from Dell or similar) so power is cheap.

Quote - Always remember a tip from the past- don't by version x.0 of anything (to update it, just wait until the first service pack release..be it Win, Poser 5 [couldn't resis..;], or anything..;) Learned this with Dos 3.0..;)

Not a bad point of view - but I think the world is changing some now that fast, constant updates are the norm. UI use many tools every day that are effectively "1.0". Hell, many of the web based tools I use are still calling themselves "beta".

The nice thing about a free public beta is that you can simply try it. We did the same thing with XP that we are doing with Vista...running the beta for a few months to make sure we are happy with it. When Vista hits the release I will be all over it because I already know from months of personal experience what it can and can't do.

Peole can run it or not - I don't make a dime either way. I just resent FUD.

Quote - Obviously there will be much balanced information on a Mac site. Hey, while your at it why don't you learn about the recording industry and copyright law from Slashdot? :: rills eyes ::

Hey while you're at I know what you can do censored I made a mistake didn't realize it was a Mac site there BOOT. Didn't mean for ya to come down off your high horse and mingle with us less informed. It still doesn't answer why ANY Microsoft OS has to be full of needless crap.

Quote - It still doesn't answer why ANY Microsoft OS has to be full of needless crap.

Because ANY OS has needless crap in the eyes of some ;-)

The HD DVD crap that's being put into Vista is NOT Microsoft's idea. It's Hollywood's. Hollywood insists on very convoluted copy protection schemes to protect their outdated business model. The Sony/BMG rootkit screwover in a big and legalized version.

As soon as Mac OSX supports HD DVD or BluRay, Apple will be required to put the same kind of crap into their OS.

Even Microsoft isn't big enough to give Hollywood the finger. I wish they were.

boys, boys..or girls girls (as the case may be..;). This is starting to remind me of the impending release of Poser 5..older heads will remember that screamin' match.

Watch and wait, we'll see what happens. I'm still using Win 2k..so whaddaIknown?..;)

Quote - Didn't mean for ya to come down off your high horse and mingle with us less informed.

I "mingle" here on Renderosity fairly often.Been doing it for years. I'm not sure why yoru so defensive about it.

Quote - It still doesn't answer why ANY Microsoft OS has to be full of needless crap.

I don't consider Windows XP, Server 2003 or Vista to BE full of "needless crap". I find the systems to be a great platform to develop for and only getting better as time goes on.

Heres the thing . it might help if you actually knew the systems you were getting so upset about. That isn't an insult, its a reality. You comment on XP, but I doubt you develop on it. You comment on Vista, and I am sure you've never run it. You complaina bout bloat but you don't really seam to understand the feature set. You complain about security, but you seem to have obsolete information. You complaina bout DRM, but you don't know who, why or what is actually involved.

Jsut a thought.

Quote - > Quote - Didn't mean for ya to come down off your high horse and mingle with us less informed.

I "mingle" here on Renderosity fairly often.Been doing it for years. I'm not sure why yoru so defensive about it.

Quote - It still doesn't answer why ANY Microsoft OS has to be full of needless crap.

I don't consider Windows XP, Server 2003 or Vista to BE full of "needless crap". I find the systems to be a great platform to develop for and only getting better as time goes on.

Heres the thing . it might help if you actually knew the systems you were getting so upset about. That isn't an insult, its a reality. You comment on XP, but I doubt you develop on it. You comment on Vista, and I am sure you've never run it. You complaina bout bloat but you don't really seam to understand the feature set. You complain about security, but you seem to have obsolete information. You complaina bout DRM, but you don't know who, why or what is actually involved.

Jsut a thought.

Looking at your quotes and the way they were worded who in their right mind wouldn’t get defensive? I guess it only appears you’re talking down to someone. I’d be more than happy to pursue a good conversation but I will not be spoken to as some sort of underling. But of course it’s hard to gage any conversation via a forum. There is no way to read ones face or hear any emotion in the voice. So it’s very easy to misinterpret any communication. ANYWAY……

As far as my knowledge of XP well I spend a lot of time tweaking and ripping all those “useful” features out of it. Things that are really not needed for the software to operate and do not need to be running the background. I’ve gained more speed, efficiency, and better memory usage and cut down on HD bulk. I thought that anyone with a hint of software knowledge knew that XP has a lot of things installed in it that was not detrimental for it to operate in the system it’s installed in. And from I gather from your posts you’re no computer dum-dum and I would have thought you’d agree that there are many things in XP that are indeed not truly needed and can be cut for a more efficient  operation.

