D3H6G9 Posted July 2, 2006 Share Posted July 2, 2006 My impression is it felt like XP with slight improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clamo Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 i love the new inerface. networking is a real bite in the a**. the new screen savers are cool. visuals are nice, back grounds are sharp. the new pic viewer is good, pic's are displayed sharper, buti dont like the zoom controls. the default drivers for the Nvidia Geforce fx cards suck, hade to install my own to fix problems. sound support blows. and ive already got the dam blue screen lol. but thats windows for ya. this is what i think of the 32bit verson. have not been able to setup the 64bit verson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLXX Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Too bloated. Significantly more than XP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubar Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Agreed, Biggest load of bloatware you can find, there is very little improvement in terms of functionality, all they have focused on is trying to make it look as pretty as possible, If it werent for the fact that ppl are going to have to use it to play all the latest DX10 games i wouldnt ever bother buying it. I certainly wont be buying when it is first launched anyway as thats just plain suicide, only the complete noob m$ fanboys will be doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3aces Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 TBH Vista personally for me is a must... most proberly because of new hardware support and features.. but at this current stage in time Vista needs to be improved alot more... i cant access other computers on my home network at the minute i cant figure out why but hey... and there are alot more services built in which i feel make the OS bloated... i mean a prime example... when you open up a folder in windows explorer.. in the bar across the top a green progress bar goes accross... now what the hell is that... i cant seem to find out... i video edit alot.. and when opening a folder which uncompressed avi footage that progress bar takes the p***... i have also stopped alot of services so Beta 2 is usable as a main OS which i am using... i have 26 processes running 5 mins after boot up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnikolov Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Just an improvement of Windows XP with new "Aero" interface and graphical installation insted of the ususal 98/XP installation. Too annoying security system, bad integrated graphics drivers. I like the faster boot time though. Personally, I prefer the new Mac OS X Leopard, which will be available for Intel-based proccessors too. It's scheduled for release between 7th and 11th of August, if I'm not mistaken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ripken204 Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 WAY too much crap in it, they could easily take out 6gigs of crap, i know i will once nlite can handle it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fizban2 Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 when you refer to crap, can you give some example? i know everyone says there is to much crap but i still don't see examples of it, POW has some good examples (by the way the green bar across the top is the indexing agent checking the folder and reindexing it ) that is why it takes for ever one those folders with huge AVis or movie files. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XP_2600 Posted July 3, 2006 Share Posted July 3, 2006 Well, until now i didnt find any feature worth to upgrade my machines to Vista, i have vista runing in a test machine but all what i get is some nice sutff looks alot like Stardock products, no new feature and performance seems sucks even in a new machines, i know that it suppose to be faster in the final code but im still dont think its have a huge improvments or whats force me to upgarde, i know that MS gonna use DirectX 10 as a tool to force people to upgrade to Vista and it will work with gamers who gonna find themselves unable to play the new games in there XP machines, why ?! cause MS dont want to develop DX10 for XP, another why ?! cause they want to sell Vista, thats my opinion until now maybe its change later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3aces Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 (edited) when you refer to crap, can you give some example? i know everyone says there is to much crap but i still don't see examples of it, POW has some good examples (by the way the green bar across the top is the indexing agent checking the folder and reindexing it ) that is why it takes for ever one those folders with huge AVis or movie files.is there any way the indexing rubbish can be stopped i cant find anything out about which services it relies ondx10 will be relesed on XP because it will also be still a popluar OS and microsoft wont risk product sales like that... they will release Vista hoping 6/10 ppl upgrade andthen a few months on release dx10 on XP.... to be fair i will not be playin games on Vista if i can help it... my nLited XP is amazingly quick so i will be keeping it for a long while Edited July 4, 2006 by POW!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scubar Posted July 4, 2006 Share Posted July 4, 2006 DX10 will not be released on XP, Micro$haft are instead making some improvements in DX9 and will most likely be putting the new version into the service pack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fizban2 Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 Steve is right, from the sounds of it, DX10 has ties to the graphics system that is part of vista, since this is not backwards compatible with XP you will not see any of the DX10 features in XP. i am sure there will be a refresh of DX 9, but if you look, both Nvidia and ATI's next gen cards are both still DX9 based, so there won't be any DX 10 cards out till next year at the earliest i would bet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XP_2600 Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 I think technically it shouldnt be NT6 it should be something like NT5.3 or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris.ftcc Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 so far, i have a mixed review......the good:fresh looking GUI...nice effectsbetter security platform (bi-directional firewall, bit-defender built in....Avast functions for anti-vi)very informative (windows updates, hardware inventory..etc)the bad:- very bloated...(551 MB just running after startup -83 for Avast...) i'm sure this will be scaled down a bit before final relase- new learning curve (users will have a fit over the menu system and the styles......good thing they kept most of windows classic)- compatibility (crashed when installing Alcohol....i'm sure this will be the case for quite some time...it's a beta, hell)i've noticed a lot more things good and bad, but the bottom line is it is still very much in beta, so a lot can change between now and next spring...STAY TUNED..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stickzilla Posted July 5, 2006 Share Posted July 5, 2006 Who knows how big the final release will be, but the first thing that got my attention was the obvious : size.Workstation imaging is going to take a wee bit longer in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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