[milkweg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xenithon /img/forum/go_quote.gif The other question would be, if using something like foobar on Vista, would the ASIO plugin still be required or is DS a viable option?

foobar can use either Directsound or ASIO.

 

[milkweg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by irchel /img/forum/go_quote.gif They're approaching true UNIX sound quality wise, yes. But Windows remains a bit inefficient crap compared to a true UNIX, and I feel the same as my developer land landsman, vista seems to be the closest to unix windows by now and really (apart from hdd usage) has to be considered as the best win so far. The biggest step I felt was however going from 98 to 2000 (no wonder, since 2000 was the first mass-useable unix-based windows system, the nt's before didnt' fully support directx). Aero glass I find to be very neat, very well implemented, howerver, it uses up some additional energy. i didn't find it to slow down core system performance that much. microsoft really is a mixed bag: Sometimes their pushing out stuff that couldn't be any better (direct3d is really great by now), sometimes their stuff just sucks (why has the .net framework to be a so bloated too many classes for the same few tasks piece of ****?) - choose wisely. Vista is on the bright side.

You need a good 3D video card for AERO as it utilizes 3D acceleration that the vid card is capable of. It is supposed to speed things up and not slow it down. I don't notice any performance hit using it but I am using an 8800GT also. Linux doesn't sound better than Windows either and never has, IMO. Only difference I have ever noticed is that on Linux all you get is basic functionality and on Windows I get to use all of my soundcards features.

 

[Packgrog]

Quote:

Originally Posted by brainsalad /img/forum/go_quote.gif Vista is the future, like it or not. I am a software developer and started with Windows 2 back in the late 80's and Vista is BY FAR the best OS out of Microsoft yet.

This is a loaded set of statements.

Vista is not the future. The Windows 7 system they're working on after the abject failure of Vista might be the future. Of Windows anyway.

I too am a software developer, though I haven't been in the game as long it seems. That said, with Microsoft's continued focus on restriction and bloat, I do think that Linux may eventually overtake them. It's not there yet (I still primarily use Windows), but it's catching up fairly quickly. I find it more likely that Ubuntu, or something similar, is more likely to be where the future goes. Again, it's not there yet, but the improvements over the past few years have been remarkable, with fewer restrictions and rapidly improving ease of use. Some day...

 

[Kaluminati]

Those who say vista is crap, buggy or whatever, have no clue what they're talking about.

I've been using vista, 32bit, and 64 bit, on 2 out 3 of my machines, for almost a year. Using XP again is frustrating by comparison.

Every OS is not without it's problems and driver issues, but Vista has been running smoothly for me for 5+ months. It's faster general desktop use than xp, 64bit is more widely supported driver wise than xp's 64bit (been running 64bit for 4 months on my main machine with 4GB of ram; it is VERY nice and stable), and is as fast gaming wise as vista is at least on my nvidia card.

I think for most Vista haters, what happens is they install vista, and don't realize they have to download a 64 bit driver for a piece of hardware in their machine, that vista doesn't already have a driver for. So it doesn't work properly, and they give up and declare vista "crap". Don't listen to them.

Sound wise, my Prelude runs great and sounds great. I've got problems with UT3 and sound, but that's on epic.

 

[Kaluminati]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Packgrog /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is a loaded set of statements. Vista is not the future. The Windows 7 system they're working on after the abject failure of Vista might be the future. Of Windows anyway. I too am a software developer, though I haven't been in the game as long it seems. That said, with Microsoft's continued focus on restriction and bloat, I do think that Linux may eventually overtake them. It's not there yet (I still primarily use Windows), but it's catching up fairly quickly. I find it more likely that Ubuntu, or something similar, is more likely to be where the future goes. Again, it's not there yet, but the improvements over the past few years have been remarkable, with fewer restrictions and rapidly improving ease of use. Some day...

Windows 7 is Vista revamped. I think you're in denial that Vista is in fact the future. Linux overtaking Windows? Yup, you're in denial.

Especially given that apparently Windows server 2008 is supposed to be MS's best OS yet, as it's been getting praises all around (from the same people who gave vista bad reviews last year). Rumor is, Vista SP1, which is due in March, replaces the kernel in vista with the 2008 version.

 

[abbynormal]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkweg /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's ok, I think I know what to buy anyway. Too bad I can't buy the sensor separately as I already have the remote. This is what I need to get. Microsoft MCE Remote Control for Windows XP MCE

Milkweg, that looks like it should do the trick! Hope it works out for ya!

Mark(me)

 

[mark_h]

Give it time, service pack 1 soon! I got vista untimate as soon as it came out - big big mistake! every programme I used on a daily basis was not supported, more my own fault than anything for being hasty. Dont know if I am getting used to it or i am just impervious to its intrusive nature but it seems ok now. I have to admit, any machine I do any serious work on run xp.

 

[xenithon]

Quote:

foobar can use either Directsound or ASIO

True, but I read that ASIO is pretty much mandatory in XP, whereas this is not the case with Vista?

 

[brainsalad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark_h /img/forum/go_quote.gif Give it time, service pack 1 soon! I got vista untimate as soon as it came out - big big mistake! every programme I used on a daily basis was not supported, more my own fault than anything for being hasty. Dont know if I am getting used to it or i am just impervious to its intrusive nature but it seems ok now. I have to admit, any machine I do any serious work on run xp.

I don't know why people are having a problem with VISTA. Like I posted earlier in this thread, I'm a developer and a Windows user since Windows 2.0. This is by far the best yet.

Let me state, I am NOT a Microsoft fan. In my line of work, I feel like it's dancing with the devil. The BIG problem is that they are the only game in town that matters. Sorry Linux, Sorry Mac. Like it or not, MS has 95% of the market share plain and simple. When you dominate the sand box, you have to participate or life will be more difficult.

I run Vista Business, Home Premium, Ultimate, XP and Server 2003. I have not found ANY of my apps that do not run in Ultimate and I have hundreds of apps. As long as you are running hardware supported by Vista, it's a NO BRAINER. If you have software that won't run on Vista then you are running software years old and Vista is not 100% backwards compatible. It never claimed to be. Nothing can be. If XP is running better for you, you've either have frikin ancient software OR the software is addressing hardware directly, which it shouldn't do anyway. XP was just more TOLERANT to that crap and didn't complain. Microsoft needed to provide a better/more stable environment and so they tightened the requirements. Sorry, it's what had to be done.

Also... people in this thread are complaining about the .NET framework, they clearly don't understand what .NET framework is about. The .NET framework is NOT a Vista product, it's a Microsoft product. It's meant for Server, XP, and Vista, not just Vista.

No OS will ever be perfect, that's why there are upgrades. DUH. Vista isn't perfect and never will be but it's the best game in town. XP is so flawed, it's a wonder it even works. It still has the same old core that's been drug around like a boat anchor since DOS. Vista had it's origins from NT, an OS cut from new cloth, and came directly from the Server 2003 core.

I grow weary of people and their ignorance acting like they are the authority or the final word.

 

[subfocus]

This article may be of interest : Why Vista sounds worse | Technology | The Guardian

 

[brainsalad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by subfocus /img/forum/go_quote.gif This article may be of interest : Why Vista sounds worse | Technology | The Guardian

My point exactly, I quote from the article

Quote:

Realising that users would want to use their old software and hardware, Microsoft maintained compatibility as far as it could. Older audio standards still work, but are emulated by software that feeds into WASAPI. In the case of DirectSound, that is unfortunate, as it was designed to enable low-level access to sound hardware - but no longer does so. Further, the new WaveRT drivers are not a requirement for Vista; older driver types are also supported, even though they work less well. All can lead to glitches.

Why is Microsoft getting slammed for trying to move forward to something better?

Another quote

Quote:

Apple went through similar struggles with musicians in the shift to OSX; but that was more than five years ago.

Mac realized the need to go forward, they just bit the bullet sooner. They could, they had less than 2% of the market back then.

Another Quote.

Quote:

"Nothing really changes in how you talk to an ASIO driver in Vista as compared to XP," Borthwick says. "The problem under Vista is overhead in the operating system itself. It takes more CPU to achieve the same result. You tend to get clicks or pops or noise."

That's true, move into the present. Hardware is cheap. Upgrade your systems folks. If you want the new stuff, then you need to get what will do the job, not sit around and complain about something being junk because it won't run on out dated hardware.

 

[irchel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by brainsalad /img/forum/go_quote.gif Also... people in this thread are complaining about the .NET framework, they clearly don't understand what .NET framework is about. .

please. I've been a dev for over 10 years now, 2 years on it on UNIX (no, not linux, true unix... quite a difference) - I haven't done too much in .net, I just know that it is a pain in the ass to code a three liner of perl into it's c# or even vb.net (the latter at least having real intelliSense support) equivalent, often to see it (esp. in the string op department) not even outperform perls "slow" interpreter. I know what MSIL is, know the CLR.. it's just Java in the end. ****ed up java.

However, the climax of fun is certainly C++/CLI, a language which is this difficult to grasp that nobody I know of really uses it. You've not only got the pointers and c++ references... no, *managed* pointers are with you also (which must be dereferenced with a ^ instead of *... you can even combine them! yay!)

Back from OT (correct, I just wanted to show that I know my **** more or less, keeping the discussion level high): Vista isn't *bad*, but they could have made it far, far better than what it is. Still, it is one of the more enjoyable Products of ms, as stated above.

 

[brainsalad]

irchel, I agree and sorry for the soapbox but I get really tired of the comments like

Quote:

Vista == crap. If you must use Windows, find yourself and XP Pro install. Get rid of Vista NOW.

and

Quote:

Vista is not the future. The Windows 7 system they're working on after the abject failure of Vista might be the future. Of Windows anyway.

PS, I don't know much s**t, just enough to pay the light bills, Cheerios, and support my wife, kids, pets, and a little for my audio addiction

 

[pretzelb]

Quote:

Originally Posted by irchel /img/forum/go_quote.gif please. I've been a dev for over 10 years now, 2 years on it on UNIX (no, not linux, true unix... quite a difference) - I haven't done too much in .net, I just know that it is a pain in the ass to code a three liner of perl into it's c# or even vb.net (the latter at least having real intelliSense support) equivalent, often to see it (esp. in the string op department) not even outperform perls "slow" interpreter. I know what MSIL is, know the CLR.. it's just Java in the end. ****ed up java. However, the climax of fun is certainly C++/CLI, a language which is this difficult to grasp that nobody I know of really uses it. You've not only got the pointers and c++ references... no, *managed* pointers are with you also (which must be dereferenced with a ^ instead of *... you can even combine them! yay!)

I've been a dev for a long while (seen almost all of it) and I find comments like this funny. First it's a pain to use a language that requires MORE lines (c# or vb.net vs perl), then it's too confusing to use a language that is more compact (C++). Give some devs a high level language and it's too wordy - give them total control and it's too complicated and prone to errors.

The OS wars really do end up as holy wars to some. I just never understand why it's so hard for some people to say "I don't care for XYZ" instead of "XYZ is crap" especially when XZY isn't something they owned or created. Shrug.

 

[Packgrog]

Sorry, brainsalad. I've been doing development for nearly 10 years now (god, that long!?!), and one thing that consistently irritates the hell out of me is code bloat. Fancy little visual trinkets that make usage less intuitive and code that runs less efficiently on the same hardware is a major sticking point for me, and Windows (and most Microsoft software) has been consistently guilty of this. They never seem take the time to make their existing software more efficient. They just seem to focus on flashy crap that serves no real purpose. This is an exaggeration, of course (their wireless network management is still better than Ubuntu's, for example), but there's a element of truth as well.

My HP DV9000 is a fairly decent machine. Core 2 Duo 2.0GHz, 2GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce Go 7600... not top of the line, but nothing to scoff at. It came with Vista Ultimate, I believe. It ran like a pig. I switched to XP, and it flies. All of my software works, there's less bloat (yes, I even run XP in Classic Mode with most of the effects turned off), and I can get everything done. Why bother with Vista, given all the software incompatibilities and code bloat? Fancy lights? Please, when I was doing work on a Linux workstation at my previous job, I was using Fluxbox. Desktop animations are distracting resource hogs. Aside from that, what exactly does Vista provide over XP to warrant bothering with it?