How about instead of talking about games you talk about windows, programs (as in utilities, not games) and OS's in general. I'm of the opinion in this day and age that a lot of programmers are taking the current power we have for granted. Lets start with the utilities. Look at Norton. Look at Nero. Look at Office for god's sake. Why the hell is a WORD PROCESSOR bloated, slow running, etc, on 'old' hardware. Five years isn't old if all I want to do is one of the most basic things on a computer. If a multi-GIGAHERTZ processor, with a gigabyte of ram, that would make early programmers cream their pants with glee, starts chugging along as it loads bare bones basic utilities, the modern programmers have failed. As fas as OS's, did Vista really improve anything? For most users the answer is no. Vista doesn't improve stability like XP did when most went from 98. Welp... theres eye candy though... but that'll cost you a new computer. Why the hell would anyone want to buy an entire new computer just for eye candy on their OS? Most users are going to get a miniscule amount of new features which they couldn't give a damn about. Sorry to burst bubbles but gamers and power users are minorities now. Also to note: most of this hardware is hardly 'old' considering how little penetration 64bit and dual / quad core have had. I'm actually disappointed 64bit didn't take off like a rocket.
Holy crap Otto, way to show me up by putting it better than I could. You ###### <img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tounge.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":p" border="0" alt="tounge.gif" />
Skulkbait, you're complaining about a market that's nearly three decades old. It's a little late to start complaining, especially when your solution is basically "stop making money" (or "stop innovating", in my opinion). If you were to bring a reasonable alternative solution to a supposed problem, it would receive a response other than "Deal with it". But complaining "I don't want to adapt in a market that is decades old" is only going to get "Deal with it" responses from me.
OttoDestruct, the existence of some bloated software doesn't mean the entire method of upgrading in the PC market is flawed. It's a bit unfair to compare Office with the word processor Doogie Howser used, because Office is far more than just a word processor. Notepad boots up extremely quickly for me, and it's on par with what was available on the older computers you seemed to mention. Windows XP and Vista both can burn CDs and DVDs, but Nero can offer more features for the user. Norton is, admittedly, a very bloated program - but I never said such things didn't exist, nor is Norton being bloated a new thing.
I bought a new computer and went from Windows 2000 to Vista, and wasn't displeased with the update. I had the choice of XP or Vista, and actually purposely chose Vista for the eye candy. I like the Vista interface more than that of Windows XP, and the little features about which you seem to care so little actually are rather pleasing to me. I'm not saying your opinion of the update is invalid, but rather that I am a user (perhaps the only one) who actually prefers the Vista interface over XP.
It's a bit hard to proclaim Dual and Quad core systems a failure when they're still being made and sold. PC gaming is still a rather lucrative business: granted, it's not as popular as the average "I use the Internet loloolol" PC user, but it wasn't really ever that way.
I don't know exactly what's jamming up the works for you two, but I'm only seeing faster speeds in my PC use, not slower. Older systems I used were the "turn on and walk away for a bit" type, yet now I can turn on my PC and start using it within ten seconds. I can connect to the Internet faster than ever before. I can play games at higher frame rates - and at better graphics quality - than at any other time of my life. And my word processor starts up quite quickly, thank you.
What is so unreasonable about wanting programmers to not waste more resources doing the same task?
I mean seriously, do you read my posts or just construct some imaginary StrawBait to argue against? Just look at this: <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't know exactly what's jamming up the works for you two<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Did I ever say that Vista <i>is</i> slower than XP? No. In fact, I went out of my way to make the argument using a hypothetical Vista that was. See: <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And if (<b>notice the if</b>) Vista were similarly encumbered by unnecessary resource hogging, it would be similarly unreasonable to expect people to upgrade to that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Emphasis added so that your advanced resource hungry parsing wetware can find the relevant portion quicker.
That being said: <!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I like the Vista interface more than that of Windows XP, and the little features about which you seem to care so little actually are rather pleasing to me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Features like dropping your network performance to 10% when playing an MP3, something that Microsoft claims as necessary to perform that task (<a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=724" target="_blank">I'm not making this ###### up</a>) despite the fact that no earlier operating system all the way back to 95 needs to do that. But hey, those were horse and buggy systems, onward into the future!
Now before you go taking my jab seriously, I do believe that this was an unintended side effect and that Microsoft will eventually fix it. But the situation does illustrate the kind of thing I'm complaining about.
BlooVillage Fool of UWFJoin Date: 2006-11-09Member: 58497Members
<!--quoteo(post=1655438:date=Oct 12 2007, 12:13 AM:name=sgt.waffles)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(sgt.waffles @ Oct 12 2007, 12:13 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1655438"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Wait, how do i activate user control?!?!?!?!?! SOMEONE PM THIS INFO!!! I NEED TO KNOW!!!
And the goverment can go onto your PC and look for stuff to charge you with? Hmmm i wonder where the term Personnel Computer came from....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Comments
OttoDestruct, the existence of some bloated software doesn't mean the entire method of upgrading in the PC market is flawed. It's a bit unfair to compare Office with the word processor Doogie Howser used, because Office is far more than just a word processor. Notepad boots up extremely quickly for me, and it's on par with what was available on the older computers you seemed to mention. Windows XP and Vista both can burn CDs and DVDs, but Nero can offer more features for the user. Norton is, admittedly, a very bloated program - but I never said such things didn't exist, nor is Norton being bloated a new thing.
I bought a new computer and went from Windows 2000 to Vista, and wasn't displeased with the update. I had the choice of XP or Vista, and actually purposely chose Vista for the eye candy. I like the Vista interface more than that of Windows XP, and the little features about which you seem to care so little actually are rather pleasing to me. I'm not saying your opinion of the update is invalid, but rather that I am a user (perhaps the only one) who actually prefers the Vista interface over XP.
It's a bit hard to proclaim Dual and Quad core systems a failure when they're still being made and sold. PC gaming is still a rather lucrative business: granted, it's not as popular as the average "I use the Internet loloolol" PC user, but it wasn't really ever that way.
I don't know exactly what's jamming up the works for you two, but I'm only seeing faster speeds in my PC use, not slower. Older systems I used were the "turn on and walk away for a bit" type, yet now I can turn on my PC and start using it within ten seconds. I can connect to the Internet faster than ever before. I can play games at higher frame rates - and at better graphics quality - than at any other time of my life. And my word processor starts up quite quickly, thank you.
I mean seriously, do you read my posts or just construct some imaginary StrawBait to argue against?
Just look at this:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I don't know exactly what's jamming up the works for you two<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Did I ever say that Vista <i>is</i> slower than XP? No. In fact, I went out of my way to make the argument using a hypothetical Vista that was. See:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->And if (<b>notice the if</b>) Vista were similarly encumbered by unnecessary resource hogging, it would be similarly unreasonable to expect people to upgrade to that.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Emphasis added so that your advanced resource hungry parsing wetware can find the relevant portion quicker.
That being said:
<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I like the Vista interface more than that of Windows XP, and the little features about which you seem to care so little actually are rather pleasing to me.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Features like dropping your network performance to 10% when playing an MP3, something that Microsoft claims as necessary to perform that task (<a href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=724" target="_blank">I'm not making this ###### up</a>) despite the fact that no earlier operating system all the way back to 95 needs to do that. But hey, those were horse and buggy systems, onward into the future!
Now before you go taking my jab seriously, I do believe that this was an unintended side effect and that Microsoft will eventually fix it. But the situation does illustrate the kind of thing I'm complaining about.
And the goverment can go onto your PC and look for stuff to charge you with? Hmmm i wonder where the term Personnel Computer came from....
And the goverment can go onto your PC and look for stuff to charge you with? Hmmm i wonder where the term Personnel Computer came from....<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Wait... what?