SE4, SE5 and Vista?

[Fyron]

Raapys said:
Hmm, at least with WinXp, I find the pro version to be far better, for everything really, than the home version. Is something different with Vista?

Vista Home Basic is the equivalent to crippleware XP Home. Vista Business editions have features that are generally useless to home users (like joining domains and other corporate server infrastructure), while lacking some of the media-oriented features. Ultimate has all of the features of Home Premium and the higher level Business one. Home Premium has all that most home users need. MS has a comparison chart of all of the versions on their vista site.

Instead of having just the basic crippleware and the "all in one" versions as with XP, MS made several versions in-between for Vista.

Dogscoff:
So much misinformation... The DRM stuff only applies to copy-protected files (like blu-ray and HD-DVD, and DRM-protected music), and was required to get any support to be able to play them in anything but low-res cripple-mode. Thank the MPAA. Other than the built-in HDCP stuff, which you can add on to XP to play copy-protected HD discs and such anyways, Vista's media DRM isn't really much different from what you have to add to XP to play DRM-protected files. It just happens to be installed already in Vista.

Note that the DRM features have no effect whatsoever on playing unprotected media files, and they certainly do not serve to make your machine run as slowly as a Pentium II.

Also note that OS X has similar DRM stuff included in it to play copy-protected files...

[Baron Munchausen]

dogscoff said:
I will be avoiding Vista for as long as possible. I'll probably have to have it on a work machine, because sooner or later our customers who are using it will start phoning me up for tech support, but I'm going to press my boss to let me keep my old XP box alongside it, and I don't think I'll ever be using Vista at home.

From everything I've read, it doesn't offer any worthwhile new features over XP. Basically there's no real reason to buy it except for (a) some stupid frosted glass eye candy or something and (b) Microsoft are going to try to bully software writers into making stuff incompatible with older version by refusing to make direct X 10 work on XP, thus forcing users to switch in order to run new games and apps. That's just extortion, in my view, and if that's the only way way can persuade people to upgrade then their operating must really suck, so will resist as long as possible. A new product should be a carrot, they shouldn't have to turn the old one into a stick.

Remember all the news stories about how they were putting things off? They canceled everything that was going to be 'new and different' like the new file system, just to get something out the door. What is 'new' is the additional system requirements. But then that was expected. Every new version of Windows eats the hardware gains made since the last release.

dogscoff said:
Reasons for NOT getting Vista: you get (a) all this contraversial DRM stuff that everyone's going on about, which (if you believe the worst-case scenario ppl) cripples your media and sells your grandmother to a glue factory, or at best is just yet another layer of MS bloat to slow all your shiny new hardware back down to the performance of an arthritic Pentium II (b) an immature operating system riddled with brand new, as-yet undocumented security holes (it is MS after all) - at least XP has had a few years of updates to plug the worst of them.

So basically, I see no incentive whatsoever to 'up'grade to Vista. My next home PC will be Linux, or maybe a Mac (I think the wife might get on well with a Mac). SE will just have to work under emulation, or maybe I'll maintain an old XP box or dual boot to 98 or something- God knows there's enough install CDs and licence keys for that floating around.

Microsoft can kiss my hairy pink posterior.

LOL!

Yep, I've got several Linux distributions on order with my new HDs. I think I can even make backups of my XP partition using Linux and not have to figure out how to circumvent the 'anti-piracy' measures in XP (Win9x could be copied to another drive/partition but XP makes this impossible, on purpose!) Once I learn how to do everything I need to do in Linux, XP will just be a secondary OS that I boot only when required. When I buy a completely new computer I hope it will be Linux only. You never know if MS might manage to trap some poor vendor into their OS, though. I can get a Mac to use Adobe products. (Dang, I wish they'd do Linux!) But there might be something I still need Windows for. At least they've publicly committed to support XP until 2014. Hopefully I can just move my XP license if necessary and not have to buy any more MS products.

That's why I've been trying to get MM to support WINE. We need the SE series to run on something other than Windows.

[Baron Munchausen]

Imperator Fyron said:
Vista Home Basic is the equivalent to crippleware XP Home. Vista Business editions have features that are generally useless to home users (like joining domains and other corporate server infrastructure), while lacking some of the media-oriented features. Ultimate has all of the features of Home Premium and the higher level Business one. Home Premium has all that most home users need. MS has a comparison chart of all of the versions on their vista site.

Instead of having just the basic crippleware and the "all in one" versions as with XP, MS made several versions in-between for Vista.

Please explain what is 'missing' in XP Home? As I recall, you can't run it on multi-processor machines and a few obscure widgets needed for network administration are missing. Anything else?

Imperator Fyron said:
Dogscoff:
So much misinformation... The DRM stuff only applies to copy-protected files (like blu-ray and HD-DVD, and DRM-protected music), and was required to get any support to be able to play them in anything but low-res cripple-mode. Thank the MPAA. Other than the built-in HDCP stuff, which you can add on to XP to play copy-protected HD discs and such anyways, Vista's media DRM isn't really much different from what you have to add to XP to play DRM-protected files. It just happens to be installed already in Vista.

Note that the DRM features have no effect whatsoever on playing unprotected media files, and they certainly do not serve to make your machine run as slowly as a Pentium II.

Also note that OS X has similar DRM stuff included in it to play copy-protected files...

Uh uh... and the Social Security number is only for tax purposes, not identification. (And yet that everyone who does any business at all needs to give their SS number out all the time.) And the RFID chips in our tires are just for the vendor to track inventory. (And yet they are not deactivated when the tires are sold, so you can be tracked using the vendor's customer records.) And the power of warrantless information requests given to the FBI is only for investigating terrorists. (And yet it was used to spy on anyone and everyone the FBI agents had a whim to snoop on.)

Do you really believe that DRM is going to stop at control of officially distributed media files? This is about getting control of our general purpose computers. Millions of uncontrolled general purpose computers are just too dangerous for the 'powers that be' to leave uncontrolled. Use LINUX (or at least FreeBSD) and don't support Big Brotherware!

[Fyron]

There are a lot of "wizards" you can't disable in XP Home that make it a pain in the arse to use (its network file sharing mechanism comes to mind). It doesn't remember network share and printer info very well, which makes it a pain to keep my mother's laptop able to use the network-shared printer (shared by a 2k machine)... The compies with XP Pro and Win2k here have no such troubles, and don't even need to think about hackish solutions like making sure all the account names and passwords are the same on every machine.

You can always install a non-MS media player to play unencumbered media files if they make WiMP screw with them. DRM is nasty crap, certainly, but its only there because the MPAA and RIAA are obsessed with the stuff and demand it for digital distribution and the next-gen disk formats. MS doesn't care enough about their content to try to take complete control of your media playing capabilities...

But yes, the DRM is only applicable to DRM-protected files. It has no bearing on unprotected files whatsoever, and you will never have a situation where you won't be able to play unprotected files in Windows; it just isn't in MS's interests to do that. I currently have no problems playing any such unencumbered files in Vista... Its pretty paranoid to believe you will.

There are lots of good reasons to use Linux; unmitigated paranoia about DRM isn't really one of them.

[Atrocities]

Well despite my warnings my Mother bought a new lap top with Vista basic pre-installed and guess what, none of her programs work. Oh they told her they would all work, but they don't. She was mad about it that she returned to the store and in front of the store manager called the salesmen a "God damned liar!" for telling her that all of her programs would run on Vista.

Oh well.

[Suicide Junkie]

Oh, man, I wish I could have seen that.

[Fyron]

I've yet to find a (non-ancient game that requires dosbox anyways) program I use that won't work in Vista.

[Raapys]

But if Vista doesn't even include the new file system, what is the point with it?

It can't be just a slower version of WinXP, can it?

[GuyOfDoom]

Raapys said:
But if Vista doesn't even include the new file system, what is the point with it?

It can't be just a slower version of WinXP, can it?

It's going to "revolutionize the world." But yeah it's just an excuse to force an upgrade and push the need for spending more money on computers.

[Baron Munchausen]

Raapys said:
But if Vista doesn't even include the new file system, what is the point with it?

It can't be just a slower version of WinXP, can it?

It most certainly can be! They cancelled most of the 'innovative' features, such as the new file system (WinFS), just to be able to get it out the door. The primary changes are the fancy 'Aero' interface, the DRM garbage, and a bunch of API changes to make old programs incompatible.