As far as Vista, Oh and BTW way I wasn’t the one complaining about DRM as far as I’m concerned the jury’s still out on that one, I would like to see it simple to use, small in size, speedy and to the point without fluff and eye candy. I don’t want to have to go in and turn off this and that because it’s just plain redundant or have a bunch “extra stuff” eating my memory and HD space. Tell me what in blazes is wrong with that? Besides Vista is still in the beta with a whole lot of stuff still to be worked out and who knows what “extras” will be added to the final build…unless of course you’re a Microsoft guy/gal and have an inside track on the final build phase. You’re telling me I have obsolete information yet you’re praising a beta version software where the future is questionable and out come is unknown.

Micheál

during the OS X (cheetah) beta in 2000, I gotta admit, nobody was that defensive either, but I see it's already started. I have no doubt vista will be more secure and far better than xp pro in every way, just like OS X was far better than OS 9, once they had 2 years to get the bugs out and make it work for everybody, not just admin geeks, unix geeks, command line geeks, et al.

Quote - Looking at your quotes and the way they were worded who in their right mind wouldn’t get defensive? I guess it only appears you’re talking down to someone. I’d be more than happy to pursue a good conversation but I will not be spoken to as some sort of underling. But of course it’s hard to gage any conversation via a forum. There is no way to read ones face or hear any emotion in the voice. So it’s very easy to misinterpret any communication. ANYWAY……

I'll go with that. We can chalk it up to text fuzz :)

Quote - As far as my knowledge of XP well I spend a lot of time tweaking and ripping all those “useful” features out of it.

Everyone needs a hobby ya know? I have never felt compelled to rip a single feature out of XP. The additional disk space for the stuff I don;t use often is trivial and everything that is in memory is stuff that does things for me I like.

Quote - Things that are really not needed for the software to operate and do not need to be running the background.

I suspect you and I woudl differ in our opinions of whats useful as a feature.

Quote - I’ve gained more speed, efficiency, and better memory usage and cut down on HD bulk.

I personally havent found XP to be slow or inefficient. I am sure we woudl differ on this as well.

Quote -  And from I gather from your posts you’re no computer dum-dum and I would have thought you’d agree that there are many things in XP that are indeed not truly needed and can be cut for a more efficient  operation.

Efficient operation is an OS that does what I need and wnat it to, and does it fast and stable enough to make it a useful tool. Untill we start talkign about specific features you consider not needed we can't really discuss it much further.

Quote - As far as Vista, Oh and BTW way I wasn’t the one complaining about DRM as far as I’m concerned the jury’s still out on that one[/uote] My apologies.

Quote - I would like to see it simple to use, small in size, speedy and to the point without fluff and eye candy.[/qote] I find Vista to be all those things. For what it provides me as both a user and a developer it is wonderfully small and fast.

Quote - inside track on the final build phase. You’re telling me I have obsolete information yet you’re praising a beta version software where the future is questionable and out come is unknown.

You didn't seem to be makign a prediction or speculating, you were stating as facts what the requirements were goign to be and stating that it woudl not run well on less hardware. I stated the fact that it does - and does it well. Predictions are not, of course, obsolete (they are just unfounded) but the statements of fact are indeed obsolete.

I agree it all boils down to the “tastes” of the user as to what is efficient in an OS and what is not I guess. I hang out in a lot of  techie  forums were there is much hand-to-hand combat going on over Vista. Everything from system requirements and OS performance to Vista’s drain on laptop batteries but mostly about the Microsoft’s system requirements for Vista (some say it’s too much and some say it’s not enough.) and it’s performance.

Personally, I’d like to wait until it’s out of beta testing and gone gold before I make any decisions on whether to purchase it or not. I just hope they don’t try to sneak something in and bundle it in the final release.Micheál

I've disabled quite a few things in XP too. Wireless zero administration? Not needed when you're not on a wireless network. I also switched off the visual enhancements and reverted XP to the Win2000 look. Suits my style of working better, and there are also some performance benefits.

But I didn't remove the components from my HD. Why should I? My laptop has 40 GB, I'd save maybe 20 Mb, doesn't really matter. And my desktops have far more storage capacity.

