Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

DX 11 This Year? No

Ray Tracing To Debut In DirectX 11 on Tech ARP is a report that turns out to be an April Fool, as it comes from Malaysia, where it is April 1, Year of the Rat already. Apologies for having perpetuated this techie prank.

View
46 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >

46. No subject Apr 3, 2008, 15:06 [VG]Reagle
 
I hope they never release another version of DX. Would that really be so bad? At least everything would work together.

Give us a break, screw microsoft. The only thing they use DX for is to sell operating systems.
 
Avatar 8515
 
I am MUCH MUCH better now.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
45. ... Apr 1, 2008, 11:26 theyarecomingforyou
 
Yep, April fool's joke about ray tracing - then bam! XP vs Vista arguments.
Indeed, though the "joke" really wasn't funny - it was simply a lie, which goes against the whole spirit of April Fools. NEway, DX10/11 relates to Vista, which relates to the XP / Vista debate - it's not really off-topic. This whole debate started because someone basically said Vista was great and everybody that had a problem was lying or an idiot. Fucking right people are going to complain and take issue to that. It's even worse that someone claimed that Vista benchmarks were at most 10% slower, when OpenGL based games tanked and the difference in performance is very noticeable.

I want to look forward to Windows 7 but I did the same with Vista and have been letdown. I pre-ordered Vista but with slower performance and compability issues it seems there was little benefit to doing so - I had to actually go back to XP while I awaited compatible sound drivers.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Founder of the "I Hate Smiley Fitz" society

Remember: Riley has autism. He has trouble communicating, and in an overstimulating
environment, he can get frightened and run away, leaving his parents frantic. - Auburn
This comment was edited on Apr 1, 11:27.
 
Avatar 22891
 
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou
Star Citizen: Blue's News
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
44. Re: Vista Apr 1, 2008, 10:29 Fibrocyte
 
Hows that? performance I think NOT, looks yes but why not go Linux it looks better is way way more configurable and its free.

Ive done two PC builds with four hard drives, two 150 raptors for each OS and gaming partition and two 36 gigs raptors for swap and back up.
The results you all ready know in ALL case thru what seemed like a million benchmarks Vista was far behind XP, either for gaming or any type of performance app nuff said.

P.S and even after basically tweaking Vista back to win 2k it still gets it ass handed to it by XP in all the benchmarks I tried. its the bastard step child of Win ME.


Performance in load times and frame rates. You can "think NOT" all you want - but you try to squelch such thoughts when they're completely wrong.

Why would someone honestly go Linux for gaming? This whole discussion is about alleviating headaches, not creating more. I'm Linux savvy and Linux has it's place but it is not for main-stream gaming.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
43. Re: Vista Mar 31, 2008, 23:46 Alathorn
 
Yep, April fool's joke about ray tracing - then bam! XP vs Vista arguments.

It could be a topic on a new type of knitting needle and some people will hijack it onto their pet rant caused by their insecurities about which OS they've chosen to use.

Does anyone really care about which OS you're running?

I guess so since there have been so many responses. Including mine. Damn, I've bought into it. Right, I'm off to replace XP with CP/M

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
42. Re: Vista Mar 31, 2008, 21:02 Bone43
 

However, both systems still run better than XP.

Hows that? performance I think NOT, looks yes but why not go Linux it looks better is way way more configurable and its free.

Ive done two PC builds with four hard drives, two 150 raptors for each OS and gaming partition and two 36 gigs raptors for swap and back up.
The results you all ready know in ALL case thru what seemed like a million benchmarks Vista was far behind XP, either for gaming or any type of performance app nuff said.

P.S and even after basically tweaking Vista back to win 2k it still gets it ass handed to it by XP in all the benchmarks I tried. its the bastard step child of Win ME.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
41. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 19:32 Lorcin
 
oops
This comment was edited on Mar 31, 19:33.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
40. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 19:26 Lorcin
 
In fact, most of the people I find that bitch about Vista have either never run it. Have piss-poor hardware or have completely bought into the Mac ad's.

Or bought a brand new dell xps - had it blue screen within 5 hours and discovered that it would be 50/50 as to whether WoW would run for more then ten minutes (after 10 minutes it generally would hold together - unless it decided to PSOD).

