The Royal Black Watch Forums
Public Discussion => General Discussion => Flotsam and Jetsam => Topic started by: Daxe on April 01, 2008, 02:25:45 am
-
gawd I hate this OS.
anyone have any issues loading games when using Vista. My husband can load Planetside but when he is about to be in game it crashes to desktop.
I've contacted Sony..., Microsoft and asus...nothing yet.
Thanks,
Daxe
-
Yeah Vista is the wrst thing since umm... Microsoft... When I got my laptop with VISTA pre-installed I fought with it for like 6 hours and finaly I had to put the thing aside for three months or so before I could bear looking at it agian.
Did the machine come loaded with Vista? Are all the drivers Vista compatable?
-
It did come preloaded. Zy says everything did an auto update type of thing before he did anything on it. I'm wondering...th e game will load...he can select a character but as soon as he goes to zone in it will crash to desktop. Could that be a video issue ??
Thanks for responding Urra
Daxe
-
It could be? I'd try and update the video drivers if it was me. I'm no expert though.
-
Video drivers are definately a prime suspect there, but there's more that could be going on. Has the game been updated to be explicitly compatible with Vista? The game is a lot older than the OS you're trying to run it on. If not, have you tried running the game in XP compatability mode?
Anyhow, changing to a different OS normally leads to incompatabilit ies. You shouldn't be surprised when that happens. It WILL happen again. It's happened to me many many times. ;D
There are good and bad things about Vista. I've seen it do things that no other MS OS could ever handle. For example, explorer in Vista can actually browse directories containing several million subdirectories . Try that in any other OS from MS and it will just error out. (Yes, I have actually had to do this before.)
Remember, Windows is for play, Linux is for work. You have to pay to play, and there will always be issues of obsolecence.
-
Actually, we figured out what the issue was....we had to change compatibility but we also had to disable superfetching. I have no idea what superfetching is...but it's disabled and everything is working fine.
thank you for your help..you guys are the best !
-
Superfetching. .. it sounds like what you get when you put your dog on crystal meth...
My official name for Windoze's new non-operating non-system
is
Windows Hasta La Vista
-
Running Vista without all of the bells and whistles is actually pretty smooth. For example, I've done a fair amount of work in Server 2008 (which is nothing more than another SKU of Vista). MS could make a really great OS if there was less a bit less focus-group driven design and... a lot of stuff I can't talk about. :P
I'd use Linux for everything at home, if it was viable. I wish it was.
-
Running Vista without all of the bells and whistles is actually pretty smooth.
That’s as may be, but turning off all said bells and whistles is laborious at best and certainly not for the faint of heart, or the n00bish. Upgrading to incompatibilit y and aggravation just sucks.
The various free-ware OS out there are looking more and more practical as MS' offerings turn into Apple's offerings.
-
I run Vista home proffesional and LOVE it, have had zero problems, Oh no i lie i couldnt get SWG to load for a short while, had to make it run in XP mode, butt hat was a visit to sony forums that lasted 20 seconds to fix. Outside of that ive never had a single flaw.
Linux hwever, i installed Umuntu 8.02 on my old laptop to see what the fuss was about and it refuses to connect to my wireless network, to the point the network icon vanishes and i cant do any more with it without a reboot. so screw Linux ill stick with Windows.
My 10c worth :P
-
Vista installed on my new machine worked very well at first...but patches altered its structure drastically making it very vulnerable to attack.
Exactly what the "security updates" were supposed to prevent.
Here are some items I found slowing my machine:
-services I had intentionally shut down were reset by updates to ON.
-several items were scheduled that slowed the machine.
-TMM linked an off-site SMB server to my machine that was activated every time a user logged on...even mirroring the game.
XP ran much better...faste r...smoother.. .more reliably.
If I had not already purchased this Vista Platinum Full product, I would change to XP Pro Full version.
-
I still hate Vista. A lot.
-
Better get used to it because XP is going bye bye
-
Yeah, I know. I've been running Vista since it came out. Hence the hate...
-
Better get used to it because XP is going bye bye
They can take my XP out of my cold dead hands. I'll use it till Windows 7 ships some time next year :)
-
Better get used to it because XP is going bye bye
They can take my XP out of my cold dead hands. I'll use it till Windows 7 ships some time next year :)
Hehehehe. Oh... sometimes I wish I wasn't bound by a non-disclosure agreement. There is just so much I could say about that, but I'd rather not be fired right now. :)
Vista has plenty of problems, but in my opinion and experience, most of them are really just in design, not technical problems. The only exceptions to that are related to DRM. Vista is a very viable OS. Sure, migration can always be tricky since running legacy software can be a crap-shoot, but that's normal. For a business, its a risk, but one that can be managed. There are a lot of benefits to switching to a newer OS (or linux :) ). For a gamer, some old games and apps might not work, but you can always run old software on old hardware, right? Anyhow, I like XP too. :) The ONLY reason I run Vista is because I actually want some of the features (RAM usage, DX11, Aero, etc).
We don't really know how MS is going to sell Win7 yet. I thought they mentioned to the press that we'd have to pay more for any features outside of the default, like some ala carte system.
-
As far as Windows 7 is concerned...
I think everyone should pay Microsoft a set price for Windows 7, and then they pay you back a certain amount every time it crashes.
100 crashes, and the operating system is free. Just a thought, imagine what a business model that would be... a company actually having to care if its system works or not...
-
Most of the time when Windows crashes it's not strictly due to Windows itself, but another application or a device driver. (Though, granted, many of these are preinstalled with Windows, so many people might not understand the difference.) I'm not saying Windows is itself without bugs, but it's nevertheless quite stress-tested and most of the flaws are either in design or are buffer overflows (oh, how much MS could have saved themselves by training their developers early on about how to use strings/arrays in C).
The main reason I don't care to switch to Vista, besides the fact that it gives me nothing I don't already have, and besides the adage of, if it's not broken, why fix it... but primarily I don't like Vista because it's 3-D. I don't want my OS hogging all of my 3-D hardware, thank you very much. My computer can't reliably run two high-end 3-D applications at once, which is the equivalent of what would happen if I tried to use Vista and run a 3-D game at the same time. As far as I'm concerned, an OS is supposed to use absolutely minimal resources and stay out of my way and let me run my applications. That's my view. Vista has gone in completely the opposite direction and that's why I don't like it.
Besides which, compatibility is a big deal with me. I have no idea if Vista would run my old DOS programs but I'm glad I don't need to find out yet. Of course, at this rate you'd think modern PCs could flat out 100% emulate DOS/Win98 with no speed loss so you have to wonder why they don't just do that instead of worrying about making the OS itself backward compatible...
Solving compatibility issues by using old hardware (e.g. old PCs) to run old software won't work. Why? Because you can't buy a legal copy of Win98 anymore, and soon WinXP. And once MS shuts down the activation servers you won't be able to install or reinstall WinXP either, even copies that you legally own. The only recourse would be to use a pirated/hacked version of the OS, which is not something I prefer doing.
-
I hadn't heard that MS was going to shut down the XP activation servers. When that happens is when I'll probably be going over to Linux.
-
I hadn't heard that MS was going to shut down the XP activation servers. When that happens is when I'll probably be going over to Linux.
Can you game on Linux?
-
I've heard that there's a Windows emulator called WINE (I think) that lets you run Windows apps in a Linux environment.
-
[Popeye voice]Well blows me down...[/Popeye voice]
Can I has moar infoz?
-
Hehe, I don't know much about it really, but I did find this site: http://www.winehq.org/ (http://www.winehq.org/)
The site seems to explain what Wine is all about.
"Think of Wine as a compatibility layer for running Windows programs. Wine does not require Microsoft Windows, as it is a completely free alternative implementation of the Windows API consisting of 100% non-Microsoft code, however Wine can optionally use native Windows DLLs if they are available. Wine provides both a development toolkit for porting Windows source code to Unix as well as a program loader, allowing many unmodified Windows programs to run on x86-based Unixes, including Linux, FreeBSD, Mac OS X, and Solaris."
-
It's the very fact that people can make things like Wine (there's also a Mac (pre OS-X) emulator, I forget what it's called, Virtual PC or something I think; I tried it once long ago) is what makes me wonder why MS couldn't just make a Windows emulator for Vista and all of their future operating systems, freeing them from worrying about building compatibility in directly. You know, make a Win98 emulator, a WinXP emulator, etc. (Granted, WinXP has been fairly good with backwards compatibility thus far, so probably a single WinXP emulator would run all of the DOS and Win3.1/95/98 era stuff.)
Honestly, I think it's just an issue of time more than anything else. It takes a lot of time to work out the bugs in such systems and they are too busy working on new OSes than looking back at old ones. And there are always third parties to do it for them...
Also, I will admit emulators are far from perfect. I remember a couple of things I couldn't run on the Mac one, because of limitations in the emulator (e.g. it wasn't emulating everything 100% accurately). So there's sadly no perfect answer...
-
Yeah, from reading Wine's description it says it can run "many" windows apps, it doesn't say "all". So I'm guessing there are some apps it can't run. Buying a new game would be risky because it might not work. Would have to download a free demo first, or look for feedback on the Wine forums. One of the screenshots on the Wine site is someone playing NWN on Wine. Hehe, if nothing else I could play EVE on Linux.
With regard to Vista, if MS offered a "try it free for 30 days" kind of deal I know I would download it and give it a try, just the basic OS with none of the bells and whistles, but the word "free" kind of goes against everything MS is about.
With XP, MS finally got it right. They released a stable and robust OS that anyone could use. Vista seems like a step backward to the old BSOD days. Judging from the Mojave Experiment ads that have been popping up, it seems MS is aware they screwed up. Hopefully with Windows 7 they'll take that lesson to heart.
-
...just the basic OS with none of the bells and whistles...
With Windows there is no such thing. Seriously. MS considers Internet Explorer, Media Player, MSN Messenger, Outlook (now known as Microsoft Mail or something like that), and the Picture and Fax Viewer to be "part" of Windows. (And I'm sure this list is incomplete.)
Point being, you can't GET a bare-bones Windows without all the fluff, it just doesn't exist.
This mostly started in the Win98 days. Win98, you see, was just Win95 with Internet Explorer's DLLs integrated with the rest of the OS. That's it. That's why Win98's stability and security took a nosedive over Win95, because IE itself was insecure and unstable.
What I wouldn't give for a bare-bones Windows, seriously. If I want a media player I'll install one as a separate application. If I want a web browser I'll install one as a separate application. If this was the case, Windows would be smaller, lighter, and more secure. As it is, every security vulnerability in IE turns into a security vulnerability in the entire OS because of the dumb integration...