Topic: Windows users will be allowed to downgrade to XP from Win7, skip Vista

[Pestalence_XC]

Um, Office 2007, combined with Vista, there is no need for typing.. a Secretary can just Dictate to the computer.. It releaves stress, Typos, carpo-tunnel syndrome, posture, aggrivation, eyestrain, etc. Vista has a version of Dragon Naturally Speaking or similar program already built in which works with the entire system. on XP, you would have to buy a Voice program like Dragon to accomplish this, but on new systems, the option is already there. Office 2K3 doesn't operate well with Voice Dictation / commands.

Also Office 2K7 offers more file formats that are compatible with different OS, plus it is fully xml /bxml compliant where 2K3 may not display properly, and Office 2k7 has better file compression than previous versions.. granted that a txt file or rtf file is compressed well enough already, there is less chance of corruption of the file.

[Rod ONeal]

Sorry, but anyone still suggesting Vista is missing the point of this thread.

The vast majority of business systems and, even gamers, don't need all of the cpu power being bantered around here. AoC doesn't require 2x295 in SLI. What graphics programs are suggesting 3x SLI (I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm just curious what they are)? Pentium dual cores are still manufactured. The world is bigger than just Microsoft, Nvidea, and Intel. Step outside and look around.    

[Nemesis]

Um, Office 2007, combined with Vista, there is no need for typing.. a Secretary can just Dictate to the computer.. It releaves stress, Typos, carpo-tunnel syndrome, posture, aggrivation, eyestrain, etc. Vista has a version of Dragon Naturally Speaking or similar program already built in which works with the entire system. on XP, you would have to buy a Voice program like Dragon to accomplish this, but on new systems, the option is already there. Office 2K3 doesn't operate well with Voice Dictation / commands.

You just substantially increased retraining costs. Will there be enough productivity gain to offset the costs before the next upgrade?  I have severe doubts of that.

Now is the voice recognition good enough to get punctuation right? Choose the correct homonym?  Use the correct industry specific terms?  How about formatting?  How well does it handle accents?  How much time and effort will the secretary have to expend in correcting errors introduced by the voice recognition system?  How good is it at filtering out extraneous voices and sounds?  If it fails on any of those you likely just decreased performance. 

When you have "trained" it to handle industry specific terms can that "training" be transferred from system to system or are you stuck "retraining" it on each individual system?  More productivity loss that needs to be overcome before you get into profits.

It just doesn't seem likely to be a profitable productivity boosting "improvement" for most people. Just my opinion of course.

I'm sure that there are exceptions.  People with certain handicaps for example I'm sure will welcome this.  People with others (deaf or speech impediments or strong accents) likely won't be able to use it at all. 

Also Office 2K7 offers more file formats that are compatible with different OS, plus it is fully xml /bxml compliant where 2K3 may not display properly, and Office 2k7 has better file compression than previous versions.. granted that a txt file or rtf file is compressed well enough already, there is less chance of corruption of the file.

By default it uses DOCX which Microsoft has scheduled for replacement in the next version with OOXML (assuming they can actually implement OOXML).  Can you set Office 2007 (easily) to save by default in the older DOC format (or in any of those other formats) or are you going to be producing lots of files that can't be read except by Office 2007 meaning replacing all those older systems (or by a plugin for 2003)?

[toasty0]

Sorry, but anyone still suggesting Vista is missing the point of this thread.

The vast majority of business systems and, even gamers, don't need all of the cpu power being bantered around here. AoC doesn't require 2x295 in SLI. What graphics programs are suggesting 3x SLI (I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm just curious what they are)? Pentium dual cores are still manufactured. The world is bigger than just Microsoft, Nvidea, and Intel. Step outside and look around.    

Most businesses don't need the extra power because IT manager "said" they don't need it. The IT manager says this because the manager either does not have the budget or the manpower to implement the upgrade, or both. The IT manager rarely makes this decision based up the business productivity needs of other departments. It is not in his best interest(usually) to respond to those needs until they become critical. It's those same reasons and motivations that currently cause many IT managers to maintain legacy XPpro OS based machines instead of Vista Business or Ultimate OS based machines and NT4 based server networks even thought they know the Vista boxes and Server 03/08 networks are oft times less vulnerable to security exploits are are more effcient for the end user.

Other causes:
Bonuses...
Raises...
Retention...
And an IT department's RIO and Cost of Ownership is not always tied into the other department's RIO and Cost of Ownership.

Then there is the problem of the IT manager dealing with the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it mentality" from other non-tech departments. This is especially true when it comes to IT security. As a subject it is seemingly complex and about as exciting as 3 day old tapioca pudding to the non-techie.

I firmly believe that anytime you can, increase productivity and security. Productivity increases shows a tangable return. Address security is like a good door lock and response. You only know it was worth the slightly extra expense when an intrusion attempt or cyber attack occur. Then you're damn relieved you had upgraded.

[Clark Kent]

Sorry, but anyone still suggesting Vista is missing the point of this thread.

The vast majority of business systems and, even gamers, don't need all of the cpu power being bantered around here. AoC doesn't require 2x295 in SLI. What graphics programs are suggesting 3x SLI (I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm just curious what they are)? Pentium dual cores are still manufactured. The world is bigger than just Microsoft, Nvidea, and Intel. Step outside and look around.    

Most businesses don't need the extra power because IT manager "said" they don't need it. The IT manager says this because the manager either does not have the budget or the manpower to implement the upgrade, or both. The IT manager rarely makes this decision based up the business productivity needs of other departments. It is not in his best interest(usually) to respond to those needs until they become critical. It's those same reasons and motivations that currently cause many IT managers to maintain legacy XPpro OS based machines instead of Vista Business or Ultimate OS based machines and NT4 based server networks even thought they know the Vista boxes and Server 03/08 networks are oft times less vulnerable to security exploits are are more effcient for the end user.

Other causes:
Bonuses...
Raises...
Retention...
And an IT department's RIO and Cost of Ownership is not always tied into the other department's RIO and Cost of Ownership.

Then there is the problem of the IT manager dealing with the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it mentality" from other non-tech departments. This is especially true when it comes to IT security. As a subject it is seemingly complex and about as exciting as 3 day old tapioca pudding to the non-techie.

I firmly believe that anytime you can, increase productivity and security. Productivity increases shows a tangable return. Address security is like a good door lock and response. You only know it was worth the slightly extra expense when an intrusion attempt or cyber attack occur. Then you're damn relieved you had upgraded.

I think there is even more to the issue than you list here.  Take, for instance, my department's issues regarding upgrading computers.  Upgrading to a new OS beyond XP will provide no productivity gains.  Upgrading to a new computer will also net no productivity gains.  It doesn't matter how many new features there are or how many performance tweaks you have built in, it just isn't going to happen.  Those in my department (finance) are for the most part still "trying" to move into the 21st century with the software we already have, let alone maximize the potential of the most current version that's out there (which we don't have).

We largely use excel for our work, and somehow, before I arrived, vlookups formulas and subtotaling was about as advanced as anyone in that department had imagined.  I actually had to debate quite feverishly with my previous supervisor just to even consider introducing the idea of using pivot tables, filters, data consolidation, etc.  macros?  still never touched, and macros in excel are next to useless without the relatively benign and obscolete MS visial basic programming language.  Needless to say, most of the excel work we do is done manually.

Most of the work we do would be served very well with a relational database software, even Access, but that is a long, long long ways off.  There are a number of reasons for this.  For one, convincing non IT minded folks of learning new skills that come with new systems if very very difficult.  They just simply don't want to do it.  Second, our main function is financial reporting for regulatory purposes.  If you had limited staf, with limited time, and a constantly changing game field, would you spend your time analyzing changes in federal and state regulations, which is part of your core duties, or would you send your staff off to learn programming languages, and train in on news software and systems that are constantly evolving?  FInally, there is the political aspect: your staff has new software and new computers that are supposed to make them much more productive- executive leadership knows this.  Hmmm, sounds like your department doesn't need as many people anymore and we can cut costs.  that particular mentality is an extremely short sighted one, but is VERY common.  It's probably the greatest reason I've had thrown back in my face for why we SHOULD NOT implement productivity enhancements- because we may lose our jobs.

[Pestalence_XC]

Um, Office 2007, combined with Vista, there is no need for typing.. a Secretary can just Dictate to the computer.. It releaves stress, Typos, carpo-tunnel syndrome, posture, aggrivation, eyestrain, etc. Vista has a version of Dragon Naturally Speaking or similar program already built in which works with the entire system. on XP, you would have to buy a Voice program like Dragon to accomplish this, but on new systems, the option is already there. Office 2K3 doesn't operate well with Voice Dictation / commands.

You just substantially increased retraining costs. Will there be enough productivity gain to offset the costs before the next upgrade?  I have severe doubts of that.

Now is the voice recognition good enough to get punctuation right? Choose the correct homonym?  Use the correct industry specific terms?  How about formatting?  How well does it handle accents?  How much time and effort will the secretary have to expend in correcting errors introduced by the voice recognition system?  How good is it at filtering out extraneous voices and sounds?  If it fails on any of those you likely just decreased performance. 

When you have "trained" it to handle industry specific terms can that "training" be transferred from system to system or are you stuck "retraining" it on each individual system?  More productivity loss that needs to be overcome before you get into profits.

It just doesn't seem likely to be a profitable productivity boosting "improvement" for most people. Just my opinion of course.

I'm sure that there are exceptions.  People with certain handicaps for example I'm sure will welcome this.  People with others (deaf or speech impediments or strong accents) likely won't be able to use it at all. 

Also Office 2K7 offers more file formats that are compatible with different OS, plus it is fully xml /bxml compliant where 2K3 may not display properly, and Office 2k7 has better file compression than previous versions.. granted that a txt file or rtf file is compressed well enough already, there is less chance of corruption of the file.

By default it uses DOCX which Microsoft has scheduled for replacement in the next version with OOXML (assuming they can actually implement OOXML).  Can you set Office 2007 (easily) to save by default in the older DOC format (or in any of those other formats) or are you going to be producing lots of files that can't be read except by Office 2007 meaning replacing all those older systems (or by a plugin for 2003)?

As for training the system.. the system creates a new file for each user independantly.. You teach the computer your speaking habbits, pronunciation, accent, etc. which is stored in the individual's speech recognition file, which can be transfered to any other computer using a USB drive of 2 GB.

Training time.. 1 day.. about 4 to 6 hours.

Industry specific terminology.. Type the word in, highlight it, right click and select "Train".. Say the word 3 times, the computer now has the word added to your vocabulary.

Punctuation, manually spoken if the sentence is complex, otherwise it uses Office 2K7 build in grammar correction automatically for punctuation.

I use Voice on Windows Vista and Windows 7 all the time.. from making forum posts, browsing the web, opening programs, even aiding in games.

Office 2K7 has the built in Thesaurous, and Voice actually allows you to call it up in mid sentence to choose the word you are actually looking for.

As for other voices.. well I use an earphone mike and I sit right next to the TV, The computer never hears the TV, Radio, my wife talking or my 2 kids, much less my friends.. so picking up someone else is pretty slim unless you are using a crap desktop microphone.. my microphone is $14.99 at walmart and has excellent sound quality.. fits on one ear like a hands free device, and the integrated ausio card and the new sound options provided vy Vista / Windows 7 allows you to cancell out DC background noise (sounds from your computer hardware internally), suppress background noise, offers direct pickup cone for the mic, etc. Background noise is not a problem at all.

Using key words such as Sleep or Listen turns on and off the Voice software from typing what you say.. the only limitation is that the commands have to have about 2 seconds of paused dictation before using the commands, this way you can communicate with others in the office without the system typing everything that you say.

As for using older formats, the purpose of using newer and better formats is because of security. Say Company A and B are producing an almost identical product, Company A has made a great innovation.. someone at Company B knows how to get the schematics from their office software becuase #1, memory leaks, #2 poor security upgrades, #3 compatible format with their software. Using the newer software, since older software hardly ever gets plugins to read the newer formats and using a newer version of the software (which still gets security updates where the older software is due for update cancellation) would offer better corprate network infrastructure security against intrusion, plus the newer formats can't be read by the older software because the plug-ins are not available..

and to send to a company that hasn't upgraded, just resave the doc in a new location with an older file format (as long as the older format can support the new styles of page formatting)...

problem solved... more security and less chance of corruption..

Office 2K7 is designed to integrate 00XML as soon as the bugs are worked out.. Also the new office software is suppose to come out after the release of Windows 7 when ooxml is finished.. so Office 2K7 and Office 2K10 will be similar in functionality, although the 2K10 version will have less memory leak problems than any predecessor, less security vunerabilities, and less chance of file corruption.. IIRC it should be running a continous backup of a doc work in progress in the event of a power spike / outage, so your work is not lost as it currently is in any of the previous versions. Much like IE 8 remembers all the web sites you were on if the browser chashes or you close the application improperly.. It prompts if you want to continue previous session or just go to home page.. Office 2k10 should have this feature integrated as well from my understanding since the OS, when running with UAC turned on, is a virtual environment.. in essance, you would be creating 2 docs at the same time.. one in virtual environment and one at the OS level (administrator) in the event problems occur.. when the file is saved and the application is closed, the virtual document is wiped from system memory and the administrator lvl copy is the one that remains the the saved location.

MS wanted to impliment this in 2K7 edition, however XP was the main stream and XP only runs at the base level, there is no virtual environment in which the OS can automatically back up your work.

Now I do admit with Office 2K7, navigation and commands are quite different from previous versions, but it is a snal with coice command.. you just say "current window, which basically takes the system to the control panel of the app you are working on.. then just give the name of the command.. or if you are unsure of the name of the command, you can just say show numbers and the commands get numbers over them and you just say the number.. if that doesn't help, say Show Number List.. and a small menu pops up showing the number-function that you can look through..

simple and easy.. Vista and Windows 7 are designed to be more hands free OS than predecessors.. MS Live Messenger / MS live call, MS netmeeting, etc are all designed to function under voice command for business calls / meetings.. trow in a web cam, now you have vid calling / conferencing..

Imagine the productivity of people that can multitask.. Dictation of a letter or slots into Excel while filing paperwork using a wireless microphone.. or while getting the boss a report, etc.. or even instructing your computer by voice to enter data on specific software..

I live in a very small town with a population of 25,000 people... even our small hospital is paper free.. everything is stored electronically.. the registration nurse, the triage nurse, and even the doctors in bace, in ER use Vista Ultimate currently with Vioce commands.. they have their wireless cell in one ear which by 1 button press connects to their PC for Voice interaction..

all papers signed in hospital is done on a digital pad with finger print and handwriting..

the only paper the hospital uses is the hard copy for your medical records and your personal copy / information / work excuse.. everything else is digitally kept..

IF a doctor comes in that is unfamiliar with the case.. they have no need to grab a 2" thick folder of your medical history and attempt to read the chicken scratch that doctors call hand writing.. they just pull up your medical record from the hospital server where they can actually read what is entered. If they need to do a case study before treatment, they just load you record into a USB card and study it at home on the laptop or home PC overnight..