That is my vista story. Honest. No bullshit. One of the biggest PC manufactures shipped me a PC which was made for gaming which could not run the biggest PC game on the market (which is so graphicly challenging that it is able to run on my grandfathers hamster-in-a-wheel powered antique).

Why did my new XPS fail so badly?

Was it the hardware?

NO - since rebuilding to XP x64 I have had precisely 0 - thats ZERO - blue, purple, red, green, polka-dot crashes. Not one. WoW goes in and stays in every time (although I've quit playing since I bought the machine). Every bloody thing works.

So was it Dells version of Vista?

Ok this I doubt. Yes I'll freely admit it did have some shitty ISP and that crappy M$ (doesn't)Works on it but really it was pretty vanilla.

So given that I personally accuse Vista.

About this time some people are gonna start bitching that Nvidia caused 28.8% of all vista crashes last year and ATI created 9%. But considering the amount of desktop PCs out there with only built in GFX cards (and a fair few of them are nvidia made remember) and the picture looks awfully more like vista has a problem with any GFX card.

I'm becoming pretty convinced that the next Windows recommended specs will include:

A) A braile compatable monitor.
B) A blind opperator.
C) At least 57.6 TB if storage for the OS.

(Oh the machine is 2 months old before you say that was my day 1 teething problems)

PS: Blue you go pwned.
PPS: Derek! your here. But I'm too tired to be bothered. Hmm then again - DSmart posting in a thred which was meant to be about the cutting edge of graphics technology. That actually funnier then the original joke

This comment was edited on Mar 31, 19:34.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
39. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 18:52 Burrito of Peace
 
It all just sounds EXACTLY like what I heard when XP came out. 7 years later people are still using XP and refuse to switch so obviously it wasn't that bad.

There will always be people who spread FUD and there will always be the masses of mouth breathing, ignorant Wal-Mart shoppers that buy in to the FUD, repeating it verbatim to all of their cave mates.

Windows 95 I've always given MS a bit of a pass on. It was their first 32 bit attempt at anything in the consumer market and they added in new hardware specifications (Plug and Play) at the insistence of an unnamed, huge processor manufacturer that weren't quite ready for prime time.

With Windows 7 seemingly to be in full development, it seems that Vista is going to be relegated to the same role in OS history that Windows ME was; a stumbling half-step that spilled a glass of red wine all down the front of every user's white jacket.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
38. Re: Vista Mar 31, 2008, 17:15 Fibrocyte
 
wow so you are getting more or less indetical performance and features as XP?
so you've just spent up to $500 for XP with a skin?

Gee i dunno why people don't like vista (/sarcasm)

My opinion might be different if I payed for Vista, but I didn't. One copy is from my MSDN subscription and the other system is a DELL which came pre-built with Vista.

However, both systems still run better than XP.

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
37. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 17:06 Bone43
 
Vista.... All show no go


P.S. M$ should just come clean and add DX10 to XP SP3.
This comment was edited on Mar 31, 17:10.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
36. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 16:45 4D-Boxing
 
My original comment was a reply to NKD or whatever his name is but after reading what Parallax posted I doubt their is anything more to add.. other than who's OS is it? Nividia?! no ...MS.

From what I know Nvidia is one of the largest video card makers and they also make chipsets...if a large company like that does not have their drivers ready for launch than is the OS ready for launch?

Valve had stats about what video cards are most widely used and so on...MAybe that was a hint that MS should wait for the most used DX 10 video card maker get his drivers ready that way the DX10 hype won't go down the drain?!?!

Anyways to late for MS to blame others the damage is done...Just an idea ..but why not make sure the product lives up to the hype before releasing it?!
This comment was edited on Mar 31, 16:58.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
35. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 16:39 Parallax Abstraction
 
I agree with you on drivers Derek but I will also say from my experience that many of them dropped the ball hardcore at launch. A lot of very common peripherals by many large manufacturers (the biggest offender of which was HP) did not have drivers ready and some of them took months to get them out. At Vista launch, my former employer was selling an HP system and printer bundle and I was tasked with installing it on-site. The only problem is that the printer that was included as part of this Vista system bundle didn't have Vista drivers. So I had to tell my customers that they couldn't use their new printer and they wouldn't be able to until some unknown point in the future. Now, was that Vista's fault? No it wasn't. HP has the resources to ensure drivers were ready and they should have done so. The advantage in the past was that if it was Windows XP at launch, I could have used a Windows 2000 drivers. With Vista, that wasn't possible and there was no good reason for it from the user's perspective.

At one point, HP also has a system they were selling that came with an HD-DVD drive built-in. The problem was that on many of them, the video would either have significantly degraded quality or the screen would keep blanking out every few seconds. Why? Because Vista's DRM system wasn't properly recognizing the HDCP link and was constantly resetting the video system thinking something was wrong. this is what many referred to as "tilt bits." Basically, when Vista's DRM detects the slightest inconsistency in a component or driver used in the HDCP process, it resets the video system to try and bring things back in line. If the slight variance keeps happening, it will just keep resetting the video system in perpetuity. This is another thing that only happens on Vista and it's built-in to the operating system to minimize hacking which means this bloat is there all the time, even if you don't have a drive in your system capable of playing media that requires it.

Anyway, I don't want to keep ragging on Vista as I've already made my point and the problem I'm talking about here are discussed in far greater detail elsewhere. Like I said, run Vista if it works for you and be happy that it works so well. I also believe that one day, Vista will reach a point where it will work well for the masses. It just isn't there yet and being someone who has to support these problem day in and day out and explaining them to novice users all the while, it just gets frustrating to be thought of as a whiner.

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Canada
 
Parallax Abstraction
Geek Bravado | YouTube
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
34. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 16:20  dsmart 
 
To say that it has no problem is simply not true.

Tell me about it.

As a game developer, I have dual boot WinXP and Vista on every machine here in my office.

I develop primarily on a Vista Ultimate system because then I know that I'm working on the lowest common denominator.

Vista is a complete shame if you ask me.

Heck, even though I installed SP1 on day zero, I still cannot believe that on my XP system, I can browse my NAS (I have a 4+4 RAID5 cluster here) almost twice as fast on my XP system than I can on my Vista. Even though they seemed to have fixed the issue with Vista and network drives. No matter wtf they fixed, its still nowhere near as seamless or as speedy as XP. And this is from the same dual-boot system, not just from computers with different hardware. I'm running on a giga Ethernet backbone, and on a top of the line D-Link DIR-655 router, so its not that either.

So, those yelling and pointing the finger at driver manufacturers are just pissing into the wind because as the OS manufacturer, its up to MS to ensure that driver ISVs have their ducks in a row prior to launch. e.g. Creative still can't get their Vista driver issues sorted out. Its been what? A whole frigging year already?

MS changed the driver model just for the sake of change because, AFAIK, apart from the technicalities of "this is how we should have done it since XP!!", they did more harm than good and are pretty naive in thinking that this was going to go smoothly.

I'm sure that under the hood, Vista is more advanced than XP, but since users don't give a rat's ass about whats under the hood and only about their overall experience thats why Vista is taking such a beating.

And then they go and start talking about Windows 7. Gimme a fucking break already.

Derek I wish you would participate in more of the discussions here, as you sir have made my day, and for that I thank you (and I mean this in a good way).

heh, I try. I just leave or try to ignore threads when people start attacking me for no reason other than it being fun to poke a sleeping bear while standing in front of it stark naked and with a stupid grin on your face. But now that Blue has official weighed in and drawn the line...

http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewthread&threadid=86335

....I'll start posting more.


This comment was edited on Mar 31, 16:22.
 
Avatar 9141
 
Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead
...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
33. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 15:44 Parallax Abstraction
 
NKD:

It will definitely not e-mail your details to criminals though I am also one of the ones who isn't a fan of Microsoft's big brother "Genuine Advantage" system.

The thing about frame rates is a valid issue but I will also agree that it doesn't happen to everyone. My frame rates in Vista are noticeably slower. Now, I have a 3800+ X2 with 2GB RAM and an X1950 Pro 512MB. Not roaring state of the art but well above Vista's requirements and good enough to run any game on the market decently. However, I have yet to figure out why this happens to me and not to everyone because you're right, it doesn't happen to everyone. I don't know if it's drivers or something else but the fact is for me and many others, XP runs games better.

