2024-03-28, 23:13 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Vista and DRM  (Read 9299 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8805

WWW
« on: 2007-09-27, 18:56 »

http://www.forbes.com/security/2007/02/1...a-drm-tech-security-cz_bs_0212vista.html

Yet another reason not to upgrade to Vista.  I also wonder if Bill Gates is related to Stalin, because it seems like with Windows Vista, computer runs you.  Slipgate - Exhausted
Logged


I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Kajet
 

Vadrigar
*********
Posts: 601

I have no clue what to put here...

« Reply #1 on: 2007-09-27, 19:08 »

The more companies try to stop piracy the less people will want their shit. Especially with something expensive like an OS, people are going to tell other people how they got screwed and they're going to be as loud as they possibly can be.
Logged
Lordbane2110
 
Chton
*******
Posts: 225

« Reply #2 on: 2007-09-27, 20:06 »

yeah i've tried vista

wasn't impressed, even less so because it kept telling me i couldn't run a game that i previously had on XP

personally i'm sticking to xp pro, is customisable enough for my needs and it doesn't complain when i overclock the hell out of stuff
Logged
scalliano
 

Elite
*
Posts: 1095

Yup, that's me

« Reply #3 on: 2007-09-27, 20:19 »

Well, if that article is anything to go by, it's not just about piracy anymore. I have a mate who bought a PC a few weeks ago. It's Vista and he's had nothing but trouble with it, even down to things as basic as file management (known as The Long Goodbye, if I'm correct). I have another mate who has a Mac and SWEARS by it, although he's not much of a PC gamer, using it more for video editing and such. His atitude is that he's got a PS2 for games, and until GTA4 comes out, that's all he needs (fair do's, although I've already gone PS3 myself. MGS4, anyone? Slipgate - Wink ).

I'm sticking with XP for as long as possible. Losing DOS was bad enough. Besides, it's not as if anything out there needs Vista to run anyway. Slipgate - Ninja
Logged

PSN ID: scalliano

The Arena knows no gender, colour or creed, only skill.
ReBoOt
Mean ol Swede
 
Team Member
Elite
****
Posts: 1294

WWW
« Reply #4 on: 2007-09-28, 02:18 »

Well i've tested vista..its like the "do you want to allow this?" endles questions OS yeah of course its possible to turn off which i did or else id go nuts.
And you navigate alot quicker in XP.
And yes it looks really flashy, but what noon mention is how much the graphics actually use your computers rescources, turn of the graphic shit and you'll find out...

For me there's no way in hell im switching to Vista unless i absolutley have no other choice.
Do yourself a favor, stay away from this crap.
Logged
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
 

Team Member
Elite (3k+)
******
Posts: 3330

WWW
« Reply #5 on: 2007-09-28, 09:24 »

Quote
Losing DOS was bad enough.

You're kidding, right? I mean, DOS is all fun nostalgia for me now, but it was a horrible environment, even compared to win95.. :]
Logged

Tabun ?Morituri Nolumus Mori?
Lopson
 

Elite
*
Posts: 1133

Still Going In Circles

« Reply #6 on: 2007-09-28, 15:02 »

I'm with Tab on this one: DOS was a horrible shell. But unlike some other OSs, DOS rarely crashed. I've never seen DOS crashing, at least. Macintosh was a tremendous evolution, and Windows helped a lot. Too bad none of those has introduced anything actually useful for the past 8 years.

DRM SUCKS btw.
Logged

scalliano
 

Elite
*
Posts: 1095

Yup, that's me

« Reply #7 on: 2007-09-28, 17:08 »

Ach. it's just all those old games I can't play anymore and the fact that DOSbox is only any good if you have a 16-core CPU.
Logged

PSN ID: scalliano

The Arena knows no gender, colour or creed, only skill.
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
 

Team Member
Elite (3k+)
******
Posts: 3330

WWW
« Reply #8 on: 2007-09-28, 17:59 »

No problems with DOSBox here. I'm only annoyed with the limited possibilities of using VMWare. That's definitely not a solution for running oldies..
Logged

Tabun ?Morituri Nolumus Mori?
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8805

WWW
« Reply #9 on: 2007-09-28, 18:13 »

Let me correct a few things here.

DOS is not a shell.  DOS is an operating system with a command interpreter.
DOS Shell was a shell.  Think of it as the precursor to Windows.  It was a shell environment that ran on top of DOS.
Windows up through Windows 98 SE was not a true operating system.  It was a shell environment that (you guessed it) ran on top of DOS.
Windows ME... I don't even know what that was besides being abominable.

Windows NT, 2000, XP, and Vista qualify as operating systems because they do not rely on a low-level command interpreter.

Now that's out of the way, time for opinion.  DOS a horrible environment?  Hardly.  Let's take the last incarnations of DOS.  Consider the hardware available for which it ran, the backward compatibility requirements, and the demands placed on it.  For what it had to do it ran extremely well and had very few problems.  I realize most people here did not use computers back when DOS was new, but ALL computers at the time had very cryptic command interpreters.  They had to.  Memory was THE deciding factor on all computer activities.  Space was at a premium, programs had to be written as compact and as optimized as possible, and the OS itself had to handle hardware drivers, low-level hardware input, and program demands while not leaving a big memory footprint itself.

Now consider Windows.  Windows relied on DOS to do the actual OS stuff.  That Windows 95 and 98 ran on top of DOS is something people see the wrong way a lot I think.  The fact that they could run on top of DOS was huge marks for DOS's reliability.  What DOS's command-line environment lacked was functionality and user friendliness, two things that Windows tried fairly unsuccessfully to address for a long time.  Graphical environments are easier to navigate and relate to, making computers more "user-friendly" on the surface.  However, the demands of multitasking and just running the graphical environment have placed more demands on the hardware just to provide a working environment.  Try running Aero on a Pentium 2.  Right.  Now go back and play Quake on it.  There's too much freaking overhead in the OS now.  What DOS was good at was file management.  That aspect of DOS is something that is still used in all versions of Windows.  NTFS improved on the old FAT system, but the basic file structure and access scheme has not changed.

And if anyone here uses Linux, please.  You've got BASH.  It's a command-line environment too, and it hearkens back to UNIX.  A command interpreter is a command interpreter is a command interpreter.  Same rule - syntax is law.

We've all just gotten used to doing 30 things at once on a computer and switching quickly between applications.  Going back to DOS is hard because nobody wants to lose the functionality of the newer environments.  I can't say I blame them, but for its time DOS was damned good and did exactly what it set out to do.
Logged


I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
 

Team Member
Elite (3k+)
******
Posts: 3330

WWW
« Reply #10 on: 2007-09-28, 19:10 »

I stand corrected. What I should have said was: it was horrible to work with DOS in the time and way that it was pretty much the only choice for me, here. I wasn't as tweak and debug savvy back then, which made freeing up memory and dealing with TSR's rather unappealing, to put it mildy. The culprit was, I guess, the interface, which was decidedly unfriendly for the uninformed, bookless autodidact. The relative appeal of Win95 (for me), was that you could fiddle and play around in it, and figure out its (superficial and/or basic) operations that way.
Compared to the excruciating minutes in which I learnt the absolute basics of Vi (the linux text editor), for instance, dealing with visual environments was really nice.
Logged

Tabun ?Morituri Nolumus Mori?
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8805

WWW
« Reply #11 on: 2007-09-28, 20:16 »

That makes sense.  Having messed with older Apple and Tandy systems I was well used to command-line interfaces the first time I worked with DOS.  I learned DOS well enough that I was able to out-tweak the Memmax utility provided with DOS 6 to free up as much upper memory as possible.  That's the one thing I did hate about DOS was the 640K lower memory limit, and the fact that CD-ROM drivers, etc, tended to eat up a lot of memory needed for the games that needed the CD-ROM to run.  I became quite skilled at making boot configs and batch files.

I also developed an early hatred for Maxtor when I found out that Maxtor drives did not get along with some other hard drive brands.  My first hard drive upgrade resulted in a destroyed compressed volume and a mandatory reformat/reinstall of pretty much everything.  Fortunately I didn't have much to reinstall and I did have floppy archives of the most important stuff I had at the time.

One thing I did love about most DOS programs is portability.  I just had to xcopy c:\whatever\*.* c:\newfolder /s, deltree c:\whatever and poof, program moved, maybe a few entries in the .ini would need changing for pathing and maybe I'd need to alter the PATH environment if it was something I had included in the PATH statement in the boot files.  Now you've got a million registry entries so once you install most programs that's it, it stays put.  Reformatting in DOS was cake, and I could just dump programs back in "as they were".  Now you have to go through the whole damned reinstall process, reconfigure everything, apply all your patches... what a mess.  I hate system upgrades now for this reason!

Edit:  Oh, and neat.  This forum code allows backslashes!
  Slipgate - Laugh
Logged


I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
scalliano
 

Elite
*
Posts: 1095

Yup, that's me

« Reply #12 on: 2007-09-28, 20:28 »

And portability brings us nicely back to DRM, which makes software about as portable as a nuclear power station.
Logged

PSN ID: scalliano

The Arena knows no gender, colour or creed, only skill.
Lordbane2110
 
Chton
*******
Posts: 225

« Reply #13 on: 2007-09-28, 22:06 »

i know what you mean pho, i have on my current pc over 2 terabytes of harddrive space over 6 hard drives

previously i could just swap in and out as i pleased with DOS, much like most people could as although it wasn't as user friendly as it could have been it wasn't horrible either

but with xp i do have to reinstall everything and it's notas if i can start modding regedit instead as it just doesn't want to know. which is also one of the reasons i worry about the 2 install issue of Bioshock

as i chop and change my hardware on a almost regular basis (usually 3 -4 Months) i usually have to reinstall all my programs, modding tools, drivers and so on. yet with that it's 2 installs and your out

and as for DRM i heard there going to place it in a windows update for XP, i could be wrong (i soooo hope i'm wrong) but you never know
Logged
Lopson
 

Elite
*
Posts: 1133

Still Going In Circles

« Reply #14 on: 2007-09-29, 23:13 »

DOS wasn't user-friendly. At all. As I said, DOS was completely reliable, but way too complicated for most users (it wasn't that easy to learn how to properly work with the damn thing, I'll tell ya that much).
Portability was awesome, yes. And yes, ME was awesome.
« Last Edit: 2007-09-29, 23:19 by Lopson » Logged

Kajet
 

Vadrigar
*********
Posts: 601

I have no clue what to put here...

« Reply #15 on: 2007-09-30, 00:53 »

DRM in an XP update? oh spork no...         I thought I read that XP wouldn't be getting updated after vista cam out?
Logged
Phoenix
Bird of Fire
 

Team Member
Elite (7.5k+)
*********
Posts: 8805

WWW
« Reply #16 on: 2007-09-30, 05:02 »

I did not find DOS to be complicated at all.  DOS was very literal.  That's where most people run into trouble as absolutes and literals tend to exist only in the realms of mathematics and religion, and not every day life.
Logged


I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to: