This topic is locked from further discussion.
The code name "Blackcomb" was originally assigned to a version of Windows that was planned to follow Windows XP codenamed "Whistler;" in both client and server versions. However, in August 2001, the release of Blackcomb was pushed back several years and Vista was announced as a release between XP and Blackcomb!! Yes,Vista is just another Windows ME! Remember Windows ME, it was released between Windows 98 and XP! Microsoft is at it again guys, putting out a early test version, and as with ME, driver issues and lack of support abound!
 As of 2006, code name "Blackcomb" is still planned as both a client and server release with a current release estimate of late 2009. A recent article provided from Yahoo!News projected the release date to be closer to 2009.
Blackcomb was ALWAYS the intended follow-up to Longhorn (Vista). Windows ME was rush-written in 6 months with no beta testing as MS wanted a home version of Windows 2000, since 2000 was being targetted for business users. Vista was written over 2 years with the most extensive beta testing programme of any MS OS. You mention that ME was released between 98 and XP, but so was Windows 2000, which is largely regarded as MS's most stable OS despite the fact that it had far more problems when it was released than Vista has now. The recent article from Yahoo news projecting the release date of 2009 for the next version of Windows has also been countered by an article in Arstechnica which says this is not true. When it comes to tech news, i find Arstechnica a damn sight more reputable than Yahoo news... Even if the next version of windows does come out in late 2009, it will mean Vista will have been the latest version of Windows for the same length of time as Windows 95, 98, ME and 2000 all were... so it's hardly shocking to anyone. XP was the exception to the release date cycle, not the norm.The code name "Blackcomb" was originally assigned to a version of Windows that was planned to follow Windows XP codenamed "Whistler;" in both client and server versions. However, in August 2001, the release of Blackcomb was pushed back several years and Vista was announced as a release between XP and Blackcomb!! Yes,Vista is just another Windows ME! Remember Windows ME, it was released between Windows 98 and XP! Microsoft is at it again guys, putting out a early test version, and as with ME, driver issues and lack of support abound!
 As of 2006, code name "Blackcomb" is still planned as both a client and server release with a current release estimate of late 2009. A recent article provided from Yahoo!News projected the release date to be closer to 2009.
t0adphr0g
I have Vista and a powerful ATI card. That dude up there has Vista and powerful Nivida cards in SLI. FEAR runs great on my machine maxxed at high res. FEAR runs bad on his machine maxxed at high res.
in fact ALL my games run great maxxed (except for oblivion, gotta lower some sets on that) on high res.
List of my games that run fine.
Oblivion, Sims 2, CS: source. 3 mods for BF2, BF2 vanilla, Falcon 4.0 (old game!!), Americas Army, Age of Empires II(Old game!!), Rainbow 6 Vegas, Civ IV. Civ II(old game!!), Supreme Commander. Flight simulator 2004, Medieval, Total War, Day of Defeat(old!!), Day of Defeat Source, Call of duty 2, and F.E.A.R.
So whats the problem here, "ZOMG Vista Suxxorz!!" or "Nvidia being too lazy to get off their butts and write a decent driver for Vista"
?
Now I am running the 64-bit Vista Ultimate, but I love it and would never go back. Improved desktop features, improved graphics, improved asthetics and I can now run 4 gig of memory which helps performance tremendously. tkemoryWell, that kinda says it all. If you want a pretty desktop, get vista. If you wanna play games, keep XP. Personally, I don't understand anyone who is getting vista for gaming who would get it now. DX10 games aren't out yet. Most of your old games won't run, or will run poorly, why even bother going through the hassle of not knowing for sure even? You can load 4 gig of ram (usable) in your XP rig so I don't understand why that's even mentioned above. Vista lovers are just fanboys right now who don't wanna look foolish for, or wanna justify the money they've spent on vista. Unless you are totally unhappy with XP, and have had a lot of security problems surfing the net (tsk tsk on you if you have :P ), there is no "real" practical reason to get vista right now. If you ask me (and I know no one did :P ) vista is just something people are jumping on to brag about DX10 capability, or having the "latest thing." If one is on any kind of budget, one should wait until vista is actually worth the money, although a lot of people would consider that a relative thing anyways.
[QUOTE="tkemory"] Now I am running the 64-bit Vista Ultimate, but I love it and would never go back. Improved desktop features, improved graphics, improved asthetics and I can now run 4 gig of memory which helps performance tremendously. 1LonehawkWell, that kinda says it all. If you want a pretty desktop, get vista. If you wanna play games, keep XP. Personally, I don't understand anyone who is getting vista for gaming who would get it now. DX10 games aren't out yet. Most of your old games won't run, or will run poorly, why even bother going through the hassle of not knowing for sure even? You can load 4 gig of ram (usable) in your XP rig so I don't understand why that's even mentioned above. Vista lovers are just fanboys right now who don't wanna look foolish for, or wanna justify the money they've spent on vista. Unless you are totally unhappy with XP, and have had a lot of security problems surfing the net (tsk tsk on you if you have :P ), there is no "real" practical reason to get vista right now. If you ask me (and I know no one did :P ) vista is just something people are jumping on to brag about DX10 capability, or having the "latest thing." If one is on any kind of budget, one should wait until vista is actually worth the money, although a lot of people would consider that a relative thing anyways. Vista is a prettier, more stable, and "smoother" OS than XP, and uses a bit more RAM. If your place the utmost importance on game performance, its probably better to wait until drivers mature mroe (especially nvidia), but I got a good deal on vista home premium ($75 OEM), so I got it. I'm not a huge gamer, and I have dual boot going in the case of unaccetable Vista performance on a certain game.
[QUOTE="nonreversebird"] You cant play games on full settings in Vista period. So for all of us who have spent a lot of money for computers we cannot play our older games with out lockups requiring a reset. Constantly. I have loaded Vista Ultimate I would say 6 times on my machine only to take it off and put XP pro back on just to see how much difference there is. Look FEAR will not run worth bean in Vista. In XP its flawless. Takes complete use of my SLI 8800s. RS Vegas runs Flawless in my XP rig now that I can OC my CPU beyond 3.5ghz. Is it worth it? If you want a Mac look for Internet use only yes. It is very pretty and can help you stay out of spyware and virus hell. Games? forget it and if nvidia doesn't come out with a decent driver soon we can all forget it. Thats why Microsoft is doing every thing in there power to stop people from using XP by introducing a new WGA and a new SP 3. Currently I feel ripped off for my $430 for Vista UltimateLukozerThe worst thing about people who bash Vista needlessly are those who criticise it for things that are nothing to do with Vista itself and everything to do with hardware drivers currently available. These problems have ALWAYS happened with a new OS and people who expect flawless drivers for cutting edge, brand new hardware on a brand new OS are being ridiculous. It's never happened before, it's not going to happen now and won't happen in the future. Fear runs flawless in XP and not in Vista? You don't think it's possibly down to the fact that XP has been out almost 6 years and driver developers have had a bit of time to get XP drivers nailed? You even say so yourself... "if nvidia doesn't come out with a decent driver soon we can all forget it"... It's the video card manufacturers who are slacking on the drivers front, although the idea that if Nvidia don't get a decent driver out soon then you can forget gaming on Vista altogether is equally ridiculous.
Amen.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment