check out hte new WINDOWS Vista

[gchick]

Windows Vista (http://www.betanews.com/slideshow/Windows_Vista_September_CTP_Build/69)

pretty cool...

[Stephen Philbin]

I heard someone suggest that that transparency and stuff in the top section of the window would need a graphics card. That can't be right can it? What exactly is the "line" between needing and not needing a card?

[MstrBob]

I heard someone suggest that that transparency and stuff in the top section of the window would need a graphics card. That can't be right can it? What exactly is the "line" between needing and not needing a card?

:confused:

Basically, if you want to use a monitor, you need a graphics card. Many motherboards come with an integrated graphics card, if that's what you're referring to (though a PC gamer will splurge for a top of the line card).

Now if you are implying that you'll need to by a new graphics card to run Vista, you won't. Vista will be taking advantage of 3D technology already present in graphics cards. Now, not all cards can handle some Vista GUI elements, true, but that's why Vista is supposed to have different GUI levels. So if your card starts to liquify with the new visuals, you can go to a more basic UI.

Despite the fact that it's supposed to be 'cool' to blast Windows, I'll ignore the apparently obligatory "OMFG M$ STOLE 3V3RY7H1NG FROM Apple 4 WINBLOWS!!!11!!" statement and go on record saying that, from the screenshots and impartial reviews, Vista should be very interesting.

[theuedimaster]

I agree, Vista looks to be pretty nice. Visually, I'm sure it'll please. I just hope for better automation of things like networking, synching, and wireless connections. Windows XP was a great upgrade from 2000 and me in terms of usability, but I hope Vista can offer the same magnitude of improvement. Plus, you gotta love the 3d chess ;).

[Sheldon]

I heard they are bringing out like 7 versions. lite, home, home lite, corporate, corporate lite, pro, network pro or something like that, just another way to make money, BS i reackon, GO APPLE!!

And withthe side bar like that, a little to much like the Moc OS X Dock i think

[theuedimaster]

Believe me, many companies have created docks. Just because apple made one doesn't mean microsoft is specifically targeting them. Thats not a fair accusation.

But I agree, the 7 versions are a bit..... weird.

[Sheldon]

Yerthats true, but apple were the first decent dock in a bigger op sys.

I cant remember the exact names, im not a real windows fan anyway, i might install it on one of my boxes later on. We will see the reviews after a service pack has come out to get rid of the bugs that thhey will release it with

[MstrBob]

Can you provide any links to this fact? Because last I heard, it was another rumor.

So Microsoft copied apple? Really now, the vast majority of GUI's today are more or less direct rips of Douglas Englebart and his team's work at Xerox. He even came up with the computer mouse! Of course, the whole GUI bonanza at Apple was due to the fact that many of these people who developed windows, scrollbars, dialogues, ect. moved to Apple in its early days. Look, the point is that they are all based off of copying one another. Windows, dialogues, mice, scrollbars, icons... how different are they all really? Some are shiny? Some have a 'start bar' while others have 'docs'? Please...

[Stephen Philbin]

Well actually my question was more to do with simply understanding the performance difference between onboard graphics processors and them things you buy and chuck in yourself, and whether or not people that don't have the ones you buy seperate would see that effect. Rather than thrying to prove that MS are evil and Vista will bring poverty to the entire world. I guess I'd better take my evil "one OS that isn't Windows" self away and have a little read about graphics elsewhere some other time.

[BigMoosie]

When reading about windows vista about 6 months ago (then longhorn) I read that most PCs at the time wouldnt be able to handle the highest GUI level.
Also, about the doc, I really dont care if it is a 100% rip of apple's idea (not that it is very ingenius, wow stuff that you can click on the side of the screen!!!). Really, I mean if it is a tool that works well, I'll be happy to see it in the next windows regardless of its origin.

[PeOfEo]

Basically if you are running onboard graphics you are using system memory and your memory is further from your chipset. If you have a card the memory can be tuned for graphics and it is sitting right up next to your chipset. The performance difference between onboard and even a basic card can be very staggering unless you have something geared for performance, for instance, a gaming geared laptop with a high end ati or nvidia chipset right on the board and loads of very fast memory.

[theuedimaster]

I wonder if there is anyway for the system to take advantage of video memory that isn't being used....

[Stephen Philbin]

Oh right. I thought it was just the case that as soon as you wanted 3D graphics, you needed a graphics card. I thought that's why everyone always seemed to grab one for whatever game was the latest and greatest at the time. From the sounds of it though, it's not the type of calculations, it's just the quantity required to achieve the effect that's the deciding factor? Like lighting, shadowing, translucency etc.

[MstrBob]

Oh right. I thought it was just the case that as soon as you wanted 3D graphics, you needed a graphics card. I thought that's why everyone always seemed to grab one for whatever game was the latest and greatest at the time. From the sounds of it though, it's not the type of calculations, it's just the quantity required to achieve the effect that's the deciding factor? Like lighting, shadowing, translucency etc.

Generally, yes. The same reason gamers go for more powerful processors. Having 3d, means, well, a whole new dimension with visuals to calculate. Microsoft's big thing with this is to 'tap the exisiting power of current graphic capabilities'. But not everyone will be able to handle that full blown effect, no.