It increases their productivity here 100 fold, even though the hospital is understaffed..

Now if they were still using Windows XP or older.. well waiting time in the ER would be horrendous.. wait times now are only at most 2 hours.. before Vista and Voice command, wait time was close to 5 or 6 hours in the ER before a doctor bacame available for you.. Data from lab work is transfered instantaneously instead of someone having to run across the street to get the results.. though the sample has to be run across the street. Imagine having to do that during rush hour.

All this points to haveing newer / faster / better computers and software can only increase productivity.. and if productivity increases, so does your earnings, which means either a) more people can work for the company now because they have the finances to hire people on or b) give raises.

In the case of the hospital here, they saved enough money from their office supply budget with their new system over the last 2 years, along with speeding up the number of patients they can treat, thus increasing income exponentially for them to build 3 new 2 story wings over a block and a half, redo their heli pad, provide garaged parking instead of parking on the street, tec..

If they were still using the old systems at this hospital.. none of this could happen because their productivity would still be 1/3 of what it is now..

Take your profits and multiply them vy 3.. multiply that by 2 years.. now add in the savings from office supplies (paperclips, staples, folders, filing cabnets, reems of paper, pens, pencils, etc) for 2 years..

You get my point.. Sticking with older tech may work for people who hate change or are old fashioned.. but in a productive world.. you need better tech.. both software and hardware wise.

[Rod ONeal]

Sorry, but anyone still suggesting Vista is missing the point of this thread.

The vast majority of business systems and, even gamers, don't need all of the cpu power being bantered around here. AoC doesn't require 2x295 in SLI. What graphics programs are suggesting 3x SLI (I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm just curious what they are)? Pentium dual cores are still manufactured. The world is bigger than just Microsoft, Nvidea, and Intel. Step outside and look around.   

Most businesses don't need the extra power because IT manager "said" they don't need it. The IT manager says this because the manager either does not have the budget or the manpower to implement the upgrade, or both. The IT manager rarely makes this decision based up the business productivity needs of other departments. It is not in his best interest(usually) to respond to those needs until they become critical. It's those same reasons and motivations that currently cause many IT managers to maintain legacy XPpro OS based machines instead of Vista Business or Ultimate OS based machines and NT4 based server networks even thought they know the Vista boxes and Server 03/08 networks are oft times less vulnerable to security exploits are are more effcient for the end user.

Other causes:
Bonuses...
Raises...
Retention...
And an IT department's RIO and Cost of Ownership is not always tied into the other department's RIO and Cost of Ownership.

Then there is the problem of the IT manager dealing with the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it mentality" from other non-tech departments. This is especially true when it comes to IT security. As a subject it is seemingly complex and about as exciting as 3 day old tapioca pudding to the non-techie.

I firmly believe that anytime you can, increase productivity and security. Productivity increases shows a tangable return. Address security is like a good door lock and response. You only know it was worth the slightly extra expense when an intrusion attempt or cyber attack occur. Then you're damn relieved you had upgraded.

What programs are you referring to that require system specs that you have quoted? You stated your opinion very well, but you didn't actually address anything that I said, except for possibly the 2nd sentence of my post.

[Pestalence_XC]

Sorry, but anyone still suggesting Vista is missing the point of this thread.

The vast majority of business systems and, even gamers, don't need all of the cpu power being bantered around here. AoC doesn't require 2x295 in SLI. What graphics programs are suggesting 3x SLI (I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm just curious what they are)? Pentium dual cores are still manufactured. The world is bigger than just Microsoft, Nvidea, and Intel. Step outside and look around.    

You play Age of Conan right?

No you don't have to have a top end PC to play age of conan.. I am saying that you have to have a top end PC to play Age of Conan with full graphics enabled.

Playing with 2 NVidia 8800's on board, I can play with FPS between 28-72 .. but I have to play in DX 9, maximum view distance turned down to 2700 meters instead of 3900 meters, details from distance turned sown to 30%, 3D Ambient Occulusion Quality turned off, grass turned off, particles set to Normal instead of high, AA at 8xQ, (basically 8X AA at 4X demand) etc.. I can enable DX 10 and reduce God Rays, disable grass, turn down water effects and still lose 10 FPS..

IF I was running a GTX 295, my limitation would be my CPU and system memory.. I would have to upgrade to a quad core or an i7 dual core and upgrade to 8 GB system memory and I would still have to turn down DX 10 features in order to maintain 28-72 FPS.. with 2 NVidia GTX 295's I could run with all settings maxed out with an i7 CPU dual core at 3.0 Ghz and 8 GB DDR3 system memory and an independant network card.

AoC is the most demanding game graphically that I have come across to daye.. even Crysis can play at full graphics with full physx enabled on my 2 NVidia 8800 in SLI pulling 95 FPS minimum.. Age of Conan at full settings in DX 10 makes my FPS dros considerably.. as in 8-15 FPS.. and I am running Windows 7, Intel Core 2 @ 2.6 Ghz overclocked to 3.86 Ghz, and 4 GB system RAM DDR2 (not DDR3)..

Now if Age of Conan is not demanding on a system, I don't know what is.. Age of Conan requires a high end gaming rig to play at maximum graphical capability.. the specs I listed above are valid to enable full graphics in Age of Conan and maintain decent FPS in a populated area.. as in an area with 100 or more players present (Kheshatta on the RP-PVP server)

3D and HD editing studios for movies / animation require 3 to 4 GPUs in SLI.. look at Dreamworks behind the scenes some time for a recent movie of theirs.. 4 NVidia 9800 GTX OC 2 with 768 MB gDDR3 in SLI on their editing / production system when putting the movie together.. having to run multiple monitors, 3D HD animation software, 7.1 Surround Sound editing software, Final Production editing software that combines it all together and the playback studio to see final results.. Yes there are jobs and software that are demanding enough to have 3 to 4 cards in SLI.. many games that are new and current require at least 2 cards in SLI.. Age of Conan and Crysis come to mind.. these games are designed for extreme graphical processing that can only be provided by cards in SLI configuration (of X-Fire with ATI/AMD cards.. but you sitll have to DL and install the HAVOC software to enable Physx on their newer cards.. though still hving problems with it in drivers).. as for NVidia.. all cards with 512 MB memory from the 8600 series on up hve the Agia Physx processor built in.. NVidia owns Agia.. and the Physx processors have only gotten getter on NVidia.. the last series of AMD vid cards offers Havoc on their own designed Physx GPU, but as I stated.. many driver problems.. I think the latest driver is the most stable to date.

Anyhow, stating that programs don't need that much horsepower is incorrect and false.. You choose to run a sub par system and don't want to upgrade and expect software to conform to a system that you currently posess.. software innovates as does hardware.. as such programs are more demanding .. I built my system last year.. brand new parts.. currently my system rates a 5.9 on the Windows Performance scale out of a possible 7.9.. my graphics rate at 6.4 by themselves.. Age of conan will play on a minimum of a system rated 5.2, but for full and best performance of the game, you need a rating of 7.6 or 7.7 on the windows PC performance scale.


EDIT : Windows Percormance scale is rated off you slowest piece of hardware.. You can have a 6.4 in graphics but your HDD could rate a 5.9 (SATA config instead of Raid 0 config).. you score would be a 5.9 because of the HDD.

[Rod ONeal]

You keep bringing up stuff that has nothing to do with the points I raised. Also, finding one extreme example doesn't invalidate the statement that a vast majority don't require something. Dreamworks, from your example, needs to stop running gaming cards and start running proper workstation equipment. I'm surprised that they can even run all of their software. Most professional graphics software will run from 3 to 10 times faster on workstation cards because of proper driver support.

Here is an example of AoC running fine without all that GPU power. It does seem that AoC prefers ATI but still not to the point of requiring 2x 295's. Current video drivers would run even better since this was done in july '08 and all cards have gotten faster since then.

[Pestalence_XC]

How old is that chart?

In March, Aoc released patch 1.04 which significantly changed texturing and shadowing in game and introduced about a month ago, introducted DirectX 10 with a completely new shader and shadowing schema.. your chard is just a bit outdated.. that chart is relavent to when the game was release through patch 1.03..

1.04 was a significant impact to game graphics and system performance.. plus Funcom is still developing more DirectX 10 content for Age of Conan.. as such a higher impact to the game system.. also they are introducing Physx along with DirectX 10 on a game that uses animation style graphics, thus lowering FPS even more..

ATI is having more performance trouble than NVidia ATM. NVidia and Age of Conan have 2 times released updates together on their respective web sites.. which gives the impression that Funcom is focusing more towards NVidia than AMD cased cards.. That maks sense since Age of Conan advertises NVidia in opening credits.. AMD is attempting to keep up with their faster driver updates than in the past.

Both cards currently perform just about the same with the edge in DirectX 10 and Physx going to NVidia.. however both cards suffer the same impact from the Shader 3.0 (DirectX 9) and Shader 4.0 (DirectX 10) the additional texturing and resizing and physx incorporated into grass and trees that was not there prior to patch 1.04..

Even people with GTX 285 graphics cards w/ 1GB gDDR3 state that they can not operate the game at full graphic resolutions..

Look at some of these people's system specs.. Even they can't run the game at max res.. and some of these results are coming from the game at lowest graphic settings..

http://forums-eu.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=119010

http://forums-eu.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=118903

http://forums-eu.ageofconan.com/showthread.php?t=118393

Here is a good example of performance in AoC

with a very good pc(i7 processor, 4870, 6Gb ddr3 1600Mhz, asus high end motherboard) you still don't get aoc to run smoothly, sometimes fps will drop A LOT, like from 70 to 10, for no apparent reason.
Same thing happen on my pc(9800 gt, 4gb ddr2 800, e 8400 cpu) and with another pc (8800 gts 640, e6750 cpu, 4gb ddr2 800)

The 6000+ is a bottleneck with a 4870x2 and make sure you have activated Catalyst AI or whatever its called to make sure x2 is running and not only on one GPU.
And you need to run Vista 64 or XP 64 anything less will **** up your system.

Hi guys ,

i have a question, i'm thinking to come back to AOC.

But how well will it run on my Nvidia Geforce 8600 GT??

Other Specs:

AMD Athlon X2 4200 (2.2 GHZ)
4 GB Ram
Windows Vista 64-bit

it will run but dont expect wonders from it.

Really depends on the resolution you are going to play. At 1280*1024 you should be able to play at medium settings!

So as you can see, ever since patch 1.04, the game has become MUCH more demanding graphically.. your chart is several months out of date.

Funcom, developers of Age of Conan are developing on systems running 2 NVidia GTX 295's in SLI and I think their QA systems have the same NVidia or equivalent ATI cards in SLI/X-Fire

See I actually play the game.. I could run Max settings on AoC with a single NVidia 8800 GTX OC 2 with 768 gDDR3 memory before the 1.04 patch..

after the 1.04 patch.. my HDD is accessed a hellovalot more, my CPU runs 1 core at 100% and the other at 65% in mass areas.. I had to go to SLI with a second card just to maintain ~40 FPS at medium settings.. on high and DX 9 with all shaders enabled, FPS drops down to 18 FPS.. in DirectX 10, FPS drops to 8-12 FPS unless I turn off grass and lower particles and disable God Rays.. then FPS is ~26-30.

So you can look at all the charts you want.. DL the game.. FC offers Free Trail currently and let's see your FPS with your rig on max settings.. go through Old Tartania or go to Potain with grass enabled, go to Kheshatta with 40 + people there, go to Ymir's pass with all the trees that have to render..

the only time you get an FPS boost is in dungeons where there are few people, nice but not overly textured walls, no trees and no grass.. and even then you have to turn off 3D Ambient occulusion Quality and set particles to Normal and maybe put shaders to Medium, lower the view distance just a bit and you might pull 60-75 FPS with an NVidia 8800 GTX OC 2 with 768 gDDR3 memory. That is with all other settings set to High.

Sorry to burst your bubble.. testing and playing is mucho proof over a chart that is over a year old.

 Also noticed you skipped over Crysis, another game that is graphically demanding.. You need to have 2 8800's in SLI in order to play with full graphics enabled.. either that or a single NVidia GTX 280 GPU with 1 GB vid memory.

Yes software is becoming that demanding and needing that much horse power.. if you get out of games that are designed for 1998-2003, you will notice that software is much more demanding..

Like Office 2K7.. works best on Vista 64 bit Ultimate edition with Intel Core 2 because the software is multi-threaded / multi-core optimized and is designed for systems running ~2GB memory, preferrably a bit more with a Vista system.. ~3GB on Vista.. though 4GB gives best performance for Vista and Office 2K7..

Many games are coming out in MMOs that will require Much GPU power.. such as The Old Republic.. heck I think that even STO will require the 8800 and 9800 GPUs to be in SLI to be able to keep up with effects and cut scenes..

Also many more games are starting to require DX 10 in order to play them, which means a definate change to Vista as games like AoC will not enable the option for DirectX 10 without the proper OS and proper Vid card.. Installers are starting to sniff the OS stamp and the Vid Card Bios to ensure DX 10 is available before installing, so the hacked version of DX 10 on XP systems won't be enough..

Add to that, Windows7 is DirectX 11.. and the only cards on the market that are DirectX 11 compliant is the GTX 290 and 295 cards and soon software will start requiring DirectX 11 in the OS and Vid Card in order to install.

I stated that these things were coming last year.. no one believed me.. Yet they are happening..

Pretty soon everyone will be running Vista / Windows 7 and using XP as a Dual Boot option for their older games / software.

And many people will hve to upgrade their systems just to run Vista / Windows 7, and then upgrade some more for the software coming out.. IE a modern PC with Moder Graphic capabilities to meet the demands of software coming out.

[Tus-XC]

Here is an example of AoC running fine without all that GPU power. It does seem that AoC prefers ATI but still not to the point of requiring 2x 295's. Current video drivers would run even better since this was done in july '08 and all cards have gotten faster since then.

*sniped pic*

Have to agree w/ pesty on that, i've seen the performance difference between the patches, 1.03 to 1.04 - that chart is simply too out of date to be using as proof for your statement. 

[Nemesis]

I use Voice on Windows Vista and Windows 7 all the time.. from making forum posts, browsing the web, opening programs, even aiding in games.

Now proofread your post for all the errors.  Doubled periods.  Missed capitalizations of first words in sentences.  Misspelled words.  (Note this was written in a text editor without spelling correction etc.)

If you can't save by default (you didn't answer that as far as I can see so I assume that is a no) in a different format then changing to Office 2007 mandates a format change for the company or your workers must remember to do so manually each time.  That means either translating all of your old files to the newer format or having a mixture of formats and risking that at some point in the future you may find old files you can no longer access.

Has Microsoft actually committed to putting OOXML into Office 2007?  I haven't heard that.  If not then it means another format change pushed onto the customers when Office 2010 comes out unless that version can be set to earlier defaults.  Should people really be forced to change formats for Microsofts profitability?

Imagine the productivity of people that can multitask.. Dictation of a letter or slots into Excel while filing paperwork using a wireless microphone.. or while getting the boss a report, etc.. or even instructing your computer by voice to enter data on specific software..

Then based on your post here they would need to sit down and proof read everything they dictated.  Your post had too many errors to make it convincing that you don't need to proofread.  Using up much or all of the time "saved".

Now if they were still using Windows XP or older.. well waiting time in the ER would be horrendous.. wait times now are only at most 2 hours.. before Vista and Voice command, wait time was close to 5 or 6 hours in the ER before a doctor bacame available for you.. Data from lab work is transfered instantaneously instead of someone having to run across the street to get the results.. though the sample has to be run across the street. Imagine having to do that during rush hour.

Sorry but why could you not use XP (or Win 3.11 even) to transfer data across the street rather than use "sneaker net"?  Most of your hospital examples are like that, things that could be done without Vista or Office 2007.

Doctors have been putting their files on computer for years and calling them up that way without Vista.  Why does it suddenly need to be Vista to do it?  The only difference is the voice command and from your example here it seems error prone.

You get my point.. Sticking with older tech may work for people who hate change or are old fashioned.. but in a productive world.. you need better tech.. both software and hardware wise.

Hopefully you got my point, changing just to change is not productive or cost effective.  I'm far from a luddite but I see no reason to adopt something without the adoption being sufficiently valuable to counter the cost.

[Nemesis]

n March, Aoc released patch 1.04 which significantly changed texturing and shadowing in game and introduced about a month ago, introducted DirectX 10 with a completely new shader and shadowing schema.. your chard is just a bit outdated.. that chart is relavent to when the game was release through patch 1.03..

1.04 was a significant impact to game graphics and system performance.. plus Funcom is still developing more DirectX 10 content for Age of Conan.. as such a higher impact to the game system.. also they are introducing Physx along with DirectX 10 on a game that uses animation style graphics, thus lowering FPS even more..

ATI is having more performance trouble than NVidia ATM. NVidia and Age of Conan have 2 times released updates together on their respective web sites.. which gives the impression that Funcom is focusing more towards NVidia than AMD cased cards.. That maks sense since Age of Conan advertises NVidia in opening credits.. AMD is attempting to keep up with their faster driver updates than in the past.

Pestalence I can only say that if I were playing a game and a PATCH degraded performance so much I would become a truely irate customer. 

I also wonder about this "partnership" with nVidea, it sounds very suspicious, like when Skypes server wouldn't run on AMD chips.  Makes me wonder if nVidea hasn't paid money to ensure that a game requires their hardware.  I'm against that on principle.

after the 1.04 patch.. my HDD is accessed a hellovalot more, my CPU runs 1 core at 100% and the other at 65% in mass areas.. I had to go to SLI with a second card just to maintain ~40 FPS at medium settings.. on high and DX 9 with all shaders enabled, FPS drops down to 18 FPS.. in DirectX 10, FPS drops to 8-12 FPS unless I turn off grass and lower particles and disable God Rays.. then FPS is ~26-30.

Splitting the game between those who can and will upgrade hardware (in the current bad economic climate) and those who can't or won't.  Sounds like a bad move for me.  A good way to kill the game off quicker and lose a lot of customers for the next game from the company.

Also many more games are starting to require DX 10 in order to play them, which means a definate change to Vista as games like AoC will not enable the option for DirectX 10 without the proper OS and proper Vid card.. Installers are starting to sniff the OS stamp and the Vid Card Bios to ensure DX 10 is available before installing, so the hacked version of DX 10 on XP systems won't be enough..

Add to that, Windows7 is DirectX 11.. and the only cards on the market that are DirectX 11 compliant is the GTX 290 and 295 cards and soon software will start requiring DirectX 11 in the OS and Vid Card in order to install.

How many of those games truely need Directx 10 to do what they do?  How many actually enhance game play by use of Directx 10 only features? 

Given the current economic climate forcing gamers to the high end seems to me to be self defeating if not suicidal.  This is especially bad since the forum you linked to has people with those high end machines STILL being unable to get decent and stable performance.

People are using the "downgrade" option to XP and considering it an upgrade because of the performance damage Vista does.  Unless 7 avoids that I forsee the "downgrade" option needing to stay and Microsoft continuing to damage their reputation.  Age of Conan is based on  your posting software released before the hardwae was there to support it.  A foolish mistake for the company.

[toasty0]

It's amazing how little has changed over the year: Nem bagging on all things Microsoft, Pesty and me pointing out his errors...wash, rinse and repeat.

 

[Nemesis]

It's amazing how little has changed over the year: Nem bagging on all things Microsoft, Pesty and me pointing out his errors...wash, rinse and repeat.

 

Am I going to have to look up times I defended Microsoft right here?  I've done that too. 

Pestalence made one clear example of the improvements on Vista/7 and that was the voice control/dictation ability and his own post showed how flawed that was.  His post was full of spelling, punctuation and capitalization errors in spite of his vaunted voice dictation so how is it an advantage? 

Add his own admission that Microsoft is changing the default format for Office again with the next version.  Why change to Office 2007 if the next version (due out in what a year?) will render its file format obsolete?  Why not skip it for the next version with a long term format (assuming Microsoft actually implements OOXML).

Then he used Age of Conan as an example of why you need powerful computers but again by his own posting you didn't need it until a patch rendered machines that were previously able to use it crippled.  By his own source even extremely powerful machines don't always work and some of those that do work intermittently.  How does all that computing power enhance the gameplay?  Is it enhanced in anyway beyond pure graphical fluff?  How does crippling machines that worked with the game count as a viable patch? 

[toasty0]

It's amazing how little has changed over the year: Nem bagging on all things Microsoft, Pesty and me pointing out his errors...wash, rinse and repeat.

 

Am I going to have to look up times I defended Microsoft right here?  I've done that too. 

You have defended the right to 'post about Microsoft', but as for "defending Microsoft", I just don't recall. I could be wrong and I am willing to be prooven so.

 

[Pestalence_XC]

Nemesis.. on D.net, I type in my posts, as I do on Startrek Gamers and the Xenocorp forums,, AoC, I use a split between Voice and Typing mainly because I post there in mid game when something occurs to me.. as inAlt-Tabbing to browser ...

Voice command for computers has been available since 1997 and has only improved over the years. Many people have never heard or used it because it seemed impractical before due to the problems you mentioned.. Those problems have been solved a few years back by Dragon Naturally Speaking or by Why Type Legal or Why Type Medical or Microsoft's Whisper Speach, etc.

In Vista, Microsoft integrated Voice command / text with readback capability into the OS. I have a feeling it is a partnership with either Dragon or the one by L&H.

Granted the MS still uses Microsoft SAM readback (or the female voice) which sounds too robotic, but there are upgrade voice packages available for Download.

I took the 3 min to dictate a document in Office 2K7 for you to see how it handles spelling and grammar.

I even saved it on the old .Doc format for you.

[Nemesis]

Nemesis.. on D.net, I type in my posts, as I do on Startrek Gamers and the Xenocorp forums,, AoC, I use a split between Voice and Typing mainly because I post there in mid game when something occurs to me.. as inAlt-Tabbing to browser ...

I had to go by your words as quoted below.  When you said "forum posts" the natural assumption is THIS forum is included in that.

I use Voice on Windows Vista and Windows 7 all the time.. from making forum posts, browsing the web, opening programs, even aiding in games.

You have defended the right to 'post about Microsoft', but as for "defending Microsoft", I just don't recall. I could be wrong and I am willing to be prooven so.

I have an easy one to look up and link to because I remember using an uncommon word to praise Microsoft.  It was even in connection with a prerelease of Vista.  Link . 
 
My comment for those who may not want to click on the link.

Windows Vista is in beta testing.  Beta testing is about finding and patching flaws.  The only thing surprising here is Microsoft patching the existing beta version rather than waiting for the next beta release.  For patching it quickly rather than risking the beta testers security kudos to Microsoft.

Look back through this thread and get reminded of some things. 

1/ Mostly I am questioning the automatic MUST upgrade NEW is BETTER mentality, not criticizing Microsoft or Vista or Windows 7.  The patch I criticized was a game patch (I don't know the company so maybe there I am criticizing MS).

2/ There are several others directly attacking Vista/Windows 7.

Why am I wrong to question these things? 

My major beefs with Microsoft come in several things. 

1/ Unethical and illegal business practices.

2/ DRM

3/ Vendor lockin. 

[Pestalence_XC]

What is the problem with DRM? I have had no problems with any Media I have attempted to use on any MS OS.

DRM is only there to prevent pirating and even that doesn't do much. DRM mainly checks, using Media Player, to verify that you are ripping music from a purchased CD.. and there are hundreds of programs out there that bypass DRM no matter what OS you are on.

Digital Rights Management is basically a Joke.. It is ineffectual and basically Hyped up to the point that it is designed to drive away those inclined to pirate music and movies.. in other words.. Massive Fail for Microsoft..

DRM is also there to help you, to put a Digital marker into your work that can link to an online license.. the content should have a unique license identifier and the end server should check to make sure no 2 copies being used at same time has the same identifier.. sort of like how SFC identifies the CD key for the Dynaverse to prevent duplicate copies from being online at once.. to prevent piracy.. however many people / companies do not use DRM as intended, thus helping to promote piracy.

DRM's effect is only against people like you, keeping those that don't actualy experience or use it away.

Now WGA is a bigger reason to not use MS.. however all it does is verify that your CD key is valid for your OS.. and even then you can still use your system even if the WGA finds your key invalid, you just can't get the updates to your OS if the key is invalid currently and your system gets a Not Ginuine logo stamped in the center of the screen and on the tool bar. Does not hinder performance nor does it prevent you from using your software, except Media Player 11 and Media Player 12 and possibly Windows Media Center.

So long as your CD key for the OS is valid, then you should have no problems at all.

Vendor lock in? I don't get that.. Apple machines can run MS OS, Linux, OSX, etc.. as can Intel / AMD systems.. Hardware is no longer a limitation