[News] Vista Sheds Another Feature, Fails into Own 64-Bit Suppression Trap
Roy Schestowitz
full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
,----[ Quote ]
| By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
| AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
| first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
`----
GreyCloud
> Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature:
> full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
> | AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
> | first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
> `----
>
I thought the Intel Core 2 duo was only 32-bit?
--
Where are we going?
And why am I in this handbasket?
Roy Schestowitz
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature:
>> full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
>> | AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
>> | first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
>> `----
>>
>
> I thought the Intel Core 2 duo was only 32-bit?
>
>>
http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/08/1139/microsoft-cuts-another-feature-full-hd-playback-in-32bit-vista
I wasn't sure myself. Just checked...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Core_2
Intel Core 2 processors feature EM64T (an implementation of AMD64),
Virtualization Technology, Execute Disable Bit, and SSE4.
Also to see:
http://www.linuxhardware.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/22/0415251
Oliver Wong
"GreyCloud" <mi...@cumulus.com> wrote in message
news:JM-dnad7jNF0lXPZ...@bresnan.com...
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature:
>> full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
>> | AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
>> | first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
>> `----
>>
>
> I thought the Intel Core 2 duo was only 32-bit?
Nope. Core 2 Duo uses EM64T.
- Oliver
The Ghost In The Machine
<newsg...@schestowitz.com>
wrote
on Thu, 24 Aug 2006 20:16:31 +0100
<2008367.3...@schestowitz.com>:
Well of course. Vista was late. And since Vista is the
only OS (from Microsoft) that supports 64-bit micros,
well... :-)
Wait...didn't Linux support 64-bit z900s back in 2000?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because it's time to refresh your hardware. Trust us.
Erik Funkenbusch
That's simply not true. Intel has been shipping 64 bit P4's for almost 2
years. Nearly all of the Pentium D's and Pentium E's are 64 bit, as well
as most of the celeron D's.
GreyCloud
Odd... Apple says that the ones they are using are only 32-bit.
I've seen the EM64T moniker for the Pentium D tho.
Roy Schestowitz
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
> <newsg...@schestowitz.com>
> wrote
> on Thu, 24 Aug 2006 20:16:31 +0100
> <2008367.3...@schestowitz.com>:
>> Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature:
>> full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
>> | AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
>> | first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
>> `----
>>
>>
http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/08/1139/microsoft-cuts-another-feature-full-hd-playback-in-32bit-vista
Oops. I had a typo in the subject line. Now corrected.
> Well of course. Vista was late. And since Vista is the
> only OS (from Microsoft) that supports 64-bit micros,
> well... :-)
>
> Wait...didn't Linux support 64-bit z900s back in 2000?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit
But someone didn't want it to catch on... just like many other advancements
in computing, which were suppressed due to financial interests. Science is
held back by money and ego. And one needn't go into similar situations that
involve ethical/religious grounds, e.g. gene research and cloning.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Open Source Othello: http://othellomaster.com
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Swap: 1036184k total, 475596k used, 560588k free, 67252k cached
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
Mark Kent
Roy Schestowitz <newsg...@schestowitz.com> espoused:
And there will be no "unsigned" drivers allowed to run in 64-bit vista.
None. That means no support for /anything/ Microsoft doesn't want you,
the customer, to have. No linux filesystems... Presumably, there'll be
no designing, building and using your own peripherals, either. Unless
I've read this wrongly, of course, but I don't think that I have.
What Microsoft appear to be about to do is to make the PC a fully locked
down appliance; all flexibility will be removed. There will be no
advantage to having a PC at all, indeed, you might as well just buy a
PS3 if you want to play high-definition movies. At least you'll be able
to play games as well.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Your reasoning powers are good, and you are a fairly good planner.
nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu
Mark Kent wrote:
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Roy Schestowitz <newsg...@schestowitz.com> espoused:
> > Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature:
> > full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
> >
> > ,----[ Quote ]
> >| By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
> >| AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
> >| first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
> > `----
> >
> > http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/08/1139/microsoft-cuts-another-feature-full-hd-playback-in-32bit-vista
>
> And there will be no "unsigned" drivers allowed to run in 64-bit vista.
> None. That means no support for /anything/ Microsoft doesn't want you,
> the customer, to have. No linux filesystems... Presumably, there'll be
> no designing, building and using your own peripherals, either. Unless
> I've read this wrongly, of course, but I don't think that I have.
Can you explain what you mean by no linux filesystems? There's no
support for linux file systems in Windows right now, is there? Vista
can't prevent you from accessing the Vista file systems from a Linux
partition, can it? That is, assuming the file systems are the same
ones Windows uses now (NTFS, FAT etc), not NFS, which is another
matter.
Mark Kent
nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> espoused:
>
> Mark Kent wrote:
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> Roy Schestowitz <newsg...@schestowitz.com> espoused:
>> > Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature:
>> > full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
>> >
>> > ,----[ Quote ]
>> >| By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
>> >| AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
>> >| first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
>> > `----
>> >
>> > http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/08/1139/microsoft-cuts-another-feature-full-hd-playback-in-32bit-vista
>>
>> And there will be no "unsigned" drivers allowed to run in 64-bit vista.
>> None. That means no support for /anything/ Microsoft doesn't want you,
>> the customer, to have. No linux filesystems... Presumably, there'll be
>> no designing, building and using your own peripherals, either. Unless
>> I've read this wrongly, of course, but I don't think that I have.
>
> Can you explain what you mean by no linux filesystems? There's no
> support for linux file systems in Windows right now, is there?
There's 3rd party support for ext2/3, see www.fs-driver.org. There was
even some kind of ext2 support for DOS, afairc.
> Vista
> can't prevent you from accessing the Vista file systems from a Linux
> partition, can it?
No, but then that wasn't really what I was driving at.
> That is, assuming the file systems are the same
> ones Windows uses now (NTFS, FAT etc), not NFS, which is another
> matter.
>
True.
Roy Schestowitz
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Roy Schestowitz <newsg...@schestowitz.com> espoused:
>> Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature:
>> full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
>>| AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
>>| first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
>> `----
>>
>>
http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/08/1139/microsoft-cuts-another-feature-full-hd-playback-in-32bit-vista
>
> And there will be no "unsigned" drivers allowed to run in 64-bit vista.
> None. That means no support for /anything/ Microsoft doesn't want you,
> the customer, to have. No linux filesystems... Presumably, there'll be
> no designing, building and using your own peripherals, either. Unless
> I've read this wrongly, of course, but I don't think that I have.
>
> What Microsoft appear to be about to do is to make the PC a fully locked
> down appliance; all flexibility will be removed. There will be no
> advantage to having a PC at all, indeed, you might as well just buy a
> PS3 if you want to play high-definition movies. At least you'll be able
> to play games as well.
I'd have to retract the OP because, as of a few hours ago, Microsoft Watch
claims that APC's claims were false. However, judging by Jo Foley's tone, I
suspect the claims were true at the time, but the damage (public disclosure
through Digg and other sites) changed the plan. It may not be the first time
plans are alterred due to negative publicity.
Jim
and weary over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore...:
I installed e2IFS for someone the other day, as it happens: this lends
read/write support for NT to access Linux ext2 partitions. Unfortunately,
this has the side effect of adding a permanent drive letter to the mix of
virtual CD drives, compressed volumes, etc. Oh yeah, and it also doubles up
when you plug in a FAT32 external - then you take potluck on which letter
represents the actual volume. Get the wrong one and the whole thing falls
down and you have to connect-cycle the external and try again.
--
http://dotware.co.uk
You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change
something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.
- R. Buckminster Fuller
Oliver Wong
news:mth2s3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk...
>
> There will be no
> advantage to having a PC at all, indeed, you might as well just buy a
> PS3 if you want to play high-definition movies. At least you'll be able
> to play games as well.
My interpretation of this is that Mark is implying that the PC won't be
able to play games, which is of course completely ridiculous. One of the big
marketting efforts from Microsoft is that Vista and the XBox360 will both
provide the same DirectX 10 API libraries thus making it easier to develop
"cross-platform" games.
- Oliver
Roy Schestowitz
> "Mark Kent" <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:mth2s3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk...
>>
>> There will be no
>> advantage to having a PC at all, indeed, you might as well just buy a
>> PS3 if you want to play high-definition movies. At least you'll be able
>> to play games as well.
>
> My interpretation of this is that Mark is implying that the PC won't be
> able to play games, which is of course completely ridiculous.
Microsoft doesn't yet play games on Vista
,----[ Quote ]
| The firm has its Vista logo all over its boothm, but all the machines that
| we investigated were running Windows XP.
|
| Obviously, it is still not the right time to switch to Vista as things
| might be not stable for current games. We hope that they can meet the
| early 2007 schedules.
`----
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33924
> One of the
> big marketting efforts from Microsoft is that Vista and the XBox360 will
> both provide the same DirectX 10 API libraries thus making it easier to
> develop "cross-platform" games.
No. DirectX is proprietary technology. It is Microsoft's tool for killing
OpenGL, which encourages openness and thereby interoperability.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Mod me up and I'll mod you 'insightful'"
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux Ś PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Mem: 514480k total, 474372k used, 40108k free, 13900k buffers
Jim
over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore...:
> __/ [ Oliver Wong ] on Friday 25 August 2006 16:06 \__
By "cross platform" they mean "xbox 360 or Vista"
Oliver Wong
"Jim" <ja...@the-computer-shop.co.uk> wrote in message
news:sREHg.3897$s4...@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...
> Once upon a midnight dreary, while Roy Schestowitz pondered weak and weary
> over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore...:
>
>> __/ [ Oliver Wong ] on Friday 25 August 2006 16:06 \__
>>
>>> "Mark Kent" <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:mth2s3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk...
>>>>
>>>> There will be no
>>>> advantage to having a PC at all, indeed, you might as well just buy a
>>>> PS3 if you want to play high-definition movies. At least you'll be
>>>> able
>>>> to play games as well.
>>>
>>> My interpretation of this is that Mark is implying that the PC won't
>>> be
>>> able to play games, which is of course completely ridiculous.
>>
>>
>> Microsoft doesn't yet play games on Vista
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | The firm has its Vista logo all over its boothm, but all the machines
>> | that we investigated were running Windows XP.
>> |
>> | Obviously, it is still not the right time to switch to Vista as things
>> | might be not stable for current games. We hope that they can meet the
>> | early 2007 schedules.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33924
Emphasis on the "yet". Windows Vista isn't out yet, so it's no surprise
that there aren't any games for it. Similarly, the Playstation 3 isn't out
yet, so there aren't any games for it. Does that mean that the PS3 is unable
to play games? Surely not. Companies have announced their plans to develop
games for the PS3. Companies have announced their plans to develop games for
Vista as well.
Does anyone here seriously believe that Windows Vista will never be able
to play games? I had assumed this ridiculousness of this belief was
self-evident, but if it really is a concern, I can try to give a serious
explanation of why this belief is pretty much guaranteed to be false.
>>
>>
>>> One of the
>>> big marketting efforts from Microsoft is that Vista and the XBox360 will
>>> both provide the same DirectX 10 API libraries thus making it easier to
>>> develop "cross-platform" games.
>>
>>
>> No. DirectX is proprietary technology. It is Microsoft's tool for killing
>> OpenGL, which encourages openness and thereby interoperability.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Roy
>>
>
> By "cross platform" they mean "xbox 360 or Vista"
Yes, exactly. That's why I put the scare-quotes around cross-platform.
- Oliver
OK
wrote:
>begin oe_protect.scr
>Roy Schestowitz <newsg...@schestowitz.com> espoused:
>> Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature:
>> full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
>>| AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
>>| first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/08/1139/microsoft-cuts-another-feature-full-hd-playback-in-32bit-vista
>
>And there will be no "unsigned" drivers allowed to run in 64-bit vista.
>None. That means no support for /anything/ Microsoft doesn't want you,\
You just expose your total ignorance of the topic. Learn about code
signing before babbling total nonsense in public forums.
>the customer, to have. No linux filesystems... Presumably, there'll be
>no designing, building and using your own peripherals, either. Unless
>I've read this wrongly, of course, but I don't think that I have.
You cound not be wronger, actually.
>What Microsoft appear to be about to do is to make the PC a fully locked
>down appliance; all flexibility will be removed. There will be no
>advantage to having a PC at all, indeed, you might as well just buy a
>PS3 if you want to play high-definition movies. At least you'll be able
>to play games as well.
How pathetic. Typical babbling. Get something totally backwards, then
build some major idiotic conjectures then go straight to conclusions.
But what is code signing?
OK
<ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
><newsg...@schestowitz.com>
> wrote
>on Thu, 24 Aug 2006 20:16:31 +0100
><2008367.3...@schestowitz.com>:
>> Microsoft cuts ANOTHER feature:
>> full HD playback in 32bit Vista goes
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | By far the majority of PCs use 32-bit processors, because despite
>> | AMD's efforts to push 64-bit CPUs into the marketplace early, Intel's
>> | first widely-promoted 64-bit CPU is the just-released Core 2 Duo.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.apcstart.com/site/dwarne/2006/08/1139/microsoft-cuts-another-feature-full-hd-playback-in-32bit-vista
>
>
>Well of course. Vista was late. And since Vista is the
>only OS (from Microsoft) that supports 64-bit micros,
>well... :-)
Stop trolling. Windows XP and Server 2003 bothl come in 64-bit
flavors.
>Wait...didn't Linux support 64-bit z900s back in 2000?
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/64-bit
And? How many actual users? Let me guess...: 0
John A. Bailo
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 21:00:03 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
>>Well of course. Vista was late. And since Vista is the
>>only OS (from Microsoft) that supports 64-bit micros,
>>well... :-)
>
> Stop trolling. Windows XP and Server 2003 bothl come in 64-bit
> flavors.
Oddly, big PC manufacturers have shied away from 64-bit in the same fashion
as Linux.
--
Texeme Construct
The Ghost In The Machine
<ot...@keiser.de>
wrote
on Sat, 26 Aug 2006 01:52:25 +0200
<m43ve293tcnetumqm...@4ax.com>:
Maybe 3, of which I was one. That would make for an
approximately 0.000003% desktop presence, assuming 100M
PCs in the US. (The other two are Rex and Roy. :-) )
Everyone else in the world was (and is) of course running
Windows. Even those servers claiming Linux/Apache, which
has about a 60%-30% lead over IIS right now...but that's
probably because Microsoft hasn't offered attractive
pricing options on IIS/Server yet.
Why Apache would claim Linux while running on Windows is
not clear to me. Most likely it's a configuration issue.
I'll refer you to the Apache documentation manpages somewhere
on http://www.apache.org .
</sarcasm>
The Ghost In The Machine
<jab...@texeme.com>
wrote
on Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:33:13 -0700
<O5SdnYNtSLlGOXLZ...@speakeasy.net>:
Desktops or servers?
I suspect desktops have shied away from it for the obvious reason:
Windows isn't quite ready for it, therefore customers are skittish.
Never mind Linux, which was practically born ready for N-bit
architectures. :-)
Mark Kent
Jim <ja...@the-computer-shop.co.uk> espoused:
That'd be the one - the "only Microsoft platforms" would be another way
of putting it, or perhaps "no other platforms than, err, Microsoft
ones". However, none of the older games are going to work on Vista anyway,
as Microsoft are deliberately breaking OpenGL, anyway.
How many major OpenGL games have Microsoft customers invested their
money in which just won't function on Vista? All of them? £1000s of
them?
My advice? Steer well clear of proprietary platforms and their
apologists (like Mr Wong).
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Take what you can use and let the rest go by.
-- Ken Kesey
GreyCloud
> It's the Kelsey method.
> Try and baffle them with twisted words, sub threads, side arguments and so
> forth instead of actually addressing the topic.
>
>
>
Guess I'll have to take back my months ago praise for Kelsey.
He sure doesn't have a sense of humour and worse... a hotheaded-know-it-all.
Oliver Wong
>
> none of the older games are going to work on Vista anyway,
> as Microsoft are deliberately breaking OpenGL, anyway.
This of course makes the assumption that all older games use OpenGL,
which is completely false.
