DirectX 11 and the PC demoscene
category: general [glöplog]
that was a response to jcl of course
Jcl: Pretty much the same essence then :)
gloom: actually... I should -really- try to convert people to Vista... would make my work much easier if I didn't have to do all new stuff XP-compatible :-)
I don't... but just because I think it's a lost cause (like the Linux one ;-) )
I don't... but just because I think it's a lost cause (like the Linux one ;-) )
Quote:
Basically the whole thing is designed around the "I want to use my pc as a multimedia center" user, thats why you get directory listings based on "track songwriter duration etc. etc.". No fuck off. I want size in BYTES, extension, last modified.
ah yes, that's very true hehe
"We're gonna stick to windows 95 for a while because windows 98 isn't mature enough"
..
"Ok win98se is out, let's switch. ok this kinda works, crashes a lot but it's pretty"
..
"Oh, look. windows 2000! nt based! but it's slow... damnit, gonna use win98se for a while"
..
"Ah new windows me! oh, wait! better run that win2000 anyway"
..
"Finally, windows xp. but wait, this IS slow as fuck. better run windows 2000, oh win2000 is the greatest!"
..
"Ah XP service pack two, better buy in on that one, not it runs "ok", and we just got faster computers"
..
"Hum, windows Vista... damnit, not this crap again".
..
"Ok win98se is out, let's switch. ok this kinda works, crashes a lot but it's pretty"
..
"Oh, look. windows 2000! nt based! but it's slow... damnit, gonna use win98se for a while"
..
"Ah new windows me! oh, wait! better run that win2000 anyway"
..
"Finally, windows xp. but wait, this IS slow as fuck. better run windows 2000, oh win2000 is the greatest!"
..
"Ah XP service pack two, better buy in on that one, not it runs "ok", and we just got faster computers"
..
"Hum, windows Vista... damnit, not this crap again".
Quote:
Windows 1.0
Windows 1.0 was released on November 20, 1985.
* CGA/Hercules/EGA (or compatible)
* MS-DOS 2.0
* 256 KB Ram
* 2 double-sided disk drives or a hard drive
windows 2 Windows 2.10
Windows 2.1 was officially released on May 27, 1988.
Interesting Fact: Versions of 2.10 were released so that the Intel 286 Processor could be taken advantage of.
* MS-DOS version 3.0 or later
* 512 K RAM
* One floppy-disk and one hard disk
* Graphics adapter card
* Microsoft mouse is optional
Windows 3.1x
Versions of Windows 3.1 were released between 1992 and 1994.
Interesting fact: What was different with this version of Windows was that if a user was running a different DOS operating system other than MS DOS, the installer would fail and the user would not be able to install Windows.
* MS-DOS 3.1 or later
* Intel 80286 (or higher) processor
* 1 MB or more of memory (640K conventional and 256K extended)
* 6.5 MB of free disk space (9 MB is recommended)
windows 95 Windows 95
Windows 95 was released on August 24, 1995.
Interesting Fact: The graphical user interface was one of the biggest improvements with this operating system. In fact, the general format and structure of the GUI is still used in Windows today.
* Intel 80386 DX CPU
* 4 MB of system RAM
* 50 MB hard drive space
Windows 98
Windows 98 was released on June 25, 1998
Interesting Fact: Windows 98 was the first operating system to use the Windows Driver Model.
* 486DX-2/66 MHz or higher processor (Pentium processor recommended
* 16 MB of RAM (24MB recommended)
* At least 500 MB of space available on HDD
* VGA or higher resolution monitor
* CD-ROM or DVD-Rom drive
* Microsoft Mouse or pointing device
windows 2000 Windows 2000
Windows 2000 was released on February 17, 2000. There were three different versions of Windows 200 and each had different requirements.
Interesting Fact: Microsoft advertised Windows 2000 as “a standard in reliability.” With this version, new features like Windows Desktop Update, Internet Explorer 5 and Outlook Express were introduced. There were also many improvements made to Windows Explorer.
Windows 2000 Professional
* 133 MHz or higher Pentium-compatible CPU
* 32 MB of RAM (64 MB recommended)
* 700 megabytes hard disk space (2 GB recommended)
Windows 2000 Server/Advanced Server
* 133 MHz CPU
* 256 MB of RAM minimum
* 2 GB hard disk space
Windows Me
Windows Me was released on September 24, 2000
Interesting Fact: Windows Me wasn’t around for very long, only about a year and then it was replaced with Windows XP
* 150 MHz Pentium Processor
* 320 MB hard drive space
* 32 MB RAM
*Note: This was the last version of Windows to include a real-mode MS-DOS subsystem even though access to it was restricted.
windows xp Windows XP
Windows XP launched on October 25, 2001.
Interesting Fact: It was the first consumer oriented operating system produced by Microsoft to be built on the Windows NT kernel and architecture. Below are the minimum requirements for XP Home and Professional (not the recommended).
* 233 MHz processor
* 63 MB RAM
* 1.5 GB free hard disk space
* Super VGA video adapter and monitor
* CD-ROM drive or DVD drive
Windows Vista
Windows Vista launched to the public on January 30, 2007. Below are the “Vista Capable” requirements as well as the “Vista Premium Ready” requirements.
Interesting Fact: one of the things Vista is criticized most for is system requirements.
Vista Capable
* 800 MHz processor
* 512 MB RAM
* 32 MB Graphics memory
* 20 GB hard disk capacity
* 15 GB free hard disk space
Vista Premium Ready
* 1.0 GHz processor
* 1 GB RAM
* 128 MB Graphics memory
* 40 GB hard disk capacity
* 15 GB free hard disk space
Bit of reading for y'all.
Quote:
Vista Capable
* 800 MHz processor
* 512 MB RAM
Absolutely epic LUL.
15GB of free space, w_t_f do they need all that for?!?!
(not that it matters, just curious)
As always with microsoft 'minimum specification': double it before you even consider installing.
And a warning on 'vista certified' hardware too: just because it's certified, it doesn't mean it'll work. A friend of mine spent a few days trying to install retail vista basic on a couple of home made pcs for people. He'd deliberately picked 'certified' motherboards to avoid the driver issues, and it was a reputable brand (not sure which, but one of the top ones).
The installer failed near the end with a nondescript error (something like 'unable to install, please restart'). The only thing we could glean from the logs was that vista detected the cheap, hand-built pcs as 'dell poweredge server' o_0 Turned out it was the integrated video (which was some super-common intel chipset), and he had to go out and buy extra video cards to install it. Once it was installed it worked without them, but he had no use for them anyway.. wasted money :)
Still, we have windows 7 to look forward to, and it seems that might be the first microsoft OS where the hardware requirements don't double :D
And a warning on 'vista certified' hardware too: just because it's certified, it doesn't mean it'll work. A friend of mine spent a few days trying to install retail vista basic on a couple of home made pcs for people. He'd deliberately picked 'certified' motherboards to avoid the driver issues, and it was a reputable brand (not sure which, but one of the top ones).
The installer failed near the end with a nondescript error (something like 'unable to install, please restart'). The only thing we could glean from the logs was that vista detected the cheap, hand-built pcs as 'dell poweredge server' o_0 Turned out it was the integrated video (which was some super-common intel chipset), and he had to go out and buy extra video cards to install it. Once it was installed it worked without them, but he had no use for them anyway.. wasted money :)
Still, we have windows 7 to look forward to, and it seems that might be the first microsoft OS where the hardware requirements don't double :D
skrebbel: ik nie geloof nie!
Ah... I can't see how hardware requierements are a important part of the specifications... yet I haven't seen a single demo lately that could run 60fps on my computer (dual core, 4gb of RAM and nV8600 GT).
What hardware do you guys make your demos on? a 1Ghz processor with a 32mb gfx card? Ah well
What hardware do you guys make your demos on? a 1Ghz processor with a 32mb gfx card? Ah well
Jcl: Now your "Blinded by Vista"-love is just starting to look pathetic. :)
X2
Compared to XP, Vista is fine. I mean I didn't *need* to upgrade, but now I have I'd choose it over XP. It boots faster, it's interfaces are nicer, it's backend is superior, and it's on par in terms of performance *(once you disable system restore).
At least in my experience. I'm not really bothered by the bloat, anything you don't want you can remove in most cases.
At least in my experience. I'm not really bothered by the bloat, anything you don't want you can remove in most cases.
doom: windows 2000 was also based on the NT kernel, unlike what you're quoting states.
Quote:
Quote:Vista Capable
* 800 MHz processor
* 512 MB RAM
Absolutely epic LUL.
Is this a Microsoft/Vista only issue? I have tried running OSX Leopard on it's minimal requirement and that was a joke aswell. With the slow onboard graphics accelerator that was not far from being totally useless due to it's slow and non responsive manor.
Leopard minimal specs:
Mac computer with an Intel, PowerPC G5, or PowerPC G4 (867MHz or faster) processor
512MB of memory
(they don't mention minimal graphics card requirements)
Hmm.. I run leopard on a 1ghz box with 512mb and some kind of really low end video card (maybe a radeon 8500 or something? can't remember) and it's not at all fast, but it's highly usable. One thing I've noticed with leopard though is that it seems to use more ram initially, but then be much more efficient with it after. Like on this box (with 4gb), it uses more than tiger after a clean boot, but it never uses as much once I have a few apps open.
Kusma: I think the quote was that xp was the first 'consumer orientated' NT based os, which is kind of right (2k was marketed to consumers a bit, but they were marketing (or maybe that should be insulting :) people with ME too).
Kusma: I think the quote was that xp was the first 'consumer orientated' NT based os, which is kind of right (2k was marketed to consumers a bit, but they were marketing (or maybe that should be insulting :) people with ME too).
kusma: It doesn't say it's not. It says that XP is the first "consumer oriented" operating system based on the NT kernel. But I guess you could argue that Win2k was "consumer oriented" too. But whatever.
All I know is I still haven't got a clue what the point is of those hardware requirements for Vista. :)
All I know is I still haven't got a clue what the point is of those hardware requirements for Vista. :)
ekoli: My impression is that Apple software is generally no less bloated than Microsoft software.
Quote:
Jcl: Now your "Blinded by Vista"-love is just starting to look pathetic. :)
What a coincidence.. I've always thought people's massive hate for Vista and their arguments looked pathetic :-)
Jcl: More pathetic than "It's not like NORMAL PEOPLE don't have hardware that can pull all that bloat, so really, it's you guys who are being tards"?
Learning to live with something that sucks doesn't automatically make it good. Tolerating something being sub-par doesn't elevate the quality of it.
Windows Vista is shit on a stick, and I'll never, ever, ever use it on any of my PCs.
"Windows 7"? Who knows, I'd have to try it first. I really hope Microsoft gets their act together with that one, but until "Windows 7 - SP2" arrives, I'll stick with Windows XP, thank you.
Windows Vista is shit on a stick, and I'll never, ever, ever use it on any of my PCs.
"Windows 7"? Who knows, I'd have to try it first. I really hope Microsoft gets their act together with that one, but until "Windows 7 - SP2" arrives, I'll stick with Windows XP, thank you.
Somebody ever tried to install Vista on a AGP System? :D
OS truly are like a disease.
