HARI SELDON Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 So, if you bought or upgraded to Vista you've just joined the rest of the fools in the world that follow the pied piper of technology. lol How do you respond to such an empathetic comment? Thanks for your contribution. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
przy Posted August 17, 2008 Share Posted August 17, 2008 Oh Kelly, nice to see you are still trolling around with your pointless banter. I miss your useless information over at the wargamer message boards, I used to get a good laugh out of it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kellysheroes Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Yep just like I get a good laugh out of igmo's myself on those boards. <cheshire cat grin> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 It's my understanding that when you buy a new computer (if you aren't skilled like some of us building your own) that you can request XP INSTEAD of Vista be installed as your operating system. That is only true for some suppliers such as Dell, not on all models, and it costs $100 extra. But yes, having Vista on their computer is a sure sign of somebody who's a computer sheep. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HARI SELDON Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 But yes, having Vista on their computer is a sure sign of somebody who's a computer sheep. BAAAAA From us sheep - A provider of product (Battlefront) should ensure their product works with the newest operating system (vista) and the newest major graphic card (nvidia 8xxx series). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 I always thought it is funny how people rejected Linux based on lack of drivers, reliability and applications, only to see the same people jump on XP64 and Vista beta versions at a time where they had worse drivers, worse reliabilty and didn't run a lot of stuff. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acrashb Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 I always thought it is funny how people rejected Linux I'm writing this from a Vista laptop, with a Sierra Aircard attached to the Bell Canada wireless network. The card won't work from any Linux distribution, because Bell's software only runs on Windows. Tell me again why I should run Linux? It's a nice toy, and has some specific applications, but it is still too far off the mainstream for normal persons to use as a tool, rather than a platform for experimentation, a statement against microsoft, or a cost-saving measure. For example, how well will CMC run under Linux? Vista won't run it - apparently - but it runs most other stuff. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 I'm writing this from a Vista laptop, with a Sierra Aircard attached to the Bell Canada wireless network. The card won't work from any Linux distribution, because Bell's software only runs on Windows. Tell me again why I should run Linux? It's a nice toy, and has some specific applications, but it is still too far off the mainstream for normal persons to use as a tool, rather than a platform for experimentation, a statement against microsoft, or a cost-saving measure. For example, how well will CMC run under Linux? Vista won't run it - apparently - but it runs most other stuff. And that card ran with the early Vista betas and XP64? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acrashb Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 And that card ran with the early Vista betas and XP64? I haven't the slightest idea, because it isn't relevant. It works with the current Vista. It will never work with Linux or any variant thereof with the wireless carrier's management software, which is the case with many or most everyday-use peripherals. I'm not saying Vista is great - it isn't. It is what's being installed by default on most new computers, so any new games need to work with it and the world's most common graphics card manufacturer's products, or said games will fail in the marketplace. I want CMC to succeed, so that I can play it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kellysheroes Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 Where does it say that in the house rules of Battlefront et al? There is no code that I know of that says ALL developers and publishers MUST provide service for EVERY OS it is THIER choice not ours ours is only whether we will buy the product or not and since I have XP I will surely buy it and every other product that THEY decide to support on XP. I'd venture to say the majority of their customers still run and use XP not Vista. Even Bill Gates doesn't want to support Vista any longer lol and if he's ready to put it to bed welp that means it's not worth the hassle of upgrading....need I remind you of the ME edition they put out before XP? If you bought into Vista welp you just got suckered by Bill Gates again is all it's not Battlefronts fault. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 Think about it: rule out the Vista lusers who can't install a real OS, get rid of 98% of the clueless support requests. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HARI SELDON Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 Think about it: rule out the Vista lusers who can't install a real OS, get rid of 98% of the clueless support requests. And Battlefront gets rid of 98% of their customers. Great business model! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogCBrand Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 I'm thinking the vast majority of CMBB users- the ones who would buy CMC- are likely to be still using XP and I don't believe CMC is likely to draw in many new CMBB users- even if it was Vista compatible. We're a small group that is happy with our old stuff while most people are constantly running after the newest and shiniest things to come out. I'm sure if it came down to making CMC and leaving it and CMBB in XP and losing a portion of sales because of that, or going to the time and expense of updating CMBB to Vista to cater to the small fraction that switched to the OS, then I'm sure it required no thought. If they felt that it would only sell enough if they did the swith to Vista, I'm certain they'd just choose not to even bother making CMC. The gain from all that work would be far too little to be worthwhile! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 And Battlefront gets rid of 98% of their customers. Great business model! CMC isn't going to make any money anyway. Arguably it makes sense to follow that up with moves that lower support expenses. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 LOL, I enjoy Vista 64 on my system, it runs everything well except some old software like CMBB. The newer stuff runs great with a E8400 3.0 duo-core, 4 gigs of fast RAM and an 8800 with 512. You only wish you had a system this fast! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acrashb Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 rule out the Vista lusers who can't install a real OS Nice. Come back and play when you have something useful to say. What a person can do and what they're willing to do are not always the same thing. I can build a car from a pile of tubing using a TIG welder, but I won't - I'd rather buy one. Fact: most new computers ship with Vista. Fact: one of battlefront's "house rules" is making money. Conclusion: support Vista to make some more money. I don't believe for a minute that "CMC isn't going to make any money anyway" - unless Moon or another battlefront spokesperson confirms that it is a money-losing labour of love. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 I've built several machines. My current one is a quad-core running Vista64 Ultimate. Why? So I can use all 8 Gb of Ram. My other 3 are running XP. Vista is quite mature and runs all my applications - except CMx1. (8800GTX card.) Microsoft has publicly announced that they will not support XP in the near future. Why would anyone spend their money on an OS which has already been assigned a date of obsolescence? (Note that I intend on running my XP machines for many years beyond that date.) In short, you are exhibiting quite a bit of computer arrogance without knowing why the users want to put Vista on their machines. Regards, Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kellysheroes Posted August 20, 2008 Share Posted August 20, 2008 Why would anyone spend their money on an OS which has already been assigned a date of obsolescence? Microsoft promises to support Windows XP until 2014 by Donald Melanson, posted Jun 24th 2008 at 5:38PM It may finally be starting to move down the availability ladder with computer manufacturers (netbooks and the like aside), but it looks like Microsoft is going to be standing by Windows XP for a good while yet, with it now pledging to support the tried and true OS through 2014. According to Microsoft senior VP Bill Veghte, that support will include security patches and "other critical updates," and he adds that "customers who still need Windows XP will be able to get it," despite plans to stop selling a retail product and stop licensing it directly to PC manufacturers after June 30th. For those keeping track, that'll mean that Microsoft will be supporting Windows XP for a full 13 years since its release -- assuming it doesn't push out that support window again when users refuse to upgrade to Windows 7, that is. Link to that page Looks to me like XP has got MANY more years of SUPPORT before it hits the shelves and you notice the upgrade windows OS is NOT Vista but WINDOWS 7 now. <cheshire cat grin> Vista has taken the path of ME and yep a lot of people fell for it when they should have waited or just had XP installed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 I don't get a couple of you guys, what is keeping me from purchasing another OS when it comes out if I choose to do so? What's keeping me from installing the XP disc I have right here on my desk? Nothing. Other then then fact I like running lots of RAM with Vista 64. In the future if I want a different OS then I will purchase it and run it or just dual boot. It is that simple. This name calling directed at people who are running and enjoying Vista is child like. And then telling me I should have stayed with XP? What the feck? Why should I stay with XP when I like running Vista 64. If you don't like it then by all means keep running XP or whatever else you prefer just as I at the present time enjoy running Vista. If I tire of Vista then I will install something else. Or is more that if you prefer CMBB over CMAK you are just as dumb as those who prefer Vista over XP or such nonsense? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kellysheroes Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 The difference is is that CMAK and CMBB aren't failures like Vista vs XP is. All you have to do is go read across the web at the many reviews and posts about Vista vs XP. Compatibility issues, stability issues etc. etc. These are not issues between CMBB vs CMAK thus that is irrelevent to the conversation. The conversation is about those with Vista wanting Battlefront to support THEM when it's such a small community of people who are even running Vista atm. The majority of users are still running XP, Vista just didn't meet the consumer needs and requirements and became more of a hassle running older games and other programs than it was worth in the extra memory usage abilities. Bill Gates has abandoned Vista more or less for Windows 7 which supposedly will offer more of what the masses want than Vista ever did or would. There were these same paddiwack conversations when ME vs XP began and well all see which OS won out in that debate as well. Final word is if you have Vista and like it, fine by me use it I don't care, but, don't go expecting every developer and publisher to support a lost cause just because you fell for the hype. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jomni Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 I guess Vista users like me should move on and play other games instead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 I have an acquantance who is an exec at EA and he said Vista was the final nail in the coffin for PC-based sports games for them. Madden 10 was just announced as console only. He said the trend was in that direction, but issues with coding on Vista drove them to make the decision 5 or 6 years early. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 I have an acquantance who is an exec at EA and he said Vista was the final nail in the coffin for PC-based sports games for them. Madden 10 was just announced as console only. He said the trend was in that direction, but issues with coding on Vista drove them to make the decision 5 or 6 years early. I don't think it is just Vista that is moving games to console. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abbott Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 Final word is if you have Vista and like it, fine by me use it I don't care, but, don't go expecting every developer and publisher to support a lost cause just because you fell for the hype. LOL, what hype? I enjoy the Vista OS and find it to be a good buy, if in the future I change my mind then I will purchase another OS and run it. Heck, I already own XP and would be running it right now if it wasen't going backwards. But thanks, your final word is real uplifting. LOL! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted August 21, 2008 Share Posted August 21, 2008 I don't get a couple of you guys, what is keeping me from purchasing another OS when it comes out if I choose to do so? What's keeping me from installing the XP disc I have right here on my desk? Nothing. Other then then fact I like running lots of RAM with Vista 64. In the future if I want a different OS then I will purchase it and run it or just dual boot. It is that simple. This name calling directed at people who are running and enjoying Vista is child like. And then telling me I should have stayed with XP? What the feck? Why should I stay with XP when I like running Vista 64. If you don't like it then by all means keep running XP or whatever else you prefer just as I at the present time enjoy running Vista. If I tire of Vista then I will install something else. Or is more that if you prefer CMBB over CMAK you are just as dumb as those who prefer Vista over XP or such nonsense? XP and all other modern 32 bit operating systems do 4 GB and more RAM just fine, except that Mickeysoft removed PAE support (which is the technology required for doing that) in XP SP2. So run XP SP1 or Win2K and you are fine. Let's not forget that Vista might or might not suck, that has nothing to do with CMx1. CMx1 is broken due to NVidia and ATI screwing up the DX10 drivers, not Microsoft. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.