PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Next month Windows 7 beta will be released, just in time for the first SFP Vista ROTFLMAO!

http://www.pcworld.com/article/154852/w ... hints.html


Time for me to start building my first new computer in 5 years.

IMO It's still going to be one big Vista bug fix.

The 'real' V7 probably won't be out until late next year.

My 'inside sources' tell me that it's still a scrambled mess.

Greg

I heard it is complete and great.

don't be naive
if it really were 'complete and great' what schould their developers work on after that ?
nobody sacks half of his staff
brings down the corporate training business
removes the reason to write books for Dummies
empties one quarter of the newsstand
... just for a piece of code that does what it is supposed to do

cheers, Tom

when you make a product for 5 years and nobody wants to use it, its all simple
invent a new name, add two features, change the desktop image and there u have it - Windows 7!

I'll wait 'till they decide to use a FreeBSD kernel and call it WindowsX

That is what Apple did!

Nobody upgrades, they get it on their new computer. The main problem with Vista was that it required a lot of memory and Microsoft didn't force companies to sell computers with that much RAM coupled with the fact that all the cheap laptops have "integrated graphics" which uses even more RAM. Now you have a computer which is 10 times slower than your previous one. Of course Vista was blamed for this because the average person doesn't know about the RAM requirements. They don't know not to get integrated graphics also. It sounds good. A modern Vista computer has no noticeable difference in speed to an XP computer. This is fully documented. I like the extra features. It's a bunch of tiny improvements not one major one. They don't intend for you to buy it for your old computer.

According to Steinberg, 64 bit is an advantage because you can have vastly more RAM. This is very helpful for large projects. Mine start to fail after 20 minutes of music length. What experts are saying now is to buy Vista 64 bit.

the reason for "progress", is so that a tool can be imroved. if the tool works, there's no need for progress. if the tool can truly work better, then progress is nice. if progress brings as much trouble as it solves, then what's the point?

humans aren't going somewhere, to need "progress" to some great destiny. just living will tell of that. life is always forward. buying new things will not make an empty life complete. please relax.

braincell wrote:That is what Apple did!

Nobody upgrades, they get it on their new computer. The main problem with Vista was that it required a lot of memory and Microsoft didn't force companies to sell computers with that much RAM coupled with the fact that all the cheap laptops have "integrated graphics" which uses even more RAM. Now you have a computer which is 10 times slower than your previous one. Of course Vista was blamed for this because the average person doesn't know about the RAM requirements. They don't know not to get integrated graphics also. It sounds good. A modern Vista computer has no noticeable difference in speed to an XP computer. This is fully documented. I like the extra features. It's a bunch of tiny improvements not one major one. They don't intend for you to buy it for your old computer.

According to Steinberg, 64 bit is an advantage because you can have vastly more RAM. This is very helpful for large projects. Mine start to fail after 20 minutes of music length. What experts are saying now is to buy Vista 64 bit.

I've a VERY fast centrino duo with 4 GB of RAM and a NVidia 8800 GTX card with 1GB dedicated DDR3 on board RAM and a SATA2 HD @7200 RPM , and that piece of c**p runs 10 times slower than XP on my old Athlon 3200+ with 1.5 GB and hangs 10 times more...

I have no idea what you did wrong. There was a DAW benchmark test with various new computers:

http://www.dawbench.com/blofelds-xp-v-vista.htm

While the conclusion was that there was there was no significant difference in speed, I am a Vista user (not on my DAW, I will go to Windows 7 later).

I did not upgrade just to get the latest thing! I did it because I bought a new laptop computer. Someone in this group said just wipe it the first day. I don't know why he didn't want me to try it first. It turns out like I said before, there are many minor improvements (too many to list) which I happen to like. Anyone who thinks otherwise just hasn't used it for any significant period of time.

The so called "phone home" aspect was taken out almost immediately after it was released and only affected playing DVDs with DRM. I don't even watch DVDs on this computer.

You will be quite able to use Windows XP for the rest of your life if you want to, probably on old computers. I pity you.

If I go Windows7, I'll use the XPlite guys' tools to turn off half the OS, increase RAM on possibly yet another new machine, and use the OS for what it's probably designed for - the touchscreen i-phone type GUI with dynamic graphic objects. But what's the point if none of the apps. work with touchscreens very well, and what's the point if I already get 40 full-blown tracks with all the effects and DSP that I need?

I'd rather streamline than just accept new redundant features.

We can also be 'progressed' right into a hole.

Greg

Don't believe the hype. 7 will undoubtedly still be a bag of shit & will still only be usable or useful if you have to use it. I don't see any reason why anyone would have to use it though..

braincell wrote:I have no idea what you did wrong.

Buying a new laptop because I needed that graphics power on a mobile station...

braincell wrote: I did not upgrade just to get the latest thing! I did it because I bought a new laptop computer. Someone in this group said just wipe it the first day. I don't know why he didn't want me to try it first. It turns out like I said before, there are many minor improvements (too many to list) which I happen to like. Anyone who thinks otherwise just hasn't used it for any significant period of time.

Same as me.. but for many peripherals there are *NO* XP drivers, so I have to stick with that piece of s**t

Name one single thing that Vista does better than XP and that justifies having a heavier buggier and uglier system installed...

braincell wrote:You will be quite able to use Windows XP for the rest of your life if you want to, probably on old computers. I pity you.

I'd love to for strictly windows things.. that and a good linux distro for the rest. But manufacturers like to get a piece of the cake and will keep on not supporting XP...
Don't pity me, I'm more than happy like that..

I pray that DRM (and all the other NSA backdoor spyware) dies, since Vista was a collosal failure for M$ anyways.

G

My DAW stays offline usually.

DAW is only on internal home network to two older computers.

Greg

honestly,
ms had only 1 decent OS ever, and thats xp (sp3 is g00d).
no reason to think this will ever change

Vista is stone-age compared to 0SX 10.5, and its supposed to standup against 10.6.
its not just about resource management, its also about gui, and development resources, graphics engine and much much more.

OSX runs full blow animations with alpha channels, and antialiasing in realtime, and on the other hand Vista is busy redrawing simple pixel graphics 90's style.

while searching the entire pc on a mac takes less than 5 seconds, i can wait 5 minutes for a simple seach in windows to end

and you know what? i dont even like OSX i think some of it is stupid and even fascist. but what can i say... Vista is microsoft's worst mistake, and windows-7 seems to be what vista was supposed to be. well its way too late for that...

my advice is get osx and wait for windows 8

Completely agree with Red... Vista is just so poor - MS copied a few nice OSX graphical things while totally missing the point about why it's a superior OS. Whenever I've used Vista I've found it unintuitive and slow, even on fast machines.

Here's a funny story about Windows (XP as it happens)... a friend of mine has a wireless card in his PC and constantly got dropouts when using a DAW while the wireless was active. Eventually he got sick of it and installed a hackintosh OSX on exactly the same hardware. Guess what - problems with wireless gone He no longer even dual-boots XP on that machine.

This is just 1 example of the kind of issue that MS will never ever improve. They'll never improve the networking, or the USB driver scheme (you know, when you have to remember exactly in what USB port you originally installed something, otherwise you must install the driver again ), the nonsensical distribution of preferences all over the place, lack of consistency and general crappy, non-innovative ideology.

I agree that Windows has always had good backwards-compatibility - it's very impressive to be able to run software that was written 12 years ago for Win95 - but IMHO this ultimately holds it back and stops it from progressing. Apple tends to be a little more harsh with upgrades but at least it tries to move forward and fully utilize the hardware available.

This is why Windows is over for me... outside of hosting Scope cards on a 2nd machine

stardust wrote:

ReD_MuZe wrote: my advice is get osx and wait for windows 8

or stay with XP

untill scope 5 comes out