Geoff Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Wired had a go at putting Vista RC2 on a 'Vista Ready' Laptop. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,71947-0.html?tw=rss.index Works fine with the ATI graphics chip. However disabling it resulted in a sluggish system that was unable to play videos. The worst news is that with the graphics and cpu going full belt most of the time to run Vista, the battery performance is utterly destroyed. Making ones laptop distinctly non-portable.
Disease Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Works fine with the ATI graphics chip. However disabling it resulted in a sluggish system that was unable to play videos. . Gee what ever next, if you disable the sound card in vista the sound don't work!!
DHCP Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Hmmm, When you disable the graphics card the 3d acceleratrion doesnt work anymore? oh? really? Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if you disabled the soundcard? Would it still be able to play audio? Hmmm, now let me see! I wonder if it will run any better if I remove the ram as well?
Geoff Posted October 18, 2006 Author Posted October 18, 2006 If you disable the 3d accelerator in XP it'll default back to the generic SVGA driver. XP will disable all/some visual effects as required to get reasonable performance.
Disease Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Why would you want to disable the 3d driver? I still do not get the point.
DHCP Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Yeah, why on god's earth why would you want to disable the 3d acceleration for in vista? If you did this you wouldn't be able to appreciate the yummy splendidness of digital visual candy that is Windows Aero! (Which bears no resemblence to that yummy nestle chocolate bar of the same name!) Alternatively though if vista doesnt run that well on a vista laptop you could always remedy this by installing ubuntu on it, but that kind of defeats the object of having a vista laptop really doesnt it?
Geoff Posted October 18, 2006 Author Posted October 18, 2006 Its a common technique for the powermanagement subsystems on 'performace' laptops with 3d controllers to disable their 3d graphics functionality when its not required.
Disease Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 How can you call it a Vista ready laptop when Vista is not due out for another 6-8 months? We all know how quickly tech updates so testing it now and saying it's shit is a bit unfair really.
Disease Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 There is a difference in PM disabling it and actually disabling the entire chip. Most 3D cards handle both 3D and 2D and by actually switching off the card via hardware rather than allowing the software to do it is just stupid. You wonder why there are problems. I have found Vista to be a superb update from XP.
Dos_Box Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 I'm running it fine on a Dell 120L with 1GB DDRII RAM. I can't see the point though as it is a pain in the bum with its constant nagging.
Geoff Posted October 18, 2006 Author Posted October 18, 2006 Vista will be released to Corporate customers (Technet subscribers, Select Agreement holders, etc) in December. Besides, this isn't a 'new' idea. I've seen loads of PC's with 'ready for windows xxx' stickers on them going all the way back to Win98.
Disease Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Geoff thats irrelevant it's not out yet. Dos you can turn off the nagging, I am running it on my home and work system and get no nagging at all.
Geoff Posted October 18, 2006 Author Posted October 18, 2006 You ask if Vista is out in 6-8 months and I tell you it's out in December. Hows my answer irrelevant?
Disease Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 It's irrelevant because its not actually out NOW.
Geoff Posted October 18, 2006 Author Posted October 18, 2006 So whats Dos_Box running on his Dell then?
webman Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Why the hell would you want 3D on the desktop anyway? Yeah it might look cool but it's not very productive. I'm trying to do my job not play Unreal Tournament. If I'm ever force to use Vista I think I'll find the Windows Classic switch.
Geoff Posted October 18, 2006 Author Posted October 18, 2006 Why the hell would you want 3D My understanding is that Vista will just 'decide' to use it unless you intervene. As Wired have illustrated this ends up in tears on a laptop. Errmmmm RC2, not the finalised version. According to my "Technobabble for Dummies" book RC stands for Release Candidate. The definition of a Release Candidate is: The term release candidate refers to a final product, ready to release unless fatal bugs emerge. In this stage, the product features all designed functionalities and no known showstopper class bugs. At this phase the product is usually code complete. If this is not the case, shouldn't Microsoft still be calling it Beta?
Jake Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Why the hell would you want 3D on the desktop anyway? Yeah it might look cool but it's not very productive. I'm trying to do my job not play Unreal Tournament. If I'm ever force to use Vista I think I'll find the Windows Classic switch. Excuse me for butting into the thread, but everytime I read/hear the words Unreal Tournament, I have to say in a deep throaty voice "God-Like!"
webman Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Hehe... I'd say the other UT favourite but I don't like to swear Let's hope MS screw it up and sicken people off so they convert to open-source
Disease Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Linux is dead, Microsoft is King Long Live the King. If RC2 is the finalised version as you try to imply there would be no need to release RC1 RC2, they use RC instead of beta because it sounds better. Same way they call a bog cleaner a sanitation technician.
CyberNerd Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 except with microsoft the final version is still a beta by everone elses definition. Only when SP1 is relesed is it stable enough to call a release.
Geoff Posted October 18, 2006 Author Posted October 18, 2006 Let's hope MS screw it up and sicken people off so they convert to open-source As per our current poll it seems most people will simply stick with XP. It's certainly easier than a Linux migration. Especially when you already have a large investment in the infrastructure. Linux is dead, Microsoft is King You might want to let Google know, or IBM, or Novell. If RC2 is the finalised version as you try to imply there would be no need to release RC1 RC2 As per my definition. The term release candidate refers to a final product, ready to release unless fatal bugs emerge. I'm guessing there were some really bad problems with RC1. IIRC wasn't UAC really overly nagging? they use RC instead of beta because it sounds better. Same way they call a bog cleaner a sanitation technician. So it's marketing then? While it might confuse the PHBs, you've illustrated that it doesn't confuse us. As we damn well know it isn't ready (also confirmed by our poll results, mentioned above). As a marketing exercise then surely its failed? Or is Microsoft simply in denial and lying to itself? "If we call it a RC and ignore all the bug reports we can ship it on time!!"
webman Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Linux is dead, Microsoft is King Long Live the King. :?: :-k
Disease Posted October 18, 2006 Posted October 18, 2006 Linux is dead, Microsoft is King You might want to let Google know, or IBM, or Novell. Really proves nothing in the great Microsoft is better than Linux debate Geoff, you and I both know that tit for tatting on the business' that use MS or Linux is pointless as I could just spout some multinational to counter the IBM Novel Google favorite of Linux users.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now