• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Will RO be updated to Vista and DX10 ?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#42
I hate to disappoint u but longhorn will be just like the shitty OS that is XP right now. They can't get the drivers to run off the kernel, they can't get rid of the direct link library filing system without it blowing up. So pretty much you are jsut buying Win XP w/ SP2.5 and a nicer desktop that they already stole. Why are you so anxious to do that all over again?
 
Upvote 0
#43
Hawkeye91 said:
I hate to disappoint u but longhorn will be just like the shitty OS that is XP right now. They can't get the drivers to run off the kernel, they can't get rid of the direct link library filing system without it blowing up. So pretty much you are jsut buying Win XP w/ SP2.5 and a nicer desktop that they already stole. Why are you so anxious to do that all over again?
Click to expand...
damn could you be any more wrong?
did you actualy go out and find some fackts or are did you just form that opinion out of hand.. or worse still are you just repeating what some other people said, who heard other people say, who MAYBE thought they heard someone say... ect.

fackts :
drivers no longer to run off the kernel they run in userspace.
the DLL system got a serius upgrade/rethink.

and explain to me how XP is a bad OS?
it works, dusnt take a lot of time to install, most stuff works right away, its verry stable provided your drivers are decent.
is it perfect? ofcourse not.
is any OS perfect? ofcourse not.

and you registed just to post this troll? thats pretty sad.
 
Upvote 0
#44
actually hawkeye is right. by running it in the "userspace" it eats a ton more resources. the dll system didn't need a rethink, it needed to be trashed, instead it became more bloated than ever.

i've been using vista on my friends computer since the private beta started. vista is so bad most programs take ages to load, not to mention the constant virtual memory accessing. :rolleyes:
 
Upvote 0
#47
Hawkeye91 said:
If you like paying for the same **** over and over again, feel free.
Click to expand...

pay? what is this paying your are refering too? never heard of it.

and hey, you dont want it dont buy it nobodys forcing you to do anything. :rolleyes:

MrBunsy said:
I've not used it, but my friend also installed the beta. Vista uses 700 megs of RAM without doing anything!
Click to expand...

you do realise ofcourse that the betas are bedug builds, which means its code is a lot bigger (eating up more space and memory) in order to be able to trace down problems more eazily.

the final will be compiled normaly without all the debug flags making the code a lot cleaner, and smaller.

that also explains the extra mem useage and therefor the increased use of the swapfile, and therefor the increased loading times of programes.

and no drivers in userspace do not eat up more ram then drivers running in kernel space. and even if they did it would still be a good idea to use.
linux has drivers in userspace aswell.

atleast try to do some research into the background of things befor you form a opinion.
 
Upvote 0
#50
I beta'd XP and I'm betaing Vista. Unlike XP, Vista is SERIOUSLY lacking in a WOW factor. When I first started using XP beta, I was eager to have this OS come out. Vista on the other hand is a steaming pile of dung that should come out stillborn. It's a HORRIBLE POS. You would have thought that after 4 years, Microshaft could have come out with something better. Instead, we get XP with a pretty facelift and more blout then ever. Yes, there are some underlying things that are changed but imo they are irrellivant (sp) and not needed/implemented in the way Microshaft has done them.

Needless to say, I will NOT be purchasing Vista nor running it anytime soon.
 
Upvote 0
#51
My main point on planning to get Vista when it comes out is for the 64-bitness.

I've been running an Athlon 64 for a while, but didn't want to bother getting the 64 bit XP since Vista was "just around the corner."



Back to RO, I hope that TW will release a 64-bit native client for Vista and even the 64 bit XP's. I think HL2 has already got that.
 
Upvote 0
#53
The final version might take up less space on the hdd but the virtual filesystem is as broken as the cell processor. What I mean by that is we're looking at one order of magnitude more memory usage by the OS (100s of megs vs 10s of megs, my XP x64 runs at 70MB idle whereas vista regularlly uses 1GB even at idle). We're also looking at a severe hit in loading times due to the compatibility layers for both 32-bit applications and dx9 and older programs provided they actually run. The XP x64 compatibility layer is actually quite smooth and runs a lot of 32-bit programs wihout a large performance hit, as in I can still run DOOM3 at almost full settings. In vista they managed to unoptimize it and slow page swapping for 32-bit machines to a standstill. This means extended load times, and longer level load times as the machine tries to figure out which part of which page goes to which register. This problem seems to be more pronounced on machines that have more ram and more virtual memory set.

Vista is seriously broken, and more than likely will be scrapped entirely.
 
Upvote 0
#56
MoFo said:
Vista is seriously broken, and more than likely will be scrapped entirely.
Click to expand...

And if you believe that, then I've got a bridge for sale in Brooklyn ...

As if M$ would give up their next money maker ... HA!

They'll release it regardless as to whether it's done/quality/works ...
They wouldn't spend 5+ years on something only to scrap it at the last minute because of a few 'minor' 'random program features' ...


Favorite Bill Gates quote: "I don't care if it's [Windows 3.1, maybe 95] not done; I want it to ship in time for Christmas!"
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu