PDA

View Full Version : Vista Beta 2 Preview



drizek
September 5th, 2005, 05:56 AM
http://www.apcstart.com/teched/pivot/entry.php?id=5

a preview of the upcoming windows vista beta 2.

fav quote from the article:

"What an exciting feature list. Unless you use Linux, in which case you already have most of that stuff. Nice colours, but..."

:)

poofyhairguy
September 5th, 2005, 06:47 AM
I feel bad....but I will probably try this Preview 2.

poofyhairguy
September 5th, 2005, 06:48 AM
The alt-tab thing looks dumb.

drizek
September 5th, 2005, 07:03 AM
I feel bad....but I will probably try this Preview 2.

ive tried them all ever since 4053. except for the winhec build. i downloaded it but it was so crappy that i didnt want to waste a dvd on it. beta 1 wasnt bad, but it was nothing too revolutionary either.

right now im reading an article on WinFS http://winsupersite.com/showcase/winfs_preview.asp. it was hinted at at the bottom of the preview, and i wanted to know more about it. i havent finished reading though. its a little too techie for me ,cause i dont know much about MS(or anything else computer related for that matter) pre 2002.

poofyhairguy
September 5th, 2005, 07:33 AM
Nevermind:




Nigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC today that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive.

http://www.apcstart.com/teched/pivot/entry.php?id=6

drizek
September 5th, 2005, 07:47 AM
Nevermind:



http://www.apcstart.com/teched/pivot/entry.php?id=6
They must get really good crack in redmond.

wellery
September 5th, 2005, 08:38 AM
Is this true?


2 gigs in 64 bit is the equivalent of a gig of RAM on a 32bit machine. That's because you're dealing with chunks that are twice the size

I'm confused by this.

drizek
September 5th, 2005, 08:48 AM
Is this true?



I'm confused by this.

edit:nevermind, totally wrong, dont wanna confuse people.

wellery
September 5th, 2005, 09:06 AM
it just basically means that the cpu will be so fast and powerful that it will make the ram a bottleneck. i think it has more to do with the crappy way windows handles ram than anything else. however, it does not mean that something like internet explorer will automatically just start using twice as much ram.

But the thing is, with linux you really dont have to worry about all this stuff. two years from now, a 32bit cpu with 512mb of ram is still going to fly.

I thought a bottleneck was to do with speed rather than the amount you had.

benplaut
September 5th, 2005, 09:44 AM
yay! new solitare background!

it's been worth the 6 year wait! :grin:

Perfect Storm
September 5th, 2005, 10:00 AM
yay! new solitare background!

it's been worth the 6 year wait! :grin:

Hehehe....who hasn't! OMG ...It's...so...revoltionary! A must have! :---)

GoA
September 5th, 2005, 10:10 AM
I have to admid that it looks very good. I think Ubuntu was just ugly with the basic settings.

Also I think that linux should have more eyecandy that you could use. And the window managent. I'm now using a laptop at work which has 700 mhz processor. I can move windows much better than in home with 2.2 ghz amd processor.

These are the biggest issues I have with linux. Still, I don't have anymore windows in home. And btw, my desktop is almost like a copy of vista desktop. Black toolbars and a green background of daisies.

sapo
September 5th, 2005, 10:43 AM
yay! new solitare background!

it's been worth the 6 year wait! :grin:
rotf :D

npaladin2000
September 5th, 2005, 11:42 AM
I have to admid that it looks very good. I think Ubuntu was just ugly with the basic settings.

Also I think that linux should have more eyecandy that you could use. And the window managent. I'm now using a laptop at work which has 700 mhz processor. I can move windows much better than in home with 2.2 ghz amd processor.

These are the biggest issues I have with linux. Still, I don't have anymore windows in home. And btw, my desktop is almost like a copy of vista desktop. Black toolbars and a green background of daisies.

Actually, Linux has quite a bit of eye-candy out there. Check out Epiphany E17 and gDesklets, for instance. They're quite nice, they just don't come standard (There's a HOWTO floating around somewhere, but I don't want the eye-candy so I didn't make a note of it).

For lighter-weight window management check out XFCE4 and IceWM....for EXTREMELY lightweight window management try Fluxbox or Blackbox, but be prepared for a slight learning curve as it's completely different (Easy to use in it's own way, just different).

Gadren
September 5th, 2005, 11:51 AM
I've been utterly confused by Vista, ever since a lot of the cool features were stripped out of Longhorn...

What exactly does Vista have besides a "new" UI (basically XP with more shininess), more searching capabilities, and a "commitment" to security?

GoA
September 5th, 2005, 01:31 PM
Actually, Linux has quite a bit of eye-candy out there. Check out Epiphany E17 and gDesklets, for instance. They're quite nice, they just don't come standard (There's a HOWTO floating around somewhere, but I don't want the eye-candy so I didn't make a note of it).

For lighter-weight window management check out XFCE4 and IceWM....for EXTREMELY lightweight window management try Fluxbox or Blackbox, but be prepared for a slight learning curve as it's completely different (Easy to use in it's own way, just different).

Gdesklets are in use. I have read the info about E17 but i am afraid to install it because it isn't stable. I would use if xcompmgr if it would be stable and if I would have more powerful display adapter. My current adapter almost dies when I add shadows and fade outs/transitions (matrox g400). :D I'm planning on upgrade but the financial side is a bit problem. Also, it would be quite stupid to upgrade because of eyecandy. But we'll see. The windows vista is something that I will definetly try on future.

Brunellus
September 5th, 2005, 02:23 PM
Gdesklets are in use. I have read the info about E17 but i am afraid to install it because it isn't stable. I would use if xcompmgr if it would be stable and if I would have more powerful display adapter. My current adapter almost dies when I add shadows and fade outs/transitions (matrox g400). :D I'm planning on upgrade but the financial side is a bit problem. Also, it would be quite stupid to upgrade because of eyecandy. But we'll see. The windows vista is something that I will definetly try on future.
vista will only be worth it if you can afford the considerable sums of cash for new equipment to run it. Long before the release candidates were made public, I was already hearing rumors that longhorn/vista would bring a machine with a GIGABYTE of RAM to its knees--that's excessive. I can't afford that kind of hardware now.

Even if I could I'd be looking for linux-compatible stuff, since 90 percent of my life is now Linux, anyway. The one thing that would cause me to update now woudl be the news that wireless support, flash, and java could be made to work with an AMD64 computer without excessive fidgeting.

skoal
September 5th, 2005, 03:29 PM
http://www.apcstart.com/teched/pivot/entry.php?id=5
"Iain McDonald, sporting a saucy soul-patch" - really? I thought he was dribbling milk. Just off screen you can barely make out Ballmer's hand holding a bib...

\\//_

GoA
September 5th, 2005, 03:36 PM
vista will only be worth it if you can afford the considerable sums of cash for new equipment to run it. Long before the release candidates were made public, I was already hearing rumors that longhorn/vista would bring a machine with a GIGABYTE of RAM to its knees--that's excessive. I can't afford that kind of hardware now.

Even if I could I'd be looking for linux-compatible stuff, since 90 percent of my life is now Linux, anyway. The one thing that would cause me to update now woudl be the news that wireless support, flash, and java could be made to work with an AMD64 computer without excessive fidgeting.

That's a good reason to upgrade my computer. ;) I have decided about a year ago that I will upgrade my computer for vista. :)

Lord Illidan
September 5th, 2005, 03:38 PM
Gah, this OS seems to have User requirements like those of Doom 3...
256 mb of RAM in the Graphics Card? Then what functions are going to be going on in Aero? Damn, is this Doom 3 on the Desktop or what?

Of course it is faster if it needs this optimum hardware to even start it!!

wmcbrine
September 5th, 2005, 05:35 PM
Is this true?

2 gigs in 64 bit is the equivalent of a gig of RAM on a 32bit machine. That's because you're dealing with chunks that are twice the size

I'm confused by this.It's a gross oversimplification based on a kernel of truth. Basically: on a 32-bit system, ints, longs, and pointers are 32 bits (4 bytes). On a 64-bit system, longs and pointers are 64 bits (8 bytes). Ints are still 32 bits, at least in gcc. But chars are still only 1 byte each, and the size of code (apart from pointers) doesn't change, either. So, there's an increase in code and data size when moving to 64 bits; but overall, it's nothing like 2:1. The actual degree of bloat will depend on the application.

I can elaborate on the meaning of "ints", "longs", "pointers" and "chars" if you need me to.

Brunellus
September 5th, 2005, 05:46 PM
That's a good reason to upgrade my computer. ;) I have decided about a year ago that I will upgrade my computer for vista. :)
some of us don't have the cash to keep running on that kind of upgrade treadmill. For us, Linux is ideal....

GoA
September 5th, 2005, 06:02 PM
some of us don't have the cash to keep running on that kind of upgrade treadmill. For us, Linux is ideal....

I ain't rich if that's what you mean. Currently I'm studying so I don't have much money. However I'm not planning to upgrade it all att one time. But slowly buying new parts. And I don't by the top of the line hardware but budget one which will still do the trick. And I by only the hardware, not software. I bought my current system last summer and all the other parts but display adapter are still doing things fast. (athlon 2800+ overclocked and 1 gig of memory). And on last summer these parts were allready "old".

And yes, currently I wouldn't have money to by system which run vista. But after to years the hardware what vista needs won't be such a big deal. I believe we have like 5 ghz processors, 4 gigs of memory, 512 mb display adapters and 10krpm hd's so comparing to that vista doesn't need so much. And also linux eyecandy needs powerful system.

poofyhairguy
September 5th, 2005, 06:14 PM
Also, it would be quite stupid to upgrade because of eyecandy.

Why? A cheap Nvidia 5200FX can do some awesome Linux eye candy.

GoA
September 5th, 2005, 06:21 PM
Can it show shadows, fadeouts and transparancies well? If it does, I want one. :D

This?: XFX Geforce FX5200 128MB display adapter AGP. 128MB DDR menory, 256-bit busspeed. 50 euros?

And yes, I don't play. I how's the image quality on 2D?

GeneralZod
September 5th, 2005, 06:25 PM
Can it show shadows, fadeouts and transparancies well? If it does, I wan't one. :D

I have one, and it seems to cope with kcompmgr very well.

blastus
September 5th, 2005, 07:10 PM
It's a gross oversimplification based on a kernel of truth. Basically: on a 32-bit system, ints, longs, and pointers are 32 bits (4 bytes). On a 64-bit system, longs and pointers are 64 bits (8 bytes). Ints are still 32 bits, at least in gcc. But chars are still only 1 byte each, and the size of code (apart from pointers) doesn't change, either. So, there's an increase in code and data size when moving to 64 bits; but overall, it's nothing like 2:1. The actual degree of bloat will depend on the application.

I can elaborate on the meaning of "ints", "longs", "pointers" and "chars" if you need me to.

Unless one is dealing with an extremely old program that doesn't use Unicode, every character in every language has a universally unique code point and each code point is between 1 and 6 bytes depending on the encoding.

weasel fierce
September 5th, 2005, 07:10 PM
so what about minesweeper ?

poofyhairguy
September 5th, 2005, 08:17 PM
Can it show shadows, fadeouts and transparancies well? If it does, I want one. :D

Yep. It does them all. It does not make xcompmgr magically more stable, but it can do all the tricks (older Nvidia cards can't). I bought 2 Nvidia cards just for the xcompmgr fade effect!



And yes, I don't play. I how's the image quality on 2D?

Excellent.

xequence
September 5th, 2005, 08:19 PM
Gdesklets are in use. I have read the info about E17 but i am afraid to install it because it isn't stable.

E17 is very stable for me. Just hard to get used to.


And about vista... I am most definitally NOT looking forward to it. I am hoever looking forward to breezy :P

GoA
September 5th, 2005, 08:29 PM
I'm using breezy and like it. :)

KingBahamut
September 5th, 2005, 09:11 PM
Sorrowful, Ill be forced into testing this crap when my company gets a hold of it.

Sigh......

WildTangent
September 5th, 2005, 09:25 PM
I ain't rich if that's what you mean. Currently I'm studying so I don't have much money. However I'm not planning to upgrade it all att one time. But slowly buying new parts. And I don't by the top of the line hardware but budget one which will still do the trick. And I by only the hardware, not software. I bought my current system last summer and all the other parts but display adapter are still doing things fast. (athlon 2800+ overclocked and 1 gig of memory). And on last summer these parts were allready "old".

And yes, currently I wouldn't have money to by system which run vista. But after to years the hardware what vista needs won't be such a big deal. I believe we have like 5 ghz processors, 4 gigs of memory, 512 mb display adapters and 10krpm hd's so comparing to that vista doesn't need so much. And also linux eyecandy needs powerful system.
windows xp, server 2003, and vista only let you change a certain amount of components in a set time...if you keep upgrading you will need to reactivate, which often can only be done once, so you will need to buy a new license. do you have the money and/or allegiance to microsoft to do that?

oh, and we havent broken the 4 ghz mark yet...unless you do some extreme overclocking. and 4 GB of RAM, 512 MB gfx cards et all...those are a luxury very few can afford or even need right now

-Wild

drizek
September 5th, 2005, 10:48 PM
any dedicated video card can handle xcompmanager. a ti4200 would probably cost less and outperform a 5200 though, check it out.

anyway, im much more excited about kde 4 than i am about vista. and xcompmanager in breezy is actually quite stable. it hasnt crashed on me so far except when using more than one visualization in amarok. xcompmanager 7.0 final + kde 3.5 + exa should provide quite a bit of eyecandy with an acceptable level of stability. by this spring, everything should be ironed out and working great.

xequence
September 5th, 2005, 11:10 PM
512 MB RAM is good for 32bit systems it said somewhere.

I dont get it though... If 64 bit is so much better, why do you need 2-4 times the ram?

wmcbrine
September 6th, 2005, 12:06 AM
Unless one is dealing with an extremely old program that doesn't use Unicode, every character in every language has a universally unique code point and each code point is between 1 and 6 bytes depending on the encoding.Well, that's why I said "chars" (the C type), not "characters". :) But I think you'll find that lack of Unicode support isn't confined to extremely old programs. Anyway, it's not something that changes when going from 32 bits to 64.

poofyhairguy
September 6th, 2005, 12:19 AM
any dedicated video card can handle xcompmanager.

False. Only the official Nvidia drivers handle xcompmgr correctly.



a ti4200 would probably cost less and outperform a 5200 though, check it out.

In games yes. But anything older than the FX Nvidia series can't do xcompmgr's drop shadows correctly. So if you want the full effect, the 5200 FX is the cheapest and best choice.



anyway, im much more excited about kde 4 than i am about vista. and xcompmanager in breezy is actually quite stable.

Xcompmgr has not had a new version since late 2004. I can confirm that Breezy works better with xcompmgr (like Totem now being able to do full screen video without artifacts with it on) but the program itself has not improved.



xcompmanager 7.0 final + kde 3.5 + exa should provide quite a bit of eyecandy with an acceptable level of stability.

For Nvidia owners, yes. I love my Nvidia card.

skoal
September 6th, 2005, 12:44 AM
In games yes. But anything older than the FX Nvidia series can't do xcompmgr's drop shadows correctly. So if you want the full effect, the 5200 FX is the cheapest and best choice.
Poofy, I don't know exactly what you mean by "correctly", but my Ti-4600 (aka, pre-FX) with xcompmgr render shadows perty durn slick. So much so, in fact, my Ti-4600 is what renders the 5 o'clock shadow on my face. It's just that good...

\\//_

poofyhairguy
September 6th, 2005, 12:47 AM
Poofy, I don't know exactly what you mean by "correctly", but my Ti-4600 (aka, pre-FX) with xcompmgr render shadows perty durn slick. So much so, in fact, my Ti-4600 is what renders the 5 o'clock shadow on my face. It's just that good...