One of my desktops runs XP as trim as I could make it: 20 processes when nothing else is running. It is the most powerful desktop I have, dedicated to rendering, and I want as many CPU cycles dedicated to rendering as possible. Same goes for memory.

My other desktop is a development rig, and runs a lot more, including web servers, database servers, index servers and the whole rigamarole. Takes a noticeable hit on performance. This will also be the machine I'll be testing Vista on (first have to get a couple of big external drives to save all my data).

I hope I can trim down Vista as much as I can trim down XP.

Just coming in to ask one simple thing... I should receive the beta soon, but as the discussion already started, i wanted to know.

Could you try to render the SAME scene on WinXP and Vista to see if there is any difference (render time) ? In fact, here at Renderosity, that is the most important thing for us to know !

I also made lots of fine tuning on my WinXP, and i know i also will do it on Vista. But that's because i know how to use a computer. Don't forget that a lot of people using Windows don't really know how to use it ( i know this because i'm working with peoples who really don't know how to use it but must use it...). So a lot of the stupid things we don't use are here to make the basic user life easier.

Well, to say that services and other processes have no effect on performance is to be blinding oneself to reality.  As in any multitasking OS, every process/task will expend cpu cycles - even if it is just a check cycle to see if anything needs to be done.  And each of these processes requires memory even if it is doing absolutely nothing.  So any bunk about how having all of the bells and whistles running creates no performance hit is just that - bunk.

Turn off visual bull.  Disable services that are of no use.  Make services start Manual-ly is they are needed only at certain time.  Turn off stuff that loads on Startup if not needed at startup.  Obliterate all of those darned SysTray icons that just sit there for no reason but supposed expedience (which are more usless processes).  There are only four items in my SysTray - two of them are for my internet/network connection (wireless), the others are NAV and Sound Volume.  And I have several hundred applications installed (a good portion wanting to set something in the SysTray) - so that shows how useful SysTray crap really isn't.

One thing that I do after disabling the 'visual enhancements' is to set the priority to foreground applications (programs) and not background processes.  Same for Memory Usage (Programs and not System Cache).  Unless you are running a server with background processes, these settings are the ones that should be used.

So, I agree wholeheartedly with svdl.  There is always a balance.  You cannot get better performance with more running processes.  Vista may have tweaked it, but this is a fact of computers.

Robert

I can only tell the results from XP64 versus XP32: no significant difference in render times. Not in Vue 5 Infinite, not in Poser 5, not in Poser 6. No difference in maximum scene size before lockup either.

"You cannot get better performance with more running processes.  Vista may have tweaked it, but this is a fact of computers."

That depends on what those processes are doing for you. For instance, I run a backround task that is indexing information in my email and on my disk drive in spare CPU moment.s While that is nominally hurting my "perfomance" at any moment int ime over the course of a day having my search tools be able to find any one email out of thousands instead of waiting for it to build the index then is a life saver. It saves me hours each and every week.

Sometimes giving up a little "performance" from a purely clock cycle technical view isn't the same thing as giving up "performance" in completing a task.

The same is true for lots and lots of other things. The fraction of a percent slowdown in the render times for a frame pales dramatically in comparison to the hours a wekk I am saved by some of those backround tools.

Just a thought :)

I do not believe anybody's published claim for minimum hardware requirements. Not Microsoft, not Apple, not anyone. There's an ancient saying of computer programmers: EMACS--Eight Megabytes And Continuously Swapping. And multiple-core processors are going to be the make-or-break for Poser, and any other CPU-intensive software. That's wherte most of the speed advantages are.

tweakers go back a lot farther than you'd think; I once had a client rewrite command.com to give him more memory under 640k (you'd have to have some grey in your hair to understand that..;)

I thought EMACS was a Unix text writer, but memory fails me at points..;) I do remember vi, tho..;)

And how about OpenGL support on Vista ? OpenGL performances on Vista will degrade, because of Vista's DX interface and also MS will. This can be a problem not only for Poser but for most 3D applications that are coded with OpenGL. Also as a programmer I must say that don't think it is an easy job to switch a software from 32 bits to 64 bits, it is the same revolution it has been from 3.1 to W95. It'll have a cost for software companies. Vista is for sure better than XP, but the lack of OpenGL drivers and switching to 64 bits is a great concern to me. Yarp www.senosoft.com