 |
| |
|
|
Jarouik
|
 |
Helsinki, Finland, EU
Dec 2000
time: 07:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by St Leo
I use "app" and "games" instead of Program Files and "leo" instead of "My Documents". There is no chance in hell of me using "My Games" instead of "games" as long as installers let me specify a custom directory while installing. |
Actually, "My Games" is apparently (and hopefully) not going to be the name of an actual folder. From what I've gathered, the idea of Longhorn database file system is that no matter what folder (or what drive) your music, movies, games, software etc. are located, you will have several database views customized to music, games, etc. that will display all files of that type, sorted according to metadata. "My Games" is just the name of the virtual library of all your games...
I think the library idea, transgressing directory structure limitations, is actually very good, provided that it is implemented correctly. You would no longer need to worry about where your files are physically located, and neither would you need additional software to sort out your mp3s in a database. I can see, however, that it will be very long until we are finally free from actually having to worry about directory paths of files... but actually for the first time for a long time, I like the direction Windows is taking, simplifying the user experience instead of just complicating things by adding additional "virtual" folders and views such as control panel, my computer et al, that can be mistaken for actual folders but do not contain any physical files. Database is the way for file systems to go in the future, since the number of data and files on our hard disks is growing too huge to manage...
As for the 3D features, they look cool but seem to offer little in the way of actual improvement. What I would like to see is effects really helping us to use Windows, clarifying and streamlining user experience instead of cheap tricks. I hope they will be researching into how 3D effects could be best used to make visualising the database file system easier.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jarouik
I think the library idea, transgressing directory structure limitations, is actually very good, provided that it is implemented correctly. You would no longer need to worry about where your files are physically located, and neither would you need additional software to sort out your mp3s in a database. I can see, however, that it will be very long until we are finally free from actually having to worry about directory paths of files... but actually for the first time for a long time, I like the direction Windows is taking, simplifying the user experience instead of just complicating things by adding additional "virtual" folders and views such as control panel, my computer et al, that can be mistaken for actual folders but do not contain any physical files. Database is the way for file systems to go in the future, since the number of data and files on our hard disks is growing too huge to manage... |
I agree. 
quote:
As for the 3D features, they look cool but seem to offer little in the way of actual improvement. What I would like to see is effects really helping us to use Windows, clarifying and streamlining user experience instead of cheap tricks. I hope they will be researching into how 3D effects could be best used to make visualising the database file system easier. |
There are other things you can do with it aside from eyecandy. They demonstrated "Virtual Desktops" at WinHEC too.
From ExtremeTech: quote:
This first picture shows the mouse defining one area that will be a virtual desktop. After the area is defined, it's minimized to a small version of the desktop. This isn't an icon, but is fully active – you can drag stuff to it and drop it in, for example. At first blush, it sounds a bit like an undocked Apple OS X Aqua interface, but it behaves differently – there's much more of a sense of a 3D object to each desktop. You keep track of each desktop with small labels that look like flags. Here's one example. |
http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/2/0,3363,sz=1&i=23752,00.jpg
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dv8ed
I think I have enough problems with DirectX that I don't really want it running my basic desktop...
That's ignoring, of course, the hardware requirements of the graphics card. I can just imagine what this is going to be like on integrated video.
Yes, I know integrated video isn't like it used to be, but...
If the graphics card (I will not use the term 'GPU', thanks) isn't powerful enough, does the interface get offloaded back to the processor? Or just hang and create strange visual effects? |
Did you have problems understanding the first post or something?
If your graphics card is not powerful enough, you can't run it. It just won't let you. So if you can't run Tier 2 (DX9), you can try Tier 1 (DX7) which is essentially hardware-based Windows XP-style effects. If you can't even run that, it falls back on the old 2D GDI that Win2K and XP uses.
And what's wrong with using "GPU"? Modern-day GPUs are multi-threaded, programmable, and have more precision than even desktop processors.
By ~2005, integrated chipsets will support DX9. Hell, ATi and Nvidia are both releasing DX9-based integrated graphics in 2003. Via(S3) also have a DX9 chipset in development, and SiS can use its Xabre core.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Koyaanisqatsi
|
 |
of Maine paupers.
May 1999
time: 00:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
Did you have problems understanding the first post or something?
If your graphics card is not powerful enough, you can't run it. |
Given the fact that you never said this in the first post, no, I think my comprehension was just fine. You said there were tiers. You never said people were blocked from using them. My assumption, based on previous MS releases (such as the travesty that was Active Desktop), was that all the bells and whistles would be turned on by default and 99% of the users out there wouldn't know that they could be turned off, much less how to do it or what effect it would have on their system.
quote:
It just won't let you. So if you can't run Tier 2 (DX9), you can try Tier 1 (DX7) which is essentially hardware-based Windows XP-style effects. If you can't even run that, it falls back on the old 2D GDI that Win2K and XP uses. |
That's fine then. It's all I asked.
Although I would still like to see more driver/software/DX compatibility before I depend on it for my primary interface.
quote:
And what's wrong with using "GPU"? Modern-day GPUs are multi-threaded, programmable, and have more precision than even desktop processors. |
"GPU" is a marketing term invented by nVidia. Yeah, modern graphics chipsets are powerful, and most likely even deserve the term, but I don't like it just because it was invented as marketing hype.
quote:
By ~2005, integrated chipsets will support DX9. Hell, ATi and Nvidia are both releasing DX9-based integrated graphics in 2003. Via(S3) also have a DX9 chipset in development, and SiS can use its Xabre core. |
And I already said that integrated video was getting better. That doesn't make it good.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dv8ed
Given the fact that you never said this in the first post, no, I think my comprehension was just fine. You said there were tiers. You never said people were blocked from using them. My assumption, based on previous MS releases (such as the travesty that was Active Desktop), was that all the bells and whistles would be turned on by default and 99% of the users out there wouldn't know that they could be turned off, much less how to do it or what effect it would have on their system. |
This doesn't make sense -- if you based it on previous MS recent releases, you'd remember that stuff like the special effects in XP is determined automatically during the install by detecting the system hardware's capabilities.
And seeing as how it's simply impossible to run the DX9 pixel shading code on non-DX9 hardware, nor run the DX7 code on non-DX7 capable hardware, I thought it would have been obvious that those would only be enabled by default if the system was capable.
quote:
"GPU" is a marketing term invented by nVidia. Yeah, modern graphics chipsets are powerful, and most likely even deserve the term, but I don't like it just because it was invented as marketing hype. |
"CPU" was once a marketing term too, I suppose we shouldn't use that either?
Nvidia calls them GPU, others call them VPUs, it doesn't matter. I call them GPUs because they're not always just video cards, they're frequently being integrated onto the motherboard (see nForce).
quote:
And I already said that integrated video was getting better. That doesn't make it good. |
It makes it good enough for simplistic 3D apps. As impressive as those videos appear, they're actually extremely simple 3D applications that just use simple pixel shading programs. They won't require much graphical horsepower at all.
All it does is generate procedural textures, which is a small portion of what most games can do.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Koyaanisqatsi
|
|
of Maine paupers.
May 1999
time: 00:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
[quote]If the users buy products with craptastic drivers and have problems with it, they can revert to the standard 2D display. It's not MS' fault that SiS can't make decent drivers. |
Um. Isn't that the point of the HCL and driver certification programs?
Besides which, it is MS' problem when they then go and build their software in such a way that it is dependant on crappy drivers.
That's the advantage I was talking about the other day when I said that Apple's closed platform has helped them make better products, by the way.
quote:
I'm also curious as to what constitutes a "DirectX" problem. 
Are you referring to DirectX driver problems, or problems with DirectX? Do you know the difference? |
I'm referring primarily to driver problems. Although if you want to throw badly written software in there, you're welcome to do that as well.
quote:
You're a tech support guy, people only call you when they've got problems. Most people don't have problems, you're not seeing the big picture. |
See, this is the attitude that causes bad software design. "If it works for most people, we don't care about the rest."
I heard one of my favorite "this person is an idiot" quotes a few years ago: "Well, the situation in Africa isn't that bad. I mean, only 15% of the people there are starving. That's not that many compared the the whole population."
Put it this way. At one point, I saw statistics on the calls that came in to the University's help desk last year. The biggest category was not networking, as you might expect since they are really only supposed to provide network support, or even the intranet client, which is a horribly ported Mac application. It was DirectX-related problems.
quote:
And another feature of "My Games", by the way, is to ensure users have the latest drivers for them, since all too often some games require driver updates to function properly. |
Is this determined just by what the latest driver is, or by what the latest driver is that works with all games, or how? I've had to roll back drivers more than once to get them to work with a game...it seems that auto-updating may end up causing problems, although admittedly probably not as many as it would fix.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by dv8ed
Um. Isn't that the point of the HCL and driver certification programs?
Besides which, it is MS' problem when they then go and build their software in such a way that it is dependant on crappy drivers. |
I've never had problems with WHQL-certified drivers in WinXP.
And I'm pretty sure XP warns you if you install non-WHQL drivers...
quote:
I'm referring primarily to driver problems. Although if you want to throw badly written software in there, you're welcome to do that as well.
[quote]See, this is the attitude that causes bad software design. "If it works for most people, we don't care about the rest." |
No, that's a red herring.
The problem is, if people buy bad products with bad drivers, they still blame MS because it's Windows that crashed. Nevermind that Windows passes off hardware interaction to drivers, that the hardware company makes. It's not MS' problem, nor their responsibility, that SiS makes crap drivers. They're doing what they can with fairly exhaustive WHQL-certifications (they take forever to get, they constantly send them back to Nvidia & Co and tell them to fix things), but there will always be people who have problems. It's the nature of complex devices such as computers, and the average person doesn't exactly know what they're doing.
quote:
Put it this way. At one point, I saw statistics on the calls that came in to the University's help desk last year. The biggest category was not networking, as you might expect since they are really only supposed to provide network support, or even the intranet client, which is a horribly ported Mac application. It was DirectX-related problems. |
Again, you do not comprehend the difference between DirectX-related problems and driver problems. They are entirely different things.
One thing MS can fix, the other hardware vendors can fix.
If you've got problems with driver quality, blame the source of the problems, and find another scapegoat besides MS.
FYI, I've always found OpenGL drivers more finicky than DirectX drivers. But that's just me.  Maybe it has to do with all the screwed up extensions OpenGL has...
quote:
Is this determined just by what the latest driver is, or by what the latest driver is that works with all games, or how? I've had to roll back drivers more than once to get them to work with a game...it seems that auto-updating may end up causing problems, although admittedly probably not as many as it would fix. |
It'd update to the latest WHQL-certified drivers.
And, again, XP and above have the convenient driver-rollback settings if you don't like the changes in the new driver.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28.
Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-05-2003 21:28
|