Quote:
cost for enterprises to deploy the OS.
cost for the user who has to buy a new PC just to run the OS.
oh, and let's not forget cost for those people who just don't care about PC's that much
you're forgetting that most home PC's are for simple things web browsing, office work,. etc, and don't need to be ezxtremely powerful - look atthe steam survey and you'll see this point proved. that is a poor poor argument. legacy support is required by microsoft, and if you want to use their OSes then you WILL have to deal with it.
not to mention there is nothing fundamentally improved from Vista to XP. DX10 aside, why does anyone NEED to run vista? (famers aside)
just because you and a couple of hundred thousand people worldwide think that MS should dop this, you think it is smart business sense? it isn't. enthusiasts like us make a small small fraction of the market. they drop it and they suffer, far worse than Vista did. look at the amount of businesses that aren't running vista. are they dumb because their software might not work on Vista?
kif you want a OS that runs around you, try tinkering with Arch Linux - make it as fast as you want. that brings me to my next point. what is fast for you and powerful for you isn't necessarily so for me.
and klastly, re crysis. it just goes to show you, people don't want to have to upgde just to play games, and most people didn't. scalability or not, it's more appreciated if you make something run well on what is there presently than make it work well fior the future. which explains at least partway why the Source engine is so loved.
/rant
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NrGx
So what part of my argument do you not agree with? I want an OS that can play the newest games at the best performance and utilize my system's power to it's maximal potential. Vista does that. As the enthusiast, I like Vista and if Microsoft did not innovate at all we would be stuck with Windows 98.
|
Umm. Windows Xp
CAN play the latest games with the best performance. When you mean by utilizing your system's power to its full potential. Do you want it to sound like a lawn mower? Do you just want to make it sit there and use 90% of the resources? A system should be efficient and use the least amount of resources as possible. You want both quality and quantity data to come the other end with using the least amount of resources.
AND this kinda sum up what I feel...
Quote:
|
not to mention there is nothing fundamentally improved from Vista to XP. DX10 aside, why does anyone NEED to run vista?
|
.
__________________
[GameIndustry]Windows 7 Will Be "Great For Games"
02-26-09
