NEWS: Vista's video requirements may be too much

[ROF]

Well it appears that no one here has a reason to offer as to why I should care about Vista.

and nobody should. There are still people happily using Windows 95 or older. There are also people still enjoying their 386 machines. The choice and reason to upgrade should be solely based on your needs. Nobody can tell you what those are. Only you can decide after looking at what you have and what an upgrade provides as to whether or not you want it or need it.

[oldandinthe way]

I haven't seen a reason based on anyone's needs.

So far it just appears that the only reason to upgrade is you wish to be an "early-adopter".

ROF's BD HD-DVD suggestion wasn't any capability not available on earlier OS releases today.

Products do not succeed without a real or perceived need.

When James B. Duke invented modern marketing it was motivated by having machinery which could manufacture more cigarettes in a day than Americans smoked in a year.

He invented all of the tools of modern marketing to create enough demand for cigarettes. In spite of his success, he need to create an effective monopoly to actually solidify the business.

The tobacco trust was dismantled through the intervention of government, but the marketing truths and methods continue in every aspect of American lives. Hell they even use these principles to get ROF to buy the same product over and over.

Where is the demand for Vista going to come from?

[Doramius]

Win2K wasn't marketed very heavily. It is an excellent OS, but from experience, the bugs in it are not very different from XP. I got my XP versions because it was the same price as Win2K and everybody had XP. It's not easy when you have Win98 and someone with XP calls you to help them over the phone with a problem. My memory isn't THAT good.

Again, there isn't much difference, but depending on the problems people have on their PC, the repair process can be extremely different.

[jntaylor63]

From what I have seen on the internet, the two new laptops from Sony (Blu-Ray) on Toshiba (HD-DVD) will be able to play movies with WINXP.

Now granted a laptop is somewhat of a closed system from interms of "movie to screen", but these machines are running XP MCE with HDMI ports that can output to a TV. (only if said TV has DVI / HDMI inputs)

http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/cmod.to?coid=-30600&seg=HHO


http://news.sel.sony.com/en/press_room/consumer/computer_peripheral/notebooks/release/22113.html



So, I think they only thing will need is an updated version on PowerDVD or WinDVD and the right hardware such as a sound card, HDCP video card and TV. (I hope that we don't have to upgrade our MOBO's too.) Now for CableCard and DirectTV, I guess you will have to go with Vista.

BUT, if sales of Vista machines & upgrades are slow or to cater to current XP users, I would not be suprised in the Hardware / software companies don't offer their products to work outside of Vista. As long as they can show the powers that be that all of this HDCP B.S. will still be intact on Win XP, we should be able to upgrade. I just think that there will be too many users staying with XP for the HW / SW vendors not to sell prodcuts that will give users more out of there current system and make $. If Sony and Toshiba want to do all they can to win the format war, they better use every channel to get their format in the hands of users.

[Doramius]

HD DVD & Blu-Ray have nothing specific to Vista. It's the software that supports it you have to worry about. They will certainly have software to support it, and M$ has already said that it will have an update available for WMP. So if you have the drive to play the disc, you'll need to install the sofware update. I believe some people were saying it won't be hard to create a software so that Win98SE machines and newer will be able to run the HD DVD & BR drives. It's the same as it is with current optical drives. If your bios or software isn't updated, it'll only read it as a standard CD or DVD drive, The same way older Bios read a DVD drive as a regular CD drive until the software or update was installed.

I can also get Direct TV and Cable into my XP system now. My AIW does a great job of it. That's nothing new and you don't need Vista for it. Again, it's your hardware and the software from it's manufacturer. They could always make so it only runs on Vista, but that would be company suicide to force that this early on technology. There are still new hardwares and softwares being made right now where support is made for Win98 & also Win95. Shocks the heck out of mee too, but it still happens.

[jayl]

Just something I read the other day that is somewhat related to this conversation:

During a DirectX 10-related event in London, UK, Richard Huddy, ATI Technologies' software developers relations chief, said that Microsoft's Vista will integrate DirectX 10 and DirectX 9 APIs for different types of hardware, but the current Windows XP will not get DirectX 10 support, as suggested some rumours earlier. For end users this means that to get the most advantages of the new-generation graphics processing units (GPUs), the new OS will be required.

[RabidDog]

Another point about format change I cant play my wax cylinders on my LP deck, or my LPS on my CD player BUT I can play my dvd's on my HD-blu player.. and 25/60gb of data storage will surely be handy. And as to paying for an MS os I never have.. I always get them free when I buy a new machine! Dont expect anybody except an uber-geek without the gumption to pay full retail for this eye-fluff. What happened to the super-duper filesystem ? thats gone...
It will take over tho, MS will make sure of that

[DereX888]

Win2K wasn't marketed very heavily. It is an excellent OS, but from experience, the bugs in it are not very different from XP. I got my XP versions because it was the same price as Win2K and everybody had XP. It's not easy when you have Win98 and someone with XP calls you to help them over the phone with a problem. My memory isn't THAT good.

Again, there isn't much difference, but depending on the problems people have on their PC, the repair process can be extremely different.

You are right.
The bugs actually ARE the same (because of obvious reasons I stated in my previous post).
The problem you are talking about is just another 'layer' of Microsoft's intentional mess to fool customers that they got new operating system.
We all complain often that there is no logic in Microsoft's way of moving buttons or menu items etc from one OS version to another. Yet I always say that there is a logic in those supposedly illogical moves, redesigns of layouts and shifts: if i.e. explorer's look, feel and layout wouldn't change drastically in XP, no one would believe Microsoft its some 'new' operating system as they say That is the only reason and 'logic' behind i.e. moving "Folder Options" from View in 98's explorer to Tools in 2K's explorer, and I won't be surprised to find it in i.e. Favorites on Vista
Many people tell me that XP boasts some 'improved' explorer version. Bullshit! That notification of inserted disc with popup menu of potential action you can take? - It was already in Win95, Win98, WinME and Win2000 - you just had to manually install it (one of the PowerToys developed for Win3.1 and imlemented for Chicago), while now it is installed by default., thats the only difference. The icons? The look? All was available, often in exactly same buggy state
There is nothing new in XP that wasn't available before in previous windozes, and that is including this 'groundbreaking' app - System Restore. (as Microsoft was telling its business and home users). Its nothing else than a System State backup from Win2000 combined with WinME's backup GUI (which was also called System Restore iirc, but actually worked differently).
I dont wanna waste time on any more examples, obviously those who don't know such stuff won't believe it, and those who know it don't need my rant, so I just say it again in one sentence:
Microsoft sells the same product over and over again, it only add more and more eyecandy to each next version. ditto.
I gave up on expecting any new (real new) operating system from Microsoft in December 1999, when I got Windows 2000. As most of us I already knew that Microsoft is able to cobble-up all patches and fixes, throw-in new Windows Media Player or DirectX, and relese it under new operating system's name (its very easy to tutn Windows 95 into Windows 98 or Windows 98SE, which only prooves my point). But with their NT line I thought they are serious (since it was 'designed' for business users), so I couldn't believe back then that they basically have sent me NT just with a nicer GUI (granted - with all service packs and patches and hotfixes already incorporated on the installation disc, which is something we couldn't do ourselves back then, but it still doesn't make it any 'new' operating system). When XP came out I already sensed rat in the air, and I wasnt surprised when after installation and disabling all of the new colourful eye candy I found out its just yet another updated NT version.
And they dare to charge money for selling just updated and/or fixed versions of nevertheles still the same operating system...

Fortunatelly for Gates, the 'average' computer user sees different GUI and thinks - "wow, a new operating system"
Hasn't anyone ever thought why Windows is the only operating system with its core tied to its GUI? Simply and exactly for this reason: Microsoft reserves the 'right' to change GUI for itself, and when they do it they call it new operating system, while core is stil the same since begining (if you don't know what i'm talking about install any linux and load it with different GUIs - say Fluke first, restart, and load it with KDE next - and you will witness this magical change of 'operating systems' on your computer exactly the same way as Microsoft does it with 'different' windoze 'versions', alas same core, different GUIs )


oldandintheway - i love your nick
and i can't agree more with almost every word of your posts in this thread.

[swiego]

Hardly a killer ap. And I have no doubt I will be able to utilize them (in the unlikely case the neeed arises) without Vista

Highly unlikely. Currently at the moment, HD-DVD/Blu Ray requires a copy protection scheme known as HDCP for High Definiton Playback. Win XP does not support HDCP, hence the need for Vista (which will support HDCP).

Otherwise, without HDCP, the resolution is reduced to a quarter (from 1920 x 1080 pixels to 960 x 540 pixels), which defeats the object of HD playback.

Unless theres a crack. Do a google search, you can learn more about HDCP.

I personally hate it, but thats what the movie studios have decided

BTW, your graphics card and monitor would also need to be HDCP compliant.

Interesting. My Toshiba Qosmio laptop with integrated HDMI output and built-in HD-DVD ROM drive not only plays HD-DVD disks through HDMI as well as to the native 1920x1200 panel, it also does so in Windows MCE using WinDVD HD. No Vista required.

Nor does this seem to be some closed, proprietary, bypass-Windows thing. The Core Duo processors are doing the decoding!

[jntaylor63]

swiego,

Thats great News. What version of WinDVD is it running? Have you played an HD-DVD through MCE? (You can rent at Netflix.)

[swiego]

It appears to be an HD-enabled version of WinDVD 5. It works pretty well; does not support all the iHD functionality and only delivers video to either the panel or the HDMI output. However, it does work and it works well.

(It should be said that both cores of the T2500 are running ~ 90% during playback--decoding VC1 at 1080 resolutions requires a good deal of compute power!)

I definitely see this being a driving force for computing going further. Can't comment on BluRay because I haven't seen it yet but I can tell you this: HDDVD is good enough to reproduce film grain. If that's not amazing, I don't know what is. What Vista brings to the table is unknown but I am hard-pressed to believe that Vista will enable HD-on-PC in a way that XP or MCE can't.

MCE shells out to WinDVD HD by the way, for HDDVD playback.

[ROF]

I haven't seen a reason based on anyone's needs.

I need the new volume shadow copy, the superfetch feature, not to mention the new sleep and ready drive combination. The new search features will be a boon to my productivity. For external needs there is my D-link media lounge that will finally be able to connect to my network without my needing to set it up to do so each time it is unplugged for a few hours.

There are many more reasons I need Windows Vista.

[swiego]

Let's not forget, some of us "WANT" the Aero interface

[ROF]

Let's not forget, some of us "WANT" the Aero interface

You know it.

[oldandinthe way]

As a Microsoft sharehpolder I am glad to see that Vista has something that someone wants.

As a computer user, I continue to be disappointed that it lacks anything I want.

I hope that volume shadowing isn't tied up in the symantec volume management suit for your sake. It seems like a neat feature which will get turned off by every performance sensitive system user. Probably needs the gains from superfetch to function.

I use the existing search on my system once a week. A use google to search the net several times a day. So it doen't matter to me.

None of our pc's are part of our media center, but if your media lounge requires setup after being powered off, it doesn't seem like a product I would purchase or continue to own.

Sleep and ready would help in those times when I have left the system on, while going elsewhere. It will save several minutes, but I turn off my unused systems - part of my security policy, so it would be months before I saved enough time to justify a full backup and os update.

If the list of reasons to upgrade is such "wonk" stuff it all seems to come down to Aero.

Either its worth the cost and hassle or it isn't.

[DereX888]

Apparently there are people who stare at their operating system on their monitors instead of using its software or even to play games
They obviously need AERO.
Reminds me of a dude i knew on campus who used to stare at his screensaver for hours
I dont even put any wallpapers anywhere since whenever i use any of my comp its the software used that that moment what covers my entire screens, so Vista's major 'upgrade' being aero or GUI at all - well, i don't think i'll ever need it
And i too have some msft shares

[swiego]

Apparently there are people who stare at their operating system on their monitors instead of using its software or even to play games
They obviously need AERO.
Reminds me of a dude i knew on campus who used to stare at his screensaver for hours
I dont even put any wallpapers anywhere since whenever i use any of my comp its the software used that that moment what covers my entire screens, so Vista's major 'upgrade' being aero or GUI at all - well, i don't think i'll ever need it
And i too have some msft shares

I've been a Microsoft investor for at least fifteen years. There was a time when my income from Microsoft and Veritas shareholding exceeded by salaried income several times over. So yeah, I'd love to see Vista do well.

As for people who "stare at their operating system on their monitors" and all that, sure, fine, whatever! I have no shame to admit that. I still have my PC-DOS 1.x floppies around here somewhere, and have lived and breathed the PC revolution from then up to having beta'd Vista for longer than I care to remember. There have been times where I enjoyed the added functionality, my gosh EMM386 came in handy back in the day. There have been times when I was pissed off that Microsoft wouldn't provide something rich and useful like 4Dos. And there have been times when Microsoft introduced functionality that to the OS that made my stomach crawl, e.g. incorporating antivirus, disk defrag, etc. into the core product. And YES, there have been times that the OS got prettier, and I was happier for it. The way I see it, I've beta tested WordPerfect 5.x---I've done my time developing, testing and using utility software so I smile a little when I hear someone talk about how hardcore they are with their fancy OS that they don't run a desktop wallpaper... where were these people when Geoworks Ensemble had a fighting chance of taking on Windows? (Probably elementary school.) Oh well. Now I'm older, probably not wiser, but completely comfortable running a 13MB BMP as a wallpaper, and leaving on every visual bell and whistle that MCE offers. I've grown to view computers and operating systems as having aesthetic qualities, and can appreciate it. I have some paintings on the walls at my house. I bought my dream car because of the way it looked and sounded. And I want my Aero Glass interface to be flashy and fancy, the jazzier the better. And it sure is nice to be a member of the unwashed masses...

[DereX888]

good for you.
Thats exactly what im talking about - many people will just buy it for the GUI look - and theres nothing wrong with that
But it doesnt change the facts about that OS being same as the previous one

When I had my 1st computer I cared great deal about its look.
Now I grown to hide it if possible, and I dont care about having wallpaper on my desktop. To some computer is something to 'show', to others (like me) its just another machine, no different than microwave oven or tv - meaning i see no reasons nor any aesthetics in showing it off.
And If Im not using it (that means nothing is taking my screen - the only moments when you can see your precious 13MB bitmapped wall lol) every pc of mine turns off monitor in 1min and either standbys or hibernates within 15min. I like pictures too, but for that I have my tv for displaying pictures when Im not watching anything

Yes, youre right, I was probably wrapped in diapers when you were playing with PCs, but what it has to do with Vista?

Vista will sell well regardless of it features, mirosoft's domination already guarantee it. But will it boost stock value? Well, if you think or hope they will split just because of Vista's release then youre betting wrong horse

Also if you really don't want to be one of the 'unwashed masses', which all will in short time use aero, how can you choose it, lol!

[templelooter]

[Microsoft sells the same product over and over again, it only add more and more eyecandy to each next version.

You realize a team of Microsoft assassins has surely been dispatched.

[dvdguy4]

No need for me to switch. Ill stay with XP. If its not broke, why fix it.