\\//_

Hmm....I see. In my experiance my old GF 4 card would crash more often than my 5200 FX with shadows on, but if you say differently I won't argue. Nvidia drivers have changed since I had a Geforce 4.

drizek
September 6th, 2005, 12:50 AM
i used xcomp on integrated intel graphics and it worked fine, but it was choppy. i assumed it would work on dedicated cards too.

so will there be no new xcomp for x.org 7.0? what about kompmanager for kde, is that a totally different thing than xcomp or is it just a frontend? because i have been experiencing less crashes in breezy than i have before.

i know, its a stupid question, but it really is hard to get information about this stuff. i wish they would have all this stuff outlined a little better here in linux land. a little information and screenshots could go a long way as far as getting people excited over something.

wellery
September 6th, 2005, 01:27 AM
It's a gross oversimplification based on a kernel of truth. Basically: on a 32-bit system, ints, longs, and pointers are 32 bits (4 bytes). On a 64-bit system, longs and pointers are 64 bits (8 bytes). Ints are still 32 bits, at least in gcc. But chars are still only 1 byte each, and the size of code (apart from pointers) doesn't change, either. So, there's an increase in code and data size when moving to 64 bits; but overall, it's nothing like 2:1. The actual degree of bloat will depend on the application.

I can elaborate on the meaning of "ints", "longs", "pointers" and "chars" if you need me to.

I understand thanks. I am a programmer.

poofyhairguy
September 6th, 2005, 01:29 AM
i used xcomp on integrated intel graphics and it worked fine, but it was choppy. i assumed it would work on dedicated cards too.

Only the Nvidia drivers do it all on the GPU.



so will there be no new xcomp for x.org 7.0?

Xcompmgr was a demo. A toy. It hasn't been developed since 2004. The real stuff will come with KDE 4.



what about kompmanager for kde, is that a totally different thing than xcomp or is it just a frontend? because i have been experiencing less crashes in breezy than i have before.

Its a fork of xcompmgr. Since the xcompmgr project is dead (pretty much), kde's kompmmgr is the only way to get a bug fixed xcompmgr. I hear for 3.5 there will be a few bug fixes for the kompmgr, this alone will drive me to KDE.



i know, its a stupid question, but it really is hard to get information about this stuff.


I have studied a lot to know what I know. Its cool.



i wish they would have all this stuff outlined a little better here in linux land. a little information and screenshots could go a long way as far as getting people excited over something.

Well....there is a few problems with the whole thing. First, as I said, xcompmgr was just a demo.

Secondly, it seems that very few of the upper level X developers care about composite managing right now. Why? Because they only way to do it is through closed drivers. Nvidia has the most resources to make good Linux drivers (I hear they have a whole team just for that), but many of the developers hate that they are closed and refuse to build a platform around that.- to advertise a feature that requires a closed driver.

The only decent open source (as in good 3D and opengl speeds) video driver I know is for the ATI 9200. And even it can't do xcompmgr like Nvidia can with its team. Its hard to make graphic drivers, even with the blueprint, and so Linux drivers kinda suck.

This will change in the future. From Breezy on out the Xorg will be modular- different modules for drivers, renders, etc. This makes it easier to make a driver for Xorg. ATI has promised that if this was done, they would make better drivers. KDE 4 plans to use this new foundation to create an beautiful desktop- people that demand all open source software will just have to buy a 9200. KDE 4 with its new toys will be released late 2006, or early 2007.

Till then we just have to wait. The Gnome camp is much less exciting (thats why Metacity lacks it own compmgr), but they know that something must be done because Luminocity eats too much CPU power when unaccerated. So hopefully they will also use part of the KDE base plus glitz and Cairo. Gnome's Eye Candy revolution will probably come sixth months or so after KDE's, but that is pure speculation.

poofyhairguy
September 6th, 2005, 01:32 AM
For those interested, here is a write up by John Smirl. He worked on Xgl for a year:

http://dri.freedesktop.org/~jonsmirl/graphics.html