Can Vista run on an integrated graphics PC using a less flashy default interface instead of Aero? Or is a DirectX 9 capable graphics board really the absolute minimum requirement?

Even so, the cost of such a board might drop tremendously if the volume becomes much much greater...

Cheap computers won't go away. More likely, people will just avoid Vista. I mean, the Windows world isn't big on upgrading anyway. It's not a cool, fun thing like it is in the Mac world. Think of how many people are still using 95, 98 and ME.

You can install the Vista Beta in a VMware 5 machine using their very bare-bones virutal graphics driver implementation. In other words, this guy doesn't really know what he is talking about. He has jumped to conclusions, misinterpreted information, and attempted to appear informed on the subject without actually having any in-depth knowledge. It sounds like Gene better stick to writing about Macs.

No offense, Biff, but I think Gene did his homework, and did a credible job, based, as he stated, on early reports. Did you read his article?
Quote:
"While final system needs haven't been posted, the owner of a cheap PC with integrated graphics will most likely have to endure the existing Windows XP user interface because that PC won't handle the full complement of Aero Glass effects."

So, Vista will run, but the graphics will be XP-ish.

Isn't the new Aero-look pretty much all that's different than XP anyway?

No Brunto, why would I waste my time reading the article? So who is responsible for the headline? Because if what you say is true, then he does NOT state or even imply that Vista will eliminate low cost PCs. So where did that come from?

"Isn't the new Aero-look pretty much all that's different than XP anyway?"

If you look at the screenshots then yes, the only difference between Vista and XP is the look. If you actually did research on the new techs for Vista you would know this is not the case. This applies even if you consider that the communications and presentation layers of Vista will be back-ported to XP.

No. I'm pretty sure Vista is just new icons and updated virus definitions. They stripped everything else out about a year ago.

Quote

Guest wrote:
"Isn't the new Aero-look pretty much all that's different than XP anyway?"

If you look at the screenshots then yes, the only difference between Vista and XP is the look. If you actually did research on the new techs for Vista you would know this is not the case. This applies even if you consider that the communications and presentation layers of Vista will be back-ported to XP.

Quote

Biff wrote:
No Brunto, why would I waste my time reading the article? So who is responsible for the headline? Because if what you say is true, then he does NOT state or even imply that Vista will eliminate low cost PCs. So where did that come from?

Sigh...
"So they will have to consider dumping their cheap PCs and getting models that are less cheap." *and*
"I suppose you can also consider the standard conspiracy theory here. PC box assemblers make very little profit on the cheapest models, so if you're forced to by a more capable computer, they'll benefit. Add to that the number of PC owners who will be disappointed with the way Windows Vista runs on their computers, and you can imagine the executives at Dell, HP, Gateway and all the rest salivating with glee over the extra sales that'll accompany Vista's release."

IMPLY - "to express indirectly" and "to involve or indicate by inference, asssociation, or necessary consequence rather than by direct statement".
- Merriam Webster

Don't take the quiz if you don't know the material.

Not surprising. The useful life of PC's is shortening now. Its down to about fifteen to eighteen months.

"Mr. Steinberg notes that Windows Vista "will represent a huge leap in performance, stability and security,""

Hahah, yeah. That's the line that gets said about every new version of Windows, which always turns out to be just as insecure, bug-ridden, and even slower than its predecessors. As history shows, Microsoft's incapable of doing what Steinberg 'notes'.

And if people have to upgrade their computers to install Vista, then it's going to have an awful adoption rate. Good work, Microsoft. Thanks to your new operating system's high system requirements and constantly stripped out features, you're giving Apple a real boost. I wonder, how else will Microsoft shoot itself in the foot?

its funny they are making a year old computer not be able to run their OS, i have my 233 G3 purring along with Tiger via xpostfacto, and how many years old is it? (7 years, almost 8)

I've tried every way known to man (and then some) to install Panther on a clamshell iBook that was still pretty hip when OS X Beta came out... And Leopard could spell the end of my Cube.

$#!% happens. Given the amount of real conspiracies we witness every day on things that matter (as opposed to things that interest technophiles), I'd say this one is pretty benign.

AFCdtLoeb, that's PCs, not PC's.

Quote

Biff wrote:
He has jumped to conclusions, misinterpreted information, and attempted to appear informed on the subject without actually having any in-depth knowledge.

Is he willing to work for us?

Sincerely,
Average Broadcast News Editor

Quote

Brutno wrote:

Quote

Biff wrote:
No Brunto, why would I waste my time reading the article? So who is responsible for the headline? Because if what you say is true, then he does NOT state or even imply that Vista will eliminate low cost PCs. So where did that come from?

Sigh...
"So they will have to consider dumping their cheap PCs and getting models that are less cheap." *and*
"I suppose you can also consider the standard conspiracy theory here. PC box assemblers make very little profit on the cheapest models, so if you're forced to by a more capable computer, they'll benefit. Add to that the number of PC owners who will be disappointed with the way Windows Vista runs on their computers, and you can imagine the executives at Dell, HP, Gateway and all the rest salivating with glee over the extra sales that'll accompany Vista's release."

IMPLY - "to express indirectly" and "to involve or indicate by inference, asssociation, or necessary consequence rather than by direct statement".
- Merriam Webster

Don't take the quiz if you don't know the material.

Ok chief, I'm still not reading the article. You quoted him in a way that seemed to indicate he made no reference to the idea of low end PCs being eliminated. So I responded to that quote you provided. Now you are throwing in quotes in an attempt to contradict me. But since I am responding to you, then I guess you're contrdicting yourself? I stated up front that I did not read the article. I'm really not sure what you are getting at. Although that whole pretentious geek thing is very cool. Not cliche at all.

But anyhow, I'm still wondering who came up with the sensationalist headline. From the few quotes I have seen of the article, it doesn't appear that this guy ever expresses, either directly or indirectly, that low-end PCs will be eliminated. Nor do I get the impression that he infers or states such a supposition. Although, I have not read the article, so I might be wrong!

Looks like dLemmings were fooled by Michael's promise of a $299 machine that could actually run Windows. Now they're learning a painful lesson, in that you get what you pay for.

Yes it is possible, but the performance is very poor. Also, who would want to run their main OS in a virtual machine? He properly interpreted the information, VMWare emulates the required configuration and therefore allows Vista to run (with a significant reduction in performance).

Quote

Biff wrote:
You can install the Vista Beta in a VMware 5 machine using their very bare-bones virutal graphics driver implementation. In other words, this guy doesn't really know what he is talking about. He has jumped to conclusions, misinterpreted information, and attempted to appear informed on the subject without actually having any in-depth knowledge. It sounds like Gene better stick to writing about Macs.

Hey Biff,

Lighten up, jerk!

I see you've been around the manure again, since you're flinging it around quite a bit.

See you in the future, dork.



Marty.

No, he doesn't know what he is saying........Microsoft actually hasn't decided on system requirements at this point. You can bet that those requirements will be in support of what is best marketed..........remember, and OS is an OS is an OS.......and it simply depends on preference.

imho - biff is a micro$oft employee trying to protect their new bastard, i mean baby

Quote

Biff wrote:
Ok chief, I'm still not reading the article. You quoted him in a way that seemed to indicate he made no reference to the idea of low end PCs being eliminated. So I responded to that quote you provided. Now you are throwing in quotes in an attempt to contradict me. But since I am responding to you, then I guess you're contrdicting yourself? I stated up front that I did not read the article. I'm really not sure what you are getting at. Although that whole pretentious geek thing is very cool. Not cliche at all.

But anyhow, I'm still wondering who came up with the sensationalist headline. From the few quotes I have seen of the article, it doesn't appear that this guy ever expresses, either directly or indirectly, that low-end PCs will be eliminated. Nor do I get the impression that he infers or states such a supposition. Although, I have not read the article, so I might be wrong!

biff, before commenting on the article, how about you READ it first? it might help to understand what you're talking about. you're not making any sense trying to bash the author without knowing what he's talking about.

I hae a cheap Dell - $299 w/Free Shipping - 80MB HD - 512 Memory - and Integrated Board - the Intel 845 Chipset. Vista installs quite well on it. It does not have a video driver - you just get that from Intel for the Chip and do a manual install of the driver instead of a automated one. Basically it seems like XP - but uses more memory. Just started playing with it and am certain can stop services to bring it down to XP level.

Mainly Microsoft ships new OS on new computers - I doubt if folks will be standing in line to buy Vista - I am running it on a low-end Dell, it works fine - but basically it is the NT5 family of OS 2000\XP - call it NT 5.3. Nothing spectacular - integrated .NET environment which you can download now - the vaulted file system features so far suck in my mind.

Hope you guys when going from Motorola to Intel are not stuck with designs from Vista.

Is there something wrong with the IT community, in that it lives upon Hype, an speculation fueled by others with grievences ?

Maybe it's not Microsoft who are the villians in this instance, but the PC manufacturers who are all overcharging for the products - so maybe we need to get annoyed with the likes of HP, Packard Bell, Dell, IBM, Fujitsu ect.

Yes Microsoft are driving PC advancement, but then again so are the Military !!

As I understand it there will be at least two flavours of the Vista OS .. 32 & 64 bit .. I'm currently running Vista on a machine with 512Mb-RAM, 1.7Ghz Athlon Processor, a 40Gb HD, and a 64Mb Nvidia Graphips card with little or no issues ..

Please keep in mind that Vista Beta1 is just the sampler, (mostly for ultimate geeks, and those who wish to impress their friends .. so suitable for accountants .. along with those who for the first time want to drive the development), with the main course being delivered early next year, (date to be announced in September).

Let's not be critical, and sit back whilst enjoying the ride ... this is the first major OS from Microsoft that has been released to the general populate for their input during development ... and sadly most of the news articles so far have been purely hpye with very little substance .. and we all know as much as each other at the moment .. we've only had the beta for a couple of weeks ...

Cut the sensationalistic journalism, and get to the real stories

Arthur

Do vista operating system needs display drivers for some mother boards or eveything is integrated with the operating system. I have a DELL dimension PC getting display problems when VISTA is being installed...any comments please.

Quote

AFCdtLoeb wrote:
Not surprising. The useful life of PC's is shortening now. Its down to about fifteen to eighteen months.

Whereas macs go from 2 years (for very frequent updaters) to 10 years (like mine) , or even more sometimes, but those aren't really usable. The usual is around 4-5 years.

Obiously in a year when vista is accualy released you will be able to get a $200.00 PC that can run it. If Vista is out before June 2007 I'll buy a PC or something, ROFL, that would be punishing. Anyway I can already build a PC w/o monitor for $350.00 that can run vista just fine. just take your basic $200.00 box with available expantion slots for pci-ex and a gig open for more ram and >BAM< your good to go. So my guess is that by Xmass 2006 you will get a $200-$300 PC for light gamers and later on in 2007 vista will migrate the technology to the low end market.

Its not like this is anything new, Windows XP was too much for the cheap PCs when it was in beta too. Remember the PCs with 256 ram and slow processors?

Anyway I'm not a PC fan, not like I'm going to trade in my MACs for that crap, this is just my observation. I also work for an OEM so I know something about this.