There's been a lot of cases where the compatibility features have failed, I believe Diablo was affected, along with several other popular old games.
with vista i find it easy to browse through my files and find things quickly but for some reason it keeps telling me i need to delete things because i got no recovery left and when it comes up it tells me the only program i can delete is recycle bin which gives me 0bytes of recovery if i delete it. Also when ever i right click on a item on my desktop it says "windows explorer has encountered a problem" "windows explorer willl now restart"
No, it goes to around 3.5 GB, unless you go with using PAE, or Physical Address Extension...but that gets messy (it is supported in the CPU) And to be clear, XP 32 bit, and Vista 32 bit, see this problem. Its not Window's fault, it's a design flaw in OSes and 32bit in general. To be honest, I see no perf hit between XP and Vista...once you feed Vista its 4 GB of RAM and a dual or quad core CPU, it runs fine. Those seeing perf hits in Vista probably are running on older hardware. Does vista have more background stuff running? Yes. That's why it needs a better CPU, such as a quad core. Win7 promises to be more performant. So, having the chance to talk to developers who release software for public use (and being one who does as well) a funny "downside" I heard was - "Every time I release software and allow some bug to get in, that bug suddenly becomes a feature, and I have to support it." Simply put, when they developed Diablo, they did not follow proper coding guidlines, and instead took the quick and easy path. They used some loophole to get user info or system info, or whatever. Come windows Vista, which is a HUGELY different OS, suddenly that bug is gone, and the software fails. Point being, Windows is so widely used, and third party developers so bad, that if we allow something into the open, it has to always be supported from then on, if we want a compatability story. Reinstall your brain. Oh wait. You never had one.
Wow. I must be magical. I can type, breath, spell and outsmart you, all without a brain. Imagine what I could do if I had one. Try thinking out your insults more, with that squishy thing between your ears.
Try actually saying something intelligent in threads. If you had a brain, or at least knew how to use one...my god, you could actually contribute to threads, instead of posting spam.
32-bit address space Actually, 32-bit address space can go up to 4 GB of RAM, but address space is used up by video card memory, which is why on many computers it appears to be 3.5 GB.
^What, spam like this? Complaining about my existence? Or maybe you're too distracted with your E-peen.
rampantandroid buddy, if you are selling a product and your customer thinks it stinks, there is no point lecturing them that they 'just don't get'. Joe Public doesn't give a shit about programming, or if it's the fault of the OS or the game. All they know is they went to buy a new PC, and every PC being sold in the big name stores had Vista on it. So they are, basically, forced to buy Vista. Then suddenly a bunch of games and apps they had don't work. XP worked fine for them, Vista doesn't. Joe Public is not happy.
Blizzard isn't a third party... And the issue was with vista. some people released a quickfix, but vista shouldn't have issues anyway. I mean, 'compatibility' is apparently a feature.
Quote: In technical terms, as someone already posted in here (hence why I didn't post it) OTHER things aside from RAM get mapped into address space. Stuff like the sound card, video card, registers and so forth. The end result is, SURE, it is 32bit and can address 4294967296 bytes. But of those 4294967296 bytes, not all get mapped 1:1 with RAM. Don't lecture me on how the system works, when I already know, and have posted many times on this forum before explaining it. Next time, I'll make sure to repeat what people have already said though... I'm placing the blame squarely where it belongs - something MS has been too scared to do - and which is why we're being sued because we bowed to Intel's wishes. It's time MS stopped pussy footing around, and stood up for our own beliefs, instead of taking the blame for everyone else, just so all the major companies continue to like us. Its time we stop conforming, ffs. Its time we actually tell hardware companies where to go next - like, gee. Put all drivers in ROM, so I can just install my sound card and have it work without worrying about drivers (gee, plug n play?) Joe public isn't happy, I know..but it happens. It happens when a SINGLE OS is designed to work for 70% of all users out there. It really does, because each user wants to use their own special hardware for their own programs. We cannot control what they use it on, so we make it work on everything. Except every now and then, we miss something...because it is impossible to test all 1 billion programs out there to see if it still fucking works. Its one reason Apple has an advantage - they don't cater to EVERYONE. They picked a small subset, and went with it. Windows Mobile suffers the same problem. Its a design flaw. Compatability is something we attempt when we change the codebase of the OS. The fact any programs still work is amazing, but the public has a fit when their little program doesn't work. Forget the other 50 programs they have that still work. We should get 100%! Yeah! Do I wish we'd get 100%? Yes. Is that goal realistic? Nope. Anyone who thinks it is, is either delusional or uninformed (or some combination.) I'll repeat it again: the blame goes to developers not using our publicly exposed interfaces (...and if you want to throw blame at MS, fine. We're to blame for letting a bug get into the open for an OS with MILLIONS of lines of code.) We document them (our interfaces and such) for a reason, and third party developers take a shorter easier path. Sure, it works now...but not in 10 years. But no one plays 10 year old games, right? Right? And, yes. Blizzard is a 3PD. MS is the 1PD, as MS created Windows. Blizzard is not directly tied to Windows in any way, and are thus a 3PD. They make stuff FOR windows, they do not CONTRIBUTE to Windows.
No one expects 100% compatibility from a new OS. The issue isn't really about whats wrong with Vista, the issue is why was Vista created? XP worked. Most people were happy. Now I know that some developers had problem with the technical limitations of XP, but what percentage of the userbase did that concern? 1% maybe? XP had gotten to the point that the major problems had been patched out, people were used to it, then we wake up one morning and MS has just decided it's time for the world to upgrade or go buy a Mac. How many apps out there are only possible with Vista? Do people need Vista to read emails, write spreadsheets or play games? No. I think that is part of the Vista hate too, we had no real choice. I'm not saying the world should keep using XP forever, but now was not the time to move on.
I remember when XP first came out and people bitched about it to no end. Now people are talking as if XP is perfect. Vista will be fine as soon as they release more updates and service packs.
XP was the odd OS out. It was supposed to be replaced by longhorn within 3 years or so, to the best of my knowledge...but the reset fucked that up. Windows is getting back to a 3 year release cycle. XP SP2 was a MASSIVE security upgrade. It took windows from swiss cheese to being secure. Vista MORE than one-upped XP SP2 in security - as it was based on security. Win7 is...well, go look at the engineering blog on it.
