Windows Vista Catch-All

Or even something like A3D.

In my opinion, when Creative bought A3D explicitly to kill it and to protect their inferior EAX -- that was when they started to die.

With all the hardware power now, they really should be able to use a discrete chip to do some seriously impressive stuff. But, instead, Creative made a fairly powerful DSP, advertised the hell out of it, and then did absolutely nothing more with it for like five years. I mean, fer chrissake, what the hell is the point of all that supposed power if it's not getting used for anything? We're still on basic multichannel sound with reverb, and we've been there for the last ten years because of Creative.

Maybe Intel will get a clue and do something; coming up with a complex sound occlusion processing system that really improves immersiveness would be a great way to convince people to buy more cores...

(We probably should pull this into a different thread if we're going to continue, this is very unrelated to Vista. )

shihonage wrote:

Well one could always foresee uses for PROPER sound processing. The kind of software processing we have in games now is pretty rudimentary.

No question. My point is that, with CPU performance increasing and cores multiplying, there comes a point where there's no difference between a hardware DSP and just dedicating part or all of one CPU core to doing the exact same processing. We're not yet at the point where that can be expected, so just as you say, what we get now is "pretty rudimentary". But ultimately, this seems like one of many problems solved by increased availability of parallel processing power on the desktop.

People like Gabe Newell are already envisioning a future where more CPU cores replaces the need for GPUs. I think replacing the need for a hardware DSP to do serious audio processing is a much more immediately realizable goal.

Oh, and, umm... hmm, thread topic... I'm going to install Vista 64 soon... yay me?

*Legion* wrote:

My point is that, with CPU performance increasing and cores multiplying, there comes a point where there's no difference between a hardware DSP and just dedicating part or all of one CPU core to doing the exact same processing. We're not yet at the point where that can be expected, so just as you say, what we get now is "pretty rudimentary". But ultimately, this seems like one of many problems solved by increased availability of parallel processing power on the desktop.

This is a somewhat exaggerated parallel, but to me this sounds a lot like advocating that 3D accelerators aren't necessary if we can get enough cores to get the CPUs to do it in software.

Sure, you may say, 3D video acceleration is much more complex then 3D audio acceleration, but then again, when you think about what it really takes to model multiple-object occlusions and all the other, some-yet-unexplored subtleties of authentically modeling sounds traveling through space, simulating material properties and taking their dimensions into account, the idea of a dedicated accelerator really starts to make sense.

===

As for the topic, I uh, tried to install Vista on an external drive mounted by BIOS that XP is fooled into thinking to be a local drive.

Vista didn't let me. Alas. However, I observed that it automatically detected my bluetooth keyboard and mouse at the beginning of install - impressive.

... the 10-minute-long "Please wait..." screen before setup started wasn't so impressive, though.

So what's the recommended card for a Vista machine these days?

So I'm Windows Vista only these days and y'know... it's actually working out pretty well. I have to admit, to my chagrin, I've no real idea what the difference between 32-bit and 64-bit Windows Vista is, but then my new gaming rig has 3 gigs of ram taking up 3 slots, so I guess I'm okay...? I'm not too worried over it in any event, I have a license for whatever version. 32-bit just seemed like less hassle.

In any event my new Dell XPS 420 (specs are in some thread on here) is running Windows Vista Home Premium (32-bit) edition. Everything runs smooth as silk; installs have been pretty much the same as in XP, Steam hasn't acted up at all, tabbing through applications is a lot easier, and overall it's a better experience. That said I'm sure half of that is my shiny new toy being a lot more powerful than my old computer, so it's not a fair, side-by-side comparison. Still, Vista's never crashed on me. In fact when Sims 2 freezes up, which happened in Windows XP with about the same regularity, it actually boots me to desktop and kills the program. That's a welcome change from XP freezing up on me and forcing a hard reboot and this seems to be the case with all applications. Overall it seems less prone to issues than my old Windows XP Professional, and more likely to let me live through ones that do crop up.

On my work's Dell laptop (Latitude D820, dual core 2.16GHz, 3GB of RAM) I upgraded to Windows Vista Ultimate edition since the MUI packs are free via Windows Update with it, and at $35 per MUI pack the cost of upgrading was less than just buying the twenty or so language packs I need. Upgrading from XP was easier than any clean install of XP I've done, it runs my applications perfectly well, and has yet to crash on me. I'm a bit less demanding of it than I am of my main computer, but still.

The UAC thing is very, very annoying and I'm happy it was easy to kill it. I'm enjoying the search system and haven't even touched the Google Desktop that came pre-installed on my XPS. Overall my experience with Vista has been quite good. It's nothing phenomenal certainly, I've had no epiphanies due to Vista. But it's been stable and unintrusive, which is all I really ask for in an operating system.

Well, I've run into my first new problem with Vista in several months. (To be fair, this scenario might happen in XP too. I have no idea.) I've been reorganizing and re-ripping my music collection over the past couple weeks (got my first iPod a couple weeks ago) and I thought maybe it was time to change how I organize my music collection from having a separate folder for each artist to just having one music folder with all the files stored in it.

Talk about a nightmare. It now takes forever (like a minute or more) to do anything in my music folder now, whether it's copying new files into it (copy process is short, but getting the files to appear in the folder is not), or performing a simple file sort (say, sort by Artist in the Details view). My guess is, this is the oh-so-wonderful indexing service at work, but why it would need to reindex the folder every time I do something as simple as sort the files, I have no idea. If anyone can confirm that it's the indexing service causing the slowdown and if there's anything I can do about it short of shutting down the service, I'd certainly appreciate it.
---Todd

Couldn't you just Right-Click Folder > Properties > Advanced > Deselect "Index this folder for faster searching" and see if that worked? It'd at least decide if the index is the problem.

ubrakto wrote:

Well, I've run into my first new problem with Vista in several months. (To be fair, this scenario might happen in XP too. I have no idea.) I've been reorganizing and re-ripping my music collection over the past couple weeks (got my first iPod a couple weeks ago) and I thought maybe it was time to change how I organize my music collection from having a separate folder for each artist to just having one music folder with all the files stored in it.

The OCD collector part of me just died a little inside.

ranalin wrote:
ubrakto wrote:

Well, I've run into my first new problem with Vista in several months. (To be fair, this scenario might happen in XP too. I have no idea.) I've been reorganizing and re-ripping my music collection over the past couple weeks (got my first iPod a couple weeks ago) and I thought maybe it was time to change how I organize my music collection from having a separate folder for each artist to just having one music folder with all the files stored in it.

The OCD collector part of me just died a little inside.

LOL. I've always been that way about it too. But the number of folders was getting to be a pain to maintain (an unfortunate rhyme, that) and I thought if I just used the Details view to sort and the Search function if I ever needed to find a specific artist/album/etc. that it would be easier than moving back and forth through a couple hundred folders. I mean that's pretty much how it works if you browse your collection from within Media Player or iTunes. What could go wrong, right?

Sigh. Best laid plans and all that.
---Todd

bnpederson wrote:

Couldn't you just Right-Click Folder > Properties > Advanced > Deselect "Index this folder for faster searching" and see if that worked? It'd at least decide if the index is the problem.

This is what happens when I get really frustrated by a computer problem. The simple, no nonsense solutions just go completely by the wayside. Thanks for the suggestion! I'll try it out tonight.
---Todd

No Crysis issues on my new Dell, of all the things, with on-board Sigma-Tel audio.

No issues at all with Vista so far, aside from strange "unidentified network" syndrome upon the startup, which I plan to sort out one day, but keep forgetting to do so.

ubrakto wrote:
bnpederson wrote:

Couldn't you just Right-Click Folder > Properties > Advanced > Deselect "Index this folder for faster searching" and see if that worked? It'd at least decide if the index is the problem.

This is what happens when I get really frustrated by a computer problem. The simple, no nonsense solutions just go completely by the wayside. Thanks for the suggestion! I'll try it out tonight.
---Todd

No dice. Perhaps it is just the volume of files in the folder and not the indexing. Still, it doesn't makes sense to me. I mean it's not like I have this problem when looking at all the files at once in iTunes or WMP.
---Todd

I hope someone can help an old idiot. I'm running Vista Ultimate. I want it to stop asking me a dozen times everytime I want to install a program. Is there a way to turn this nagging off please?

Forgive the vagueness of this post, but I haven't got with Vista on atm, so will try to remember from memory.

UAC can be turned of one of two ways, either from the control panel under user accounts and there is an option to determine if it is on or off. The other way is typing MSCONFIG from the run prompt, and then going to the advanced options I think and there is a "disable UAC" checkbox there.

Either way you need to reboot.

UAC is a massive pain that's poorly implemented but it does also offer a substantial number of "behind the scenes" security enhancements that make it worth keeping on. Unless you're installing several programs a day, I would leave it on. As more software with Vista in mind comes out, you will start seeing those prompts less and less.

The easiest way to turn off UAC is to go the Start/Windows bar and then click on the picture of your userid.
There is a link right there in the window to turn off UAC. Reboot.
1-Click UAC enable/disable, it doesn't get any easier than that.

Thanks Eezy!

Well, honestly, I gave up on Vista after 2 days.

Why doesn't the File Explorer have the old "up" arrow to go to the directory above? Is that a setting I missed?

Mex wrote:

Why doesn't the File Explorer have the old "up" arrow to go to the directory above? Is that a setting I missed?

Nope, it's the breadcrumb all the way now. They got rid of the up arrow since you can now click on the part of the path in the address bar to go 'up'.

Eezy_Bordone wrote:

Nope, it's the breadcrumb all the way now. They got rid of the up arrow since you can now click on the part of the path in the address bar to go 'up'.

Oh, I didn't like that either. Seems slower, and it's really annoying when you have long directory names =P

Oh well, thanks

Hitting backspace should jump you back a directory level, if thats what your trying to do

... And, while we're at it, Alt-Left and And-Right move you to previous/next folder that you visited, just like web pages in a browser.

Keith Combs is reporting that images of Windows Vista with SP1 already baked in are appearing on MSDN TechNet subscriber downloads. After checking myself, I find that only the English, French, German, Japanese & Spanish x86 versions are available thus far. Maybe they are still updating and the x64 versions will start appearing in a few, more on that later folks.

Keith is clearly ecstatic: "My download took minutes. Being first helps. It flew down the fiber pipe to my house at 1.8meg per second. I wish all my downloads were that fast. Your mileage will vary. I'm planning on "enhancing" my VM first thing. I'm going to enable IIS7, then drop PHP, MySQL and Wordpress on it. When I get it working, I am going to do a screencast on the process. Getting ready to record how to do that with Windows Server 2008 in a few minutes. Enjoy!"

He also mentions that the blog post is a rolling update, later he will post some more screencasts of the resulting installation. Thanks Keith!

Update: Microsoft have posted an announcement regarding the SP1 images availability on it's MSDN subscriber download sites: "The first wave includes English, French, German, Japanese and Spanish versions of Windows Vista with Service Pack 1. New files will be added every couple days, depending on server bandwidth, until all downloads are published."

Via Neowin.com I ran across this Blorge.com article this morning for, "Fixing Three Broken Features of Vista." I haven't read the whole thing yet, but one of the fixes is a trick that suppresses UAC prompts while keeping "virtualization detection in place." For those of you who can't stand UAC, but want to keep such protections, it might be worth a look.

What does it take to get a good score from vista?

I have the Q6600 and that is rating a 5.X
My 400 GB SATA HD is raiting a 5.X

Nothing wrong with your score, it's not out of 10. In fact, it tops out at 5.9.

I believe I score a 9.x been since october since I ran it.

320GB 7200 RPM SATA-300
3 Gigs CORSAIR DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)
8800 with 768 mb
Intel Core 2 Duo E6400 Conroe 2.13GHz

It's out 5.9? than I have no idea what I scored...

MikeMac wrote:

Nothing wrong with your score, it's not out of 10. In fact, it tops out at 5.9.

Thank you!

From the Windows Help:

Each hardware component receives an individual subscore. Your computer's base score is determined by the lowest subscore. For example, if the lowest subscore of an individual hardware component is 2.6, then the base score is 2.6. The base score is not an average of the combined subscores.
...
The base scores currently range from 1 to 5.9.

It's fun to run the benchmark right after you boot Vista and see just how bad your HD score will be while Vista background tasks are thrashing away.