VOGONS


Is Vista now Retro

Topic actions

Reply 180 of 249, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
gdjacobs wrote:

Well, I'm blaming all three. It's a problem with Microsoft's application on AMD's chipset built into HP's hardware. It's up to them to collectively put their heads together and work out a solution. We don't know what process was followed between the three organizations, nor what may have happened within Microsoft, but the only way they would escape blame would be if they were on the "We Should Fix This" side of the argument and were somehow prevented from doing anything (such as releasing an application note) on their own.

This is basically a political thing. You subscribe to a socialist view, where Microsoft is responsible for everyone using their OS, and Microsoft has to monitor every single combination of hardware and drivers to detect any problems pro-actively.

I think a more liberalist view is better suited to an OS like Windows: Microsoft simply supplies the OS, tries to make it as robust and widely applicable as possible by abstracting away the hardware and providing solid interfaces and such. It is up to the IHVs and OEMs to use the OS however they see fit. They can write drivers for their own hardware, add their own libraries, APIs and other tools etc, and are free to use it however they like (which includes choosing settings to throttle their hardware down to a level that adversely affects the user experience. So as far as Microsoft goes, they would simply say: "Yes, the power and freedom of our OS lets you do that, if you want. This is by design. Apparently the IHV/OEM wants to do this.").

Looking at where Windows came from, this is how it has always been. MS-DOS started out as a CP/M-like OS, where Microsoft supplied the basic OS, and OEMs could add some hardware-specific 'drivers' for things like display, keyboard, disk IO and such.
However, most DOS software was not written like CP/M, but rather addressed a lot of the original IBM PC directly, requiring other suppliers of DOS machines to be more than just DOS-compatible, they had to be 100% IBM PC compatible.
So before long, the different OEM versions of DOS disappeared, and Microsoft just started selling a single MS-DOS that worked on all PC-compatible machines.

Windows started out as a GUI shell for DOS, again being able to run on any machine really.

That is the nature of the PC-compatible platform: Anyone is free to choose their own CPU, video card, harddisk controllers etc. And things generally 'just work', because it is standardized at some level (eg, x86 instructionset, ACPI etc).
As a result, the sheer amount of configurations of hardware, drivers, settings and applications is an explosion of permutations that runs into the gazillions. No other platform is remotely like it.

It simply isn't even remotely practical to manage this complexity and try and test all possible combinations and find all possible problems. It's better to take a defensive course in designing and implementing the platform, rather than merely curing the symptoms but not the root cause.

I suppose the Macintosh platform would suit your needs better: far less variation in hardware, and Apple has and wants far more control over what hardware and software you use, and how you use it. They build their own hardware, so they also set their own throttling, and won't allow anyone to shoot themselves in the foot with it (which apparently at least some Windows laptops don't, either).

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 181 of 249, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

This isn't about ideology, more about what Microsoft does to retire their support tickets.

Another way they might escape blame: if nobody told them about the problem.

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder

Reply 182 of 249, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
gdjacobs wrote:

This isn't about ideology, more about what Microsoft does to retire their support tickets.

What makes you think it's an MS support ticket at all?
These are low-end laptops sold with a preinstalled OEM version of Windows. Which means that the end-user is not entitled to Microsoft support, the OEM has to handle support themselves.

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 183 of 249, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Three avenues for tickets incoming to Microsoft:
Requests for information from IHV and OEM partners.
Direct ticket creation for customers who pay for Microsoft support.
Potentially from community engagement efforts (like Microsoft Community).

Anyway, this is straying pretty far from topic.

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder

Reply 184 of 249, by Presbytier

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I would not consider a platform Retro till the architecture of said platform is dead or outdated to the point you need that OS to run certain things properly. XP in many ways fits that bill, but Vista does not as Windows 10 is built off of its Kernel changes and maintains a certain parity with Vista. Outside of wanting to limit ones OS experience there really is no reason to run any OS Vista or after other than Win10 as all are essentially the operating kernel.

"Never pay more than 20 dollars for a computer game" - Guybrush Threepwood

Reply 185 of 249, by Standard Def Steve

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I've definitely seen Aero Glass in struggle with certain video cards and IGPs. On any system with a video card that isn't complete crap, Aero Glass is definitely far more efficient than Basic/Classic. However, the following video cards and IGPs deserve a special place in GPU Hell.

GeForce FX 5200 and FX5500 w/ 64-bit memory: All of them seem to struggle, especially at resolutions above 1024x768. Full screen video playback, even simple DVD/MPEG2, is very choppy with desktop composition enabled. Not sure how the 128-bit versions would fare. The Basic/classic themes definitely run better on these cards.

GeForce 6150 (IGP): No matter if it's a laptop or desktop, all of them struggle with Aero starting at around 1680x1050. By 1080p, it's very noticeable, especially when you have more than a few windows open. Window drags and browser scrolling are not smooth at all.

GeForce 6200: Some of the 64-bit editions struggle with Aero at 1080p. Turning off transparency and window shadows (but keeping desktop composition on) will smoothen things out. The 128-bit variants are fine.

GeForce 7050 and 7100 (IGP): Yep, I've even seen these get a little choppy with Aero at 1080p. Running the memory in dual channel mode and/or disabling transparency (but keeping desktop composition on) generally clears things up.

GMA 950: Seems to really depend on how the manufacturer implements it. I've seen some 800MHz FSB desktops struggle with Aero Glass even at 1280x800. Yet, I've seen some 667MHz FSB laptops do just fine at 1440x900. I have noticed that running the FSB:DRAM at 1:2 with dual channel memory seems to help a lot with GMA950 Aero performance. One of my laptops has a 667MHz FSB Core2 with dual channel DDR2-667. It has very good Aero Glass performance at its native resolution of 1280x800. Even 720p full screen Netflix and YouTube video is completely smooth.

GMA 3000 (Q965): Most of these are good, but I have seen some single-channel systems with this IGP struggle a little with Aero at 1080p. Dual-channel memory makes it OK. The X3000 is much, much faster than the vanilla 3000 and has no problem even in single-channel mode.

GMA 500 (Atom): One of the worst offenders. It's a good thing those crappy netbooks only had 1024x600 screens, because anything higher than that via an external monitor causes performance to tank.

GMA 3150 (Atom): Much better than the GMA 500 and generally on par with properly implemented GMA950. I think Atom's single channel IMC is what holds it back the most.

P6 chip. Triple the speed of the Pentium.
Tualatin: PIII-S @ 1628 MHz | QDI Advance 12T | 2GB DDR-310 | 6800GT | X-Fi | 500GB HDD | 3DMark01: 14,059
Dothan: PM @ 2720 MHz | MSI Speedster FA4 | 2GB DDR2-544 | GTX-280 | X-Fi | 500GB SSD | 3DMark01: 42,148

Reply 186 of 249, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
gdjacobs wrote:

Requests for information from IHV and OEM partners.

Why? When customers complain about poor Aero support, the IHV/OEM already know their power management is shit. They won't go to MS for that.

gdjacobs wrote:

Direct ticket creation for customers who pay for Microsoft support.

How does that happen?
The AMD IGP we're discussing here wasn't launched until 2007, so it will only be in systems with Windows Vista pre-installed.
And since it's a low-budget laptop, it's not the kind that organizations would buy, and put their own volume-licensed Windows on there.
So how would a version of Windows with Microsoft support even end up on such a machine?
And what are the odds of someone who goes as far as replacing the pre-installed OS not being able to figure out for themselves that they need to change the power management settings for better Aero performance, and requiring a call to Microsoft support?

gdjacobs wrote:

Potentially from community engagement efforts (like Microsoft Community).

Very small chance of that, given the target demographic (low-budget laptops with pre-installed Windows).

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/

Reply 187 of 249, by Falcosoft

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

The AMD IGP we're discussing here wasn't launched until 2007, so it will only be in systems with Windows Vista pre-installed.

No, I had the PC with this IGP way before Vista release. It had XP preinstalled on it.
Here's review of it from 2006.06.28:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1982989,00.asp
I swear I also saw yesterday at TechpowerUp a wrong release date for ATI Xpress 1150 (2007) but it seems they have corrected it (2006.05.23):
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/681/radeon-xpress-1150-igp
Wikipedia also seems to confirm this (though it is listed as RS485/ATI Radeon Xpress 1150):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ATI_chipsets

Website, Facebook, Youtube
Falcosoft Midi Player + Munt VSTi + BassMidi VSTi topic

Reply 188 of 249, by 95DosBox

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member
Standard Def Steve wrote:
I've definitely seen Aero Glass in struggle with certain video cards and IGPs. On any system with a video card that isn't comple […]
Show full quote

I've definitely seen Aero Glass in struggle with certain video cards and IGPs. On any system with a video card that isn't complete crap, Aero Glass is definitely far more efficient than Basic/Classic. However, the following video cards and IGPs deserve a special place in GPU Hell.

GeForce FX 5200 and FX5500 w/ 64-bit memory: All of them seem to struggle, especially at resolutions above 1024x768. Full screen video playback, even simple DVD/MPEG2, is very choppy with desktop composition enabled. Not sure how the 128-bit versions would fare. The Basic/classic themes definitely run better on these cards.

GeForce 6150 (IGP): No matter if it's a laptop or desktop, all of them struggle with Aero starting at around 1680x1050. By 1080p, it's very noticeable, especially when you have more than a few windows open. Window drags and browser scrolling are not smooth at all.

GeForce 6200: Some of the 64-bit editions struggle with Aero at 1080p. Turning off transparency and window shadows (but keeping desktop composition on) will smoothen things out. The 128-bit variants are fine.

GeForce 7050 and 7100 (IGP): Yep, I've even seen these get a little choppy with Aero at 1080p. Running the memory in dual channel mode and/or disabling transparency (but keeping desktop composition on) generally clears things up.

GMA 950: Seems to really depend on how the manufacturer implements it. I've seen some 800MHz FSB desktops struggle with Aero Glass even at 1280x800. Yet, I've seen some 667MHz FSB laptops do just fine at 1440x900. I have noticed that running the FSB:DRAM at 1:2 with dual channel memory seems to help a lot with GMA950 Aero performance. One of my laptops has a 667MHz FSB Core2 with dual channel DDR2-667. It has very good Aero Glass performance at its native resolution of 1280x800. Even 720p full screen Netflix and YouTube video is completely smooth.

GMA 3000 (Q965): Most of these are good, but I have seen some single-channel systems with this IGP struggle a little with Aero at 1080p. Dual-channel memory makes it OK. The X3000 is much, much faster than the vanilla 3000 and has no problem even in single-channel mode.

GMA 500 (Atom): One of the worst offenders. It's a good thing those crappy netbooks only had 1024x600 screens, because anything higher than that via an external monitor causes performance to tank.

GMA 3150 (Atom): Much better than the GMA 500 and generally on par with properly implemented GMA950. I think Atom's single channel IMC is what holds it back the most.

Just enabled it on AMD 6000 series graphics card. No noticeable sluggishness. I would only disable the window animation for the minimize and maximize that seems to add some intentional delay. Otherwise still quite snappy as the Windows Classical user interface. Also Quick Launch works with it so I will now say aesthetically it enhances it. Will have to test it on the Intel HD Graphics to see if it can handle it.

Compared to Windows 7, I think the Vista SP2 DX11 seems more responsive on a clean install. Now that I can still use the Quick Launch it is much easier to navigate and get things done quickly. I also noticed my onboard USB 3.0 seems to be supported. Only the Intel ones lack the USB 3.0 drivers so Vista is still usable with 3rd party USB 3.0. I will have to test 3rd party USB 3.0 PCIe cards to see how fast they are in comparison. Now all that's needed is some sort of Windows 7 SP1 compatibility layer and Vista is good to go.

Reply 189 of 249, by Presbytier

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

I always stuck with classic view, heck I still do even on my Windows 7 work PC as my companies PC are nearly 10 years old with too little ram.

"Never pay more than 20 dollars for a computer game" - Guybrush Threepwood

Reply 190 of 249, by Azarien

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Standard Def Steve wrote:

GMA 3150 (Atom): Much better than the GMA 500 and generally on par with properly implemented GMA950.

If 3150 is much better then I can't imagine how bad was GMA 500.

Reply 191 of 249, by calvin

User metadata
Rank Member
Rank
Member

GMA 500 wasn't actually Intel at all - it was a rebranded PowerVR.

2xP2 450, 512 MB SDR, GeForce DDR, Asus P2B-D, Windows 2000
P3 866, 512 MB RDRAM, Radeon X1650, Dell Dimension XPS B866, Windows 7
M2 @ 250 MHz, 64 MB SDE, SiS5598, Compaq Presario 2286, Windows 98

Reply 192 of 249, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
calvin wrote:

GMA 500 wasn't actually Intel at all - it was a rebranded PowerVR.

With drivers to match. 😒

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder

Reply 193 of 249, by GeorgeMan

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I actually consider Vista as Retro.
It's not a matter of age; it's a matter of rarity!

I think that one can have only two retro systems and have covered 99,9% of all old games.
1) A fast PC that supports XP (something like a Core i3 Sandybridge, 4GB RAM, any fast GPU up to Radeon 7950/Nvidia 780).
This would have XP SP3 installed with ALL the XP/Emulator/GOG stuff. Second OS of choice for me is Vista to cover the DX10 period, but that's me. If anyone doesn't have a more recent daily machine, it would be used also as a daily driver combined with Windows 7/10.

2) A super7 system (K6-2+, 128-256MB RAM, S3 graphics, VoodooSLI, ISA sound).
This would have 98SE to run 3D games from 1996-2000 that do not run natively (or with a glide wrapper) under XP, but also DOS games. It could also be slowed down to 386 levels for those speed-sensitive old games.

Do Vista is definitely a part of retro in my mind nowadays. 😀

Retro1: Athlon XP 3200+ @Arctic cooler | ASUS A7V600 | Radeon 9800XXL 128MB | SB Audigy 2 ZS | 160GB IDE HDD | Win98SE & XP
Retro2: under construction with a PIII 933 or a Tualatin Celeron 1200 and a GF2 GTS 32MB

Reply 194 of 249, by Tetrium

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++

Being considered retro has nothing to do with rarity.
Suppose some old stash of 100 million original IBM 8088 PCs were found, no leaking batteries, ready to go!
Would that make these IBM 8088 systems not retro anymore? Of course not.

Retro does have a lot to do with age or perhaps era, though I think that's not all of it.

Whats missing in your collections?
My retro rigs (old topic)
Interesting Vogons threads (links to Vogonswiki)
Report spammers here!

Reply 195 of 249, by clueless1

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

How about this: retro is personal to each individual. If it brings on a feeling of nostalgia for that individual, then it is retro for them.

The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.
OPL3 FM vs. Roland MT-32 vs. General MIDI DOS Game Comparison
Let's benchmark our systems with cache disabled
DOS PCI Graphics Card Benchmarks

Reply 196 of 249, by Jade Falcon

User metadata
Rank BANNED
Rank
BANNED
clueless1 wrote:

How about this: retro is personal to each individual. If it brings on a feeling of nostalgia for that individual, then it is retro for them.

I don't think I have ever felt nostalgic about any old system or OS, but I sure as heck have fun with older systems.

Similar to what you said, we all have are own opinions of things and what is and is not retro is often a personal thing.
Over at HWbot am3 and 775 is seen as retro yet not so much here. Its all relevant.

Reply 197 of 249, by firage

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

It's retro as soon as a person's main motivation for using it is to recreate a past experience. Vista, as a free choice for the sake of itself, is retro by now.

My big-red-switch 486

Reply 198 of 249, by liqmat

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

It is retro because Blizzard says so! haha Article came across my news feed today.

https://www.pcmag.com/news/355057/blizzard-en … ws-xp-and-vista

Last edited by liqmat on 2017-07-20, 17:51. Edited 1 time in total.

(っ•́。•́)♪♬

Reply 199 of 249, by Scali

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t
liqmat wrote:

It is retro because Blizard says so! haha Article came across my news feed today.

https://www.pcmag.com/news/355057/blizzard-en … ws-xp-and-vista

As many others seem to have done, they stop support for Vista at the same time of XP. Which is somewhat strange from a technical standpoint. Firstly, because Vista is a few years newer, and should maintain support longer. Secondly, since Vista is much closer to Windows 7 than it is to XP, in terms of technology.

http://scalibq.wordpress.com/just-keeping-it- … ro-programming/