I think the best example of Vista related nonsense is something that happened recently with a customer of mine. This was the one who had Vista blow up because of an update. Basically, it would blue screen and reboot when they tried to start it, even in safe mode. So I told them I'd back up their stuff and restore it. Simple enough right? Not so much. The Compaq restore software actually ran in a Vista PE environment. When I tried to boot from that, I got the same blue screen. When I tried to boot from my own Vista PE disc, I got the same blue screen. Vista setup CD? Blue screen. Also, due to a stupid design decision on this system, the hard disk would not spin up if plugged into any system but this Compaq (that was obviously not Vista's fault, it was Compaq being stupid) so if I couldn't get the system to boot into something, I couldn't get their data off.

What did I end up doing? I made a Windows XP based PE and successfully booted off that to get their data off. Once I did so, I completely wiped the hard diak and after that, I was able to successfully restore Vista and everything was fine. In summary: Vista blew up and due to the way it's designed, you couldn't boot into anything that used a Vista kernel (even from CD) and the only way to get into the system was with something based on XP. The only way to get Vista functional again was to completely wipe the system which you also had to do with the XP disc because Vista's own partitioning tool required you to boot from the Vista CD which was inaccessible. This problem only affects Vista and isn't acknowledged by Microsoft but when I searched for the particular STOP error I was getting, there were pages and pages of people running into it.

Obviously that's not something that will affect everyone but it is one example of stupid, Vista-only issues. Like I said, it will work for many and I'm happy for those people. But a great many of us (much more than Microsoft apologists like Ed Bott and Paul Thurrott would like to admit) are having problems with Vista, Microsoft doesn't even seem to be acknowleding them, much less fixing them and a lot of us are frustrated. We aren't all whiners, we're justifiably upset. If I didn't get Vista for free from my former employer, I'd be much more frustrated since it isn't cheap.

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Canada
This comment was edited on Mar 31, 15:48.
 
Parallax Abstraction
Geek Bravado | YouTube
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
32. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 15:42 Krovven
 
But the majority of the people complaining ARE complaining without a logical basis in fact or experience.

And you have statistical facts to back this statement up? No? Didn't think so. So your statement holds about as much water as if I stated "The majority of people complaining ARE complaining based on logical fact and experience.".

The fact is that there ARE many problems with Vista as a whole, some people experience them, others do not. It entirely depends on system specs, configuration and the software you are trying to use with it.

A simple Google search of "Vista SP1 problems" speaks for itself.

Bottomline here is that just because you aren't experiencing the problems, doesn't mean other people do not. Meanwhile your statements just make you look like an idiot.

----------------------------------------------------
Burnout Paradise, Bioshock, Ratchet & Clank ToD

Join the "Blues News" Steam Community Group. http://steamcommunity.com/groups/bluesnews/
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31. Re: Vista Mar 31, 2008, 15:32 bigspender
 
Just an FYI - I've been running Vista since release and have had almost no issues with it after a few patches were released for drivers, etc... My performance is on-par with XP or better and in most games my load times are much faster w/ Vista.

wow so you are getting more or less indetical performance and features as XP?
so you've just spent up to $500 for XP with a skin?

Gee i dunno why people don't like vista (/sarcasm)

3)Genuinely pissed former Vista users. Unfortunately their experiences were colored by being day 1 Vista adopters and their hatred has prevented them from giving Vista another chance nearly a year and a half later.

So if you buy a brand new car, you'd be happy taking it into service and mechanics for a year and a half before you can drive it to the places you like?

Yeah anyone with 1/2 a brain knows to wait until the growing pains are over when a microsoft OS comes out - but that in itself is silly. The damn thing should just work, the end.
_________________________________________________
NO COOP = NO PURCHASE
NO MULTICORE SUPPORT = NO BUY
NO NATIVE WIDESCREEN SUPPORT = NO CASH FOR YOU
CRITICAL PATCH released within 2 weeks = RETURN TO STORE
IN GAME ADVERTISING = GO ***** YOURSELVES
This comment was edited on Mar 31, 15:43.
 
_________________________________________________

Adults are just children that are allowed to make their own decisions.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 14:37 Prez
 
I have never tried Vista. And I don't want to. Why? Because many people whose opinion I trust have said it is a poor OS. And why should I "upgrade" to an OS that will play my games slower than they do in XP?  
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 14:23 NKD
 
Oh I'm not saying Vista doesn't have problems, or hasn't had problems in the past, and if I had to pay full retail I wouldn't be using it.

But the majority of the people complaining ARE complaining without a logical basis in fact or experience. Come on, you've seen it, all these douchebags running around claiming that they installed Vista on their awesome $5000 rig and their framerates tanked. Even at release the most you saw in nearly any game was a 10% drop.

Yeah Vista is definitely a resource hog, and yeah on a low end machine its unthinkable to force people to use Vista (like these shady ass Compaqs your mentioned and so on.).

What I have a problem with is not people going "I had a problem with Vista and it took some doing to fix it." or "Stuff seems a bit more sluggish in Vista than in XP."

That stuff is legit and valid. I apologize if I generalized too much, but it bugs me to no end to hear people STILL running around saying Vista has poor driver support, will cut your framerates in half and will email your financial details to criminals.

It all just sounds EXACTLY like what I heard when XP came out. 7 years later people are still using XP and refuse to switch so obviously it wasn't that bad.

Plus if people want to see a bad OS release, they should go back and time and hang out for the original Win95 release. It was remarkably similar to Vista. Poor driver support, broke compatibility with a ton of DOS programs, ran like a dog on even high end machines at the time.
This comment was edited on Mar 31, 14:28.
 
Avatar 43041
 
If you don't like where gaming is heading, stop giving your money to the people who are taking it in that direction.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: No subject Mar 31, 2008, 14:16 Parallax Abstraction
 
Vista hatefest!

Why is it the only people who have problems with Vista are either people I know quite well to be morons, or random people on the Internet. Is there a connection? Why is it I've never run into any of these Vista problems people are talking about?

My theory is that people with Vista problems fall into one or more of these three categories:

1) Liars who've never used Vista and are just relaying what they've "heard." Likely from morons.

2) Morons who probably took place in the Anti-XP hatefest when that came out, anything new = bad to these people. They probably still use AGP video cards and likely never jumped ship to AMD for those 4-5 years they were superior. Most likely had Vista problems due to user error and/or not updating their fucking OS.

3) Genuinely pissed former Vista users. Unfortunately their experiences were colored by being day 1 Vista adopters and their hatred has prevented them from giving Vista another chance nearly a year and a half later.


If I'm missing any categories feel free to add.

3. Smug people who feel that just becuase they haven't had any issues with Vista, everyone who complains is just whining or a liar while throwing out the same kind of ignorate insults that they accuse others of.

I've been doing on-site computer service for 9 years and am about to launch my own company in this field. I have been around for the Windows 2000, XP and Vista launches and run it on a dual-boot on my system. To say that it has no problem is simply not true. There are still systems being sold with Vista today that have performance and stability issues. Just recently, I had a customer whose Compaq became unbootable due to a Vista update. Yes, Compaq are not stellar computers but it wasn't the system that died, it was Vista. Oh, and let's not forget the scandal of them putting Vista Capable stickers on systems that were not actually Vista Capable.

On my system, Vista runs perfectly stable but there's no question it is slower. I've done my own comparisons with games and applications and yes, it is slower. My computer is custom-built and tuned to my needs but there are many users out there with more generic computers who are having problems. I've had several customers who have paid for XP and paid me to drop them to it, against my advice because Vista frustrated them so much.

If you want me to give more examples of its problems, I can. And I was not someone who bitched about XP when it came out. In fact, I loved XP when it came out because most of the drivers were good and Windows 2000 drivers largely worked with it and that isn't the case with Vista. But to call everyone who complains about the many legitimate problems with Vista whiners is just snotty Microsoft apologist nonsense.

There are problems with Vista, I've seen them and at the risk of sounding snotty myself, I'm willing to bet I'm quite a bit more experienced than you. If it runs good for you, well...good for YOU. It doesn't for the rest of us and we have every right to call Microsoft on this overpriced piece of crap.

Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Canada

This comment was edited on Mar 31, 14:25.
 
Parallax Abstraction
Geek Bravado | YouTube
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: Vista Mar 31, 2008, 14:13 The Half Elf
 
Derek I wish you would participate in more of the discussions here, as you sir have made my day, and for that I thank you (and I mean this in a good way).

 
Avatar 12670
 
"I've never seen a feature like this before. It warms your ass. It's wonderful" -Walter Bishop
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
46 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo