PDA

View Full Version : Vista pricing leaked



Nicolas Jordan
12-29-2006, 03:58 PM
I'm sure some of you are aware of this already but I thought I would post it anyway for those who didn't. Looks like the prices for Vista were leaked. Looks like some versions will be a bit pricey. Heres the link: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=124

Lightwolf
12-29-2006, 04:09 PM
Leaked? The official pricing was announced a couple of weeks ago and some retailers even have it in their shelves already.

Then again... I'd wait until SP1 for Vista is released ;)

Cheers,
Mike

meatycheesyboy
12-29-2006, 04:24 PM
Yes, if you look at the date on that article, it's 4 months old.

Nicolas Jordan
12-29-2006, 04:51 PM
Yes, if you look at the date on that article, it's 4 months old.

Your right, I guess that article is not very current. :foreheads

prospector
12-30-2006, 10:15 AM
Expensive

lilrayray77
12-30-2006, 10:18 AM
Expensive
Especially for something that is so bloated, and probably unstable. Have they finally made some big changes? Or is it still based on NT (or whatever XP and before were based on)?

mrunion
12-31-2006, 10:05 AM
I'd move to Linux (what I did) or buy a Mac. My Windows days are over. (And I'm a Microsoft Certified Professional! Programming for Windows pays the bills!)

Speedmonk42
12-31-2006, 01:22 PM
I just don't see Apple/Mac as a real alternative. They are just as happy to own people with DRM and rip off thier customers with RAM 3 times the going rate.

As far as integrity or freedom go, Apple is not the answer.

Qslugs
01-01-2007, 01:01 PM
Mac ram isn't that expensive. At least nothing to complain about. Look for any other system using ddr2 ECC ram and compare prices. I bet you will find that the price difference is about the same a a case of domestic vs a really good import beer.

kopperdrake
01-01-2007, 04:34 PM
Have to admit with my experiences of PCs going belly up for various reasons over the last couple of weeks I'm so tempted to go Mac for at least my main computer in the future. I even don't care that it costs a bit more if I spend less time scratching my head over problems...only worry is what software I will no longer be able to run (Lightwave plugins etc).

hrgiger
01-01-2007, 04:38 PM
only worry is what software I will no longer be able to run (Lightwave plugins etc).

That's always been my reason for going pc. Until everyone starts making plugs for the Mac platform, that won't change.

The windows pricing is unfortunate but either it'll be worth the price (which I'm initially doubting) or I'll keep using XP for the time being until the cost is justified.

avkills
01-01-2007, 04:47 PM
I just don't see Apple/Mac as a real alternative. They are just as happy to own people with DRM and rip off thier customers with RAM 3 times the going rate.

As far as integrity or freedom go, Apple is not the answer.


Yes it really sucks that I can run OS X and WindowsXP on my MacBookPro. ;)

What does Apple's iTunes DRM have anything to do with LW? Not only that, the DRM really doesn't get in your way. I have yet to get stopped from burning my purchased songs to CD. Trust me when I say Microsoft has much bigger DRM headaches coming around the corner than Apple.

Nobody really buys RAM from Apple, except the MacPro since the pricing is pretty much the same everywhere for it.

The only reason not to go Mac is if you have a lot of money invested in Win only plug-ins, but then again, you could just run Windows and do your LW stuff that way.

-mark

Paul_Boland
01-03-2007, 12:36 PM
Especially for something that is so bloated, and probably unstable. Have they finally made some big changes? Or is it still based on NT (or whatever XP and before were based on)?

As a gamer, I have to say that I'm very **** impressed by Vista and where it's helping to take the future of PC gaming. Vista is the first operating system that I'm actually excited about! The videos and screen shots and the info I'm getting all says that Vista is going to be a major leap forward for the PC as a gaming platform.

The only problem is, it's expensive and to get the real kicks out of it, you need a Direct X 10 graphics card and they are VERY expensive!!!!

lilrayray77
01-03-2007, 01:42 PM
As a gamer, I have to say that I'm very **** impressed by Vista and where it's helping to take the future of PC gaming. Vista is the first operating system that I'm actually excited about! The videos and screen shots and the info I'm getting all says that Vista is going to be a major leap forward for the PC as a gaming platform.

The only problem is, it's expensive and to get the real kicks out of it, you need a Direct X 10 graphics card and they are VERY expensive!!!!


DX 10 is supposed to somewhat of a leap, but even with my new 8800 (DX 10 support), I doubt Ill be getting Vista anytime soon. Games just arent important enough for the $300+ price tag and slower overall system performance.

A question I havent had answered, is Vista using the same core as XP or have they finally updated everything?

geothefaust
01-03-2007, 02:35 PM
I question the viability of Vista as a platform for 3D applications, with it's lack luster support for OGL.

lots
01-03-2007, 03:05 PM
There is a change in how the kernel handles some drivers. For example, DX10 is so wildly different in terms of interacting with hardware than older versions of DX.

For example, in Windows XP, and older, the video drivers were kernel modules. They ran in kernel space and had direct access to hardware. This is faster then how vista interacts with the video drivers, however it is less stable. If, say, a video driver crashes, it corrupts the kernel and the whole system becomes unstable. Possibly resulting in a crash, or other problem.

In Vista, the video driver lives in user space. This is separate from kernel space and has no effect on the system when it crashes. However, it is a slower way to interact with the hardware, as any video driver interaction has to go through a few extra steps to reach the hardware. It is slower, but ideally more stable. This is also similar to how OSX interacts with graphics hardware. So we may also see a smaller difference in drivers from nvidia and ATI. Which wouldn't be a bad thing for ATI :P

Though, when it comes to core changes outside of what I've mentioned, I dont see any reason for MS to change anything aside from an evolutionary step. It would cost more time and money to completly scrap the current core of the OS (I'd imagine that Vista is derived from the Windows Server 2003 family). instead, I would think that MS spent most of its time modernizing the dated aspects of Windows. Mainly focusing on stability and security would be my guess.

The other major change in the OS is likely the way users are handled. It seems that the OS takes more of a linux/unix like approach to users than previous versions. Which isn't bad. But its still got a ways to go....

Fausto
01-03-2007, 04:36 PM
DX 10 is supposed to somewhat of a leap, but even with my new 8800 (DX 10 support), I doubt Ill be getting Vista anytime soon. Games just arent important enough for the $300+ price tag and slower overall system performance.

A question I havent had answered, is Vista using the same core as XP or have they finally updated everything?

I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but in our tests a dozen or so work stations, Vista is much faster. Even with the new fancy aero UI, Vista is considerably quicker than XP on the same hardware, including memory.

lilrayray77
01-03-2007, 05:57 PM
I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but in our tests a dozen or so work stations, Vista is much faster. Even with the new fancy aero UI, Vista is considerably quicker than XP on the same hardware, including memory.

I installed the beta on a short period on a spare HDD a while back and it wasnt quite as responsive as XP has been for me. I didnt try any serious cpu/ram guzzling apps, so it could perform better in those areas.

lots
01-03-2007, 11:56 PM
If you kept up with the beta revisions, you would have noticed that each release was faster and faster.

You are right, the first few betas for vista, were not quite as fast. But as is with ALL beta software, it is not a good benchmark for the final revision software performance.

I've been part of quite a few beta programs, and the trend seems to be the more recent the release, the faster overall the software is.

I have not experienced Vista first hand, but I have seen reports of speed improvements during the beta cycle. Naturally I will be doing my own testing with it later, no doubt. But this will likely be with final release versions.

lilrayray77
01-04-2007, 04:34 AM
If you kept up with the beta revisions, you would have noticed that each release was faster and faster.

You are right, the first few betas for vista, were not quite as fast. But as is with ALL beta software, it is not a good benchmark for the final revision software performance.

I've been part of quite a few beta programs, and the trend seems to be the more recent the release, the faster overall the software is.

I have not experienced Vista first hand, but I have seen reports of speed improvements during the beta cycle. Naturally I will be doing my own testing with it later, no doubt. But this will likely be with final release versions.

And there's a logical explenation. Makes sense, as we have seen that happen in the past with our own Lightwave betas.

lots
01-04-2007, 06:53 AM
I do agree, nothing in vista screams "BUY IT NOW!!!" to me :) Alot of the features that were going to be vista only, are now not even ready for the release, and many of them are backported to XP anyway.. So as long as you don't need Areo, you should be good for a while longer.

Maybe one day MS will get rid of registry :P

Bog
01-04-2007, 08:47 AM
I do agree, nothing in vista screams "BUY IT NOW!!!" to me :)

Not even the ability to export textured LightWave Models into it's native 3D forumat?

I am shameless. I do apologise.

redlum
01-05-2007, 11:59 AM
I just don't see Apple/Mac as a real alternative. They are just as happy to own people with DRM and rip off thier customers with RAM 3 times the going rate.

As far as integrity or freedom go, Apple is not the answer.

That is true, but I always get my macs with the standard RAM, then purchase more RAM from a different company. I save hundreds of dollars this way and have never had any problems. Larger or additional hard drive? - same thing.

also, I'm using a super fast PC at work with a pre release of Vista. It looks very much like OSX did serveral years ago with some extra animated things on the side. It still freezes like XP and our office might not get it because of the security issues. It's like the rest of m$ -- Apps for the unwashed masses.

coremi
01-05-2007, 12:06 PM
everything in Vista screems buy Win XP now, cuase i work in the field and a big distribuitor in my small country told that, there is a big rumor that Microsoft will stop burning disc with Win Xp, so they can sell Vista better. There is a chance Win XP will be supported for a long time, but no more available on the store to buy :)

Fausto
01-07-2007, 12:38 AM
It's like the rest of m$ -- Apps for the unwashed masses.

Yeah, this is the kind of arrogant, uninformed comment one comes to expect from mac fanatics. I'm surprised you also didn't refer to us a mouth breathers.

Have you ever heard the adage, it's the driver not the car? Or it's the Indian, not the arrow? If your XP installation isn't functioning right it isn't the OS or the computer's fault, more likely it's because of you. We have dozens of workstations and several servers all running XP/XP64 and we have very few issues, and I personally haven't seen a crash in XP or in Vista for that matter, for a very long time. The release candidate is very stable and Vista absolutely rocks.

1)Windows number one in sales and installations. 94% of the desktop market, apple 2.1%
2)Office any flavour number one in sales.
3)SQL Server, top 3 in sales, SQL 2005 rated top 2 DB Platform.
4)XP Server, top 2 server platform
Granted they don't do everything right, but this is a big company with thousands of employees all doing their best to bring innovation and improvement to their customers. Sometimes the attack MS at every turn for every thing they do gets old.

Remember Microsoft develop hundreds of software applications, not a couple or a few like some other developers and they're into many other diverse businesses including hardware. What they've accomplished is truly staggering and impressive.. They do deserve some credit on occasion.

coremi
01-07-2007, 01:57 AM
i'm not a fan, but MS is fantastic, all their products have a high degree of quality, including the cheapest Mouse or Keyboard. Windows XP SP2 is very very stable, i install maybe 5 computers a day, and with good hardware, you have absolutly no problems. Things get nasty when u buy cheap hardware thinking that it has the same GPU, but it cheaper cause its No Name video card, big mistake, same goes for memory, and most important the mainboard.

Speedmonk42
01-07-2007, 03:45 AM
What they've accomplished is truly staggering and impressive.. They do deserve some credit on occasion.
------------------------------------

I am no fan of Microsoft, but I have to agree with this. I met this woman who was going to buy a mac, she was complaining about Windows going on and on, she was using Win95. My god, she just couldn't see the how amazing it was that she was using an os written probably in 1993, and it still worked at all. Not to mention that the computer was upgraded to Win95, so was even older.

I would like to see someone use a Mac from 1993. Good Luck.

Speedmonk42
01-07-2007, 03:52 AM
It still freezes like XP and our office might not get it because of the security issues. It's like the rest of m$ -- Apps for the unwashed masses.
------------------

1. It still freezes. I never have this happen. Not for years. The Macs I use at work crash more often using CS2.

2. Unwashed masses. This is a disturbing statement. It is based in belief, faith. Its trendy Mac cafe wanker talk.

3. As for the RAM and Hard drives, well you are the 1 in 100 mac user that is not being cornholed by their dealer. I ranted for years telling the idiots in my department not to buy this stuff like RAM ect... Until one day the store screwed up and put standard SKU's on the invoice. I went on the web and showed them the parts they were buying for $289 could be bought for $69 at a PC store.

"But its special Mac RAM"

"NO IT *&^(*^ING is not"

CAClark
01-07-2007, 05:14 AM
I tried RC1 and was impressed, but LW was not useable at all, mainly due to selection redraw speeds being extremely slow (opengl is very slow too, or was rather).

How does Vista hande LW in final form? I for one am going to go with vista as soon as LW is good to go in it.

Cheers!

redlum
01-07-2007, 07:27 AM
Yeah, this is the kind of arrogant, uninformed comment one comes to expect from mac fanatics. I'm surprised you also didn't refer to us a mouth breathers...

hmm, must have touched a nerver. Sorry mate, didn't want to start a flame war. Don't take comments in this forum so personally. Besides, I thought that since apple started using intel that the choice is not between which OS you use , but do you want a computer that runs one, or all of them.


94% of the desktop market
that is the unwashed masses I referred to.


I'm surprised you also didn't refer to us a mouth breathers
No, I don't use that kind of language. In face, I use XP 8 hours a day at work, then go home and use OSX doing freelance work, book keeping, email, taxes, and all the other things that people usually do on the computer.


Arrogant, uninformed
Not likely. Personally I compare the debate between mac and pc like rush hour traffic. We are all sitting at the same traffic light, waiting for it to change green, but some of use like to be surrounded by expensive german engineering. And in the end we all arrive at the same destination at about the same time.

Cheers.

radams
01-07-2007, 12:31 PM
Hi All,

Well I was able to sit down with some of the LW Dev team at the NT 20th anniversary party....

I brought up Vista support and they all looked a bit shy..and stated that it would NOT be fully supported...why I asked....

OpenGL isn't really viable at this time...and from what MS was saying it may be 6 months or a year before Vista has any real OpenGL support/speed...maybe never...so NT is holding off direct support for it...NT is supporting and working with XP64 which does have proper OpenGL...

So again this is more in MS' court to get it fully up and running...so all 3D apps are going to have issues...unless they are using DirextX for their displays vs OpenGL...think you can see what MS is doing ;)

Cheers,

CAClark
01-07-2007, 12:37 PM
Surely they (NT) should be looking toward DirectX rather then openGL now anyway? While I am liking the increased opnegL peroformance in 9.x, if MS has taken the DX route rather than OGL in Vista, Newtek need to accept that. If NT are happy for LW to become a hobby program and nothing more, then fine, but not to support or fully entertain supporting the current OS that is installed on new PC's for a vast number of machines being sold, I'd question whether 2007/8 will be so bright after all. But then historically Newtek has been good at letting progress get the better of them.

Cheers!

hrgiger
01-07-2007, 12:38 PM
I hope that MS is prepared for the large bashing they will get if they decide not to support OGL. I know I won't buy it if they don't.

I don't know much about it but is it possible that Newtek may one day give us a choice between D3D and OGL?

coremi
01-07-2007, 01:14 PM
I think Vista OpenGL problem will be solved by videocard Driver, like it was with first releases of XP when there were no opengl32.dll before vga driver instalation.

Danic101
01-07-2007, 02:01 PM
I really think NewTek should become much more platform specific. I would like to see LW be completely DX10 based for the windows platform and perhaps have multithreaded Open GL on the OSX side. With the New 8800 series stuff from Nvidia there are many things that could be done using the GPU under DX10 that aren't possible under Open GL Currently.

Danic101
01-07-2007, 02:10 PM
If you guys are interested, these are great articles on DX 10.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1982042,00.asp

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1985155,00.asp


http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1986931,00.asp


http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1989806,00.asp

Fausto
01-07-2007, 09:21 PM
hmm, must have touched a nerver. Sorry mate, didn't want to start a flame war. Don't take comments in this forum so personally. Besides, I thought that since apple started using intel that the choice is not between which OS you use , but do you want a computer that runs one, or all of them.


that is the unwashed masses I referred to.


No, I don't use that kind of language. In face, I use XP 8 hours a day at work, then go home and use OSX doing freelance work, book keeping, email, taxes, and all the other things that people usually do on the computer.


Not likely. Personally I compare the debate between mac and pc like rush hour traffic. We are all sitting at the same traffic light, waiting for it to change green, but some of use like to be surrounded by expensive german engineering. And in the end we all arrive at the same destination at about the same time.

Cheers.

What is truly revealing is you lacked enough foresight to think that people who aren't apple drones wouldn't appreciated being referred to as unwashed. This is a derogatory comment, illustrating that you see yourself, a non-MS software user, as superior to all of us that use MS software.


With respect to your traffic analogy, I've been hearing for a long time (12 years) that mac computers are like a luxury car, and PC's are like a ford fiesta. What's being suggested of course is that all PC's are clunky junk and macs are fast, well put together, high end machines. Of course anyone with half a brain would be able to recognize that this is nothing more than marketing hype, especially now when the hardware that's in them is for all intents and purposes identical. There may have been a base for argument in the past when the hardware was unique, RISC processors and all that but not today, the hardware all comes from the same bins. The argument would have been subjective of course, but at least there was some reason for debate in the past, today itís just BS. Now with all things being equal, there's nothing that separates them, except of course the OS.

radams
01-07-2007, 10:53 PM
Hi All,

Please lets get this thread onto the topic...if you want to do a PC vs Mac thing (again-fruitless endless debate) do it on its own thread topic....

Which for this thread is Vista....

Which from what I've read seems tapped out...

Please if you just can not hold back your platfrom comments please do so some where else....

Personally I'm tired of my D-ck is bigger that yours etc..
Sorry but it really is annoying. There are benefits and negatives to each...why not try using various platforms together...you might find some to cheer about.

As for Vista with LW...since Vista will have limited OpenGL support...for the time being... We'll just have to wait to see how NT & MS will handle this....especially since 3DsMax will support DirectX...hey this may even help the Mac community...Since they will have OpenGL & NOT DirectX... ;)

Back to work you mug rats ;)

Cheers,

Speedmonk42
01-07-2007, 11:07 PM
Personally I'm tired of my D-ck is bigger that yours etc..
Sorry but it really is annoying.
--------------

The problem is that at this point in time, with Vista coming, and Apples version, it may actually be important.

In fact it is important.

I do not want computing to become a glorified version of the kind of services we have from cable companies and cell phone providers. We all know how good those are.

My arguments are not for or against either platform. They are against mis information about both.

Often what Mac users do not realize when I am complaining about Apple is that I do so on their behalf. I don't care which computer you use, I don't think you shoudl be ripped off for you using it. And trust me on a regular basis they are getting ripped off.

If Apples model on price, or Vistas on control, is the future for computing, then it is tremendously less accessible, and that is a VERY bad thing. Of course what do the unwashed masses need with something like information.

redlum
01-08-2007, 03:49 AM
...With respect to your traffic analogy, I've been hearing for a long time (12 years) that mac computers are like a luxury car, and PC's are like a ford fiesta. What's being suggested of course is that all PC's are clunky junk and macs are fast, well put together, high end machines...

Dude, you're completely missing the point. Boxx makes some really nice stuff. too.

And I agree with radams, let it go. My comments were not to start a flame war. I thought I made it clear that I use both. Go have a beer, take a nap, or better yet, move on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_o9isZY5h0