>
> How many major OpenGL games have Microsoft customers invested their
> money in which just won't function on Vista? All of them? £1000s of
> them?
How many *major* OpenGL games won't function on Vista? Probably none of
them. Or to remove the double negative, probably all major OpenGL games will
function perfectly under Vista, given that OpenGL works under Vista even
better than it did under XP. Or so claims the Khronos group, who are the
developers of the OpenGL standard.
http://www.khronos.org/developers/library/siggraph2006/OpenGL_BOF/NVIDIA_-_OpenGL_on_Vista.ppt
<quote>
* OpenGL accelerated ICD now fully supported under Windows Vista
* OpenGL works fully with the Aeroglass compositing desktop
* Performance and stability will rival Windows XP by driver release
</quote>
>
> My advice? Steer well clear of proprietary platforms and their
> apologists (like Mr Wong).
My advice? Be skeptical of those who would only want you to hear one
side of an argument. When Mark and I disagree about some topic, I recommend
that people to listen to what we *both* have to say, and to decide for
themselves whose arguments are more reasonable.
- Oliver
Tim Smith
"Oliver Wong" <ow...@castortech.com> wrote:
> "Mark Kent" <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:ib36s3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk...
> >
> > none of the older games are going to work on Vista anyway,
> > as Microsoft are deliberately breaking OpenGL, anyway.
>
> This of course makes the assumption that all older games use OpenGL,
> which is completely false.
It also makes the assumption that Mark Kent knows what he's talking
about. That too is an incorrect assumption. (Mark is a good
illustration of what happens when one relies on this newsgroup as their
only source of news, and systematically killfile everyone who knows more
then they do).
--
--Tim Smith
Hadron Quark
Poor Mark. No wonder he's so keen for Roytoy to post separate News posts
: it gives him more articles to read. As it is he's either kill-filed or
(and more likely) been kill-filed by anyone with half a clue. Second in
command in the COLA gang asskissing hierarchy : certainly not a man to
waste facts and truths on when only mindless worship at the Linux altar
will suffice.
Mark Kent
Tim Smith <reply-i...@mouse-potato.com> espoused:
> In article <_DhJg.19556$365.16166@edtnps89>,
> "Oliver Wong" <ow...@castortech.com> wrote:
>> "Mark Kent" <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:ib36s3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk...
>> >
>> > none of the older games are going to work on Vista anyway,
>> > as Microsoft are deliberately breaking OpenGL, anyway.
>>
>> This of course makes the assumption that all older games use OpenGL,
>> which is completely false.
I'm talking about the OpenGL ones. I thought it would be clear from the
statement, in particular, the use of the word "OpenGL".
Most earlier games don't work at all, as they were broken in the move
from DOS to NT, of course, but you know that already, don't you?
The deliberate breaking of OpenGL will remove yet /another/ tranche of
games from those which will work.
>
> It also makes the assumption
<Snip Timmy's usual insults.>
Hey - no content in that post. Killfile seems reasonable.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
"Nuclear war would really set back cable."
- Ted Turner
Oliver Wong
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Tim Smith <reply-i...@mouse-potato.com> espoused:
>> In article <_DhJg.19556$365.16166@edtnps89>,
>> "Oliver Wong" <ow...@castortech.com> wrote:
>>> "Mark Kent" <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:ib36s3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk...
>>> >
>>> > none of the older games are going to work on Vista anyway,
>>> > as Microsoft are deliberately breaking OpenGL, anyway.
>>>
>>> This of course makes the assumption that all older games use OpenGL,
>>> which is completely false.
>
> I'm talking about the OpenGL ones. I thought it would be clear from the
> statement, in particular, the use of the word "OpenGL".
It wasn't clear, due to your use of the term "none of". The way I would
have phrased what you seem to be saying is that "some older games may no
longer work on Vista" which is par for any OS upgrade, or any upgrade in
general.
>
> Most earlier games don't work at all, as they were broken in the move
> from DOS to NT, of course, but you know that already, don't you?
Actually, in my experience, most DOS games work perfectly fine under XP.
For the few that don't (and it seems like they don't because they try to
directly access the hardware instead of using the API that DOS provided
then, and that XP still emulates now), there's DOSBOX
(http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/news.php?show_news=1), so it isn't a big
issue.
>
> The deliberate breaking of OpenGL will remove yet /another/ tranche of
> games from those which will work.
It's unfortunate that you have me kill filed, or else you would have
seen the part where I cite the developers of OpenGL explicitly stating that
OpenGL works perfectly fine in Vista; that it in fact works better in Vista
than it did in XP.
- Oliver
Hadron Quark
> "Mark Kent" <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:60bis3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk...
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> Tim Smith <reply-i...@mouse-potato.com> espoused:
>>> In article <_DhJg.19556$365.16166@edtnps89>,
>>> "Oliver Wong" <ow...@castortech.com> wrote:
>>>> "Mark Kent" <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>> news:ib36s3-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk...
>>>> >
>>>> > none of the older games are going to work on Vista anyway,
>>>> > as Microsoft are deliberately breaking OpenGL, anyway.
>>>>
>>>> This of course makes the assumption that all older games use OpenGL,
>>>> which is completely false.
>>
>> I'm talking about the OpenGL ones. I thought it would be clear from the
>> statement, in particular, the use of the word "OpenGL".
MS arent breaking openGL at all. They are freezing it. Big difference.
>
> It wasn't clear, due to your use of the term "none of". The way I
> would have phrased what you seem to be saying is that "some older
> games may no longer work on Vista" which is par for any OS upgrade, or
> any upgrade in general.
But they probably will. As usual.
>
>>
>> Most earlier games don't work at all, as they were broken in the move
>> from DOS to NT, of course, but you know that already, don't you?
>
> Actually, in my experience, most DOS games work perfectly fine
> under XP. For the few that don't (and it seems like they don't because
> they try to directly access the hardware instead of using the API that
> DOS provided then, and that XP still emulates now), there's DOSBOX
> (http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/news.php?show_news=1), so it isn't a
> big issue.
I cant think of any DOS/Direct X game that doesnt run one way or the
other under XP.
>
>>
>> The deliberate breaking of OpenGL will remove yet /another/ tranche of
>> games from those which will work.
>
> It's unfortunate that you have me kill filed, or else you would
> have seen the part where I cite the developers of OpenGL explicitly
> stating that OpenGL works perfectly fine in Vista; that it in fact
> works better in Vista than it did in XP.
Mark is a loony zealot : he believes half of what he writes - and that
is, in itself, reason for the men in the white coats IMO.
Tim Smith
Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > It also makes the assumption
>
> <Snip Timmy's usual insults.>
>
> Hey - no content in that post. Killfile seems reasonable.
Yup, Mark still doesn't know that he's completely wrong about OpenGL
support in Vista.
--
--Tim Smith
Tim Smith
"Oliver Wong" <ow...@castortech.com> wrote:
> > The deliberate breaking of OpenGL will remove yet /another/ tranche of
> > games from those which will work.
>
> It's unfortunate that you have me kill filed, or else you would have
> seen the part where I cite the developers of OpenGL explicitly stating that
> OpenGL works perfectly fine in Vista; that it in fact works better in Vista
> than it did in XP.
He'd also know that if he had news sources outside this group, as this
has been widely covered.
--
--Tim Smith
Peter Köhlmann
But he seems to know that several computer magazines have had the exact same
impression than he himself.
But naturally, what is some "computer magazine" compared to the likes of Tim
Smith or Hadron Quark?
--
Another name for a Windows tutorial is crash course
Tim Smith
> But he seems to know that several computer magazines have had the exact same
> impression than he himself.
Which they quickly corrected. But Mark wouldn't know that, because Roy
S didn't post anything about those here.
Wikipedia also has the correct information, but I guess that since Roy
doesn't post Wikipedia articles here, Mark wouldn't see them.
--
--Tim Smith
Hadron Quark
He must do. He's wrong about everything else. Shirley he cant be that stupid.
Peter Köhlmann
> In article <ed7s2f$mgv$02$1...@news.t-online.com>,
>> But he seems to know that several computer magazines have had the exact
>> same impression than he himself.
>
> Which they quickly corrected.
Wrong. That view is still upheld by several magazines. For good reasons
> But Mark wouldn't know that, because Roy
> S didn't post anything about those here.
>
It has nothing to do with Roys news articles
> Wikipedia also has the correct information, but I guess that since Roy
> doesn't post Wikipedia articles here, Mark wouldn't see them.
>
You are truly dumb. "Posting wikipedia artcles". Idiot
--
For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat,
and wrong. -- H. L. Mencken
Mark Kent
Peter Köhlmann <peter.k...@t-online.de> espoused:
It's a question of bias, isn't it? I'm afraid that Timmy and Mr Wong
are not what I would regard as reliable sources. Any more than HQuark
is.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Vail's Second Axiom:
The amount of work to be done increases in proportion to the
amount of work already completed.
Mark Kent
And how would you know what's correct information? I know that MS
spin will undoubtably have tainted anything about MS in wikipedia, so
I wouldn't even consider looking there for MS; it's far too vulnerable
to astroturfing. I want reliable sources, that excludes you, of course,
and wiki (for MS or any other large corp with time on its hands and
the inclination to pay astroturfers to spread maltruths in newsgroups
and on the web about itself).
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Mark Kent
>
>> In article <ed7s2f$mgv$02$1...@news.t-online.com>,
>>> But he seems to know that several computer magazines have had the exact
>>> same impression than he himself.
>>
>> Which they quickly corrected.
>
> Wrong. That view is still upheld by several magazines. For good reasons
Quite. It's interesting to see the MS spin machine in action; they've
been caught with their trousers down /again/, this time trying to break
opengl.
Their culture of monopoly abuse is so ingrained, I don't think that
they're able to think another way.
>
>> But Mark wouldn't know that, because Roy
>> S didn't post anything about those here.
>>
>
> It has nothing to do with Roys news articles
Indeed. I always like the way that our trolls claim to know what you're
thinking...
>
>> Wikipedia also has the correct information, but I guess that since Roy
>> doesn't post Wikipedia articles here, Mark wouldn't see them.
>>
>
> You are truly dumb. "Posting wikipedia artcles". Idiot
I'm not reading wiki articles written by MS; I'm not that stupid.
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
Tim Smith
Mark Kent <mark...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
> And how would you know what's correct information? I know that MS
> spin will undoubtably have tainted anything about MS in wikipedia, so
> I wouldn't even consider looking there for MS; it's far too vulnerable
> to astroturfing. I want reliable sources, that excludes you, of course,
> and wiki (for MS or any other large corp with time on its hands and
> the inclination to pay astroturfers to spread maltruths in newsgroups
> and on the web about itself).
Well, aside from the widespread coverage in the news, the fact that
cards with full support for the current version of OpenGL on Vista have
been announced should be a strong clue.
--
--Tim Smith
Peter Köhlmann
"Full support for the *current* version of OpenGL on vista" says exactly
nothing about the state or quality of that version. It could also mean that
they support fully the shittiest version known to mankind, since there is
no other
--
Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
It could be worse, but it'll take time.
Hadron Quark
Owned, as they say. Does Mark ever check anything?
And in regard to names : its only a game. Half the so called names arent
real anyway. And "Roytoy" isnt exactly evil or malicious : I just always
associate Roy with Boy and he does seem to be Linux's toy boy so it just
seemed natural. And since he's called me "Hardon" and "Quack" I dont
really see any harm in it Tom :-;
Scott Nudds
Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> "Full support for the *current* version of OpenGL on vista" says exactly
> nothing about the state or quality of that version. It could also mean that
> they support fully the shittiest version known to mankind, since there is
> no other
Full support? Hell, Windows and Microsoft don't even fully support
Direct-X and they invented it.
Stupid, fuckers. Slit their throats.
Scott Nudds
Mark Kent wrote:
> Indeed. I always like the way that our trolls claim to know what you're
> thinking...
Possibly not. Most corporations when they get large develop their
own form of Corporate New Speak which makes it more likely that they
will spin out of control and into la-la-land.
Unix Shit-Lickers have the same problem of course, and that's why
Linux/Unix has been a failure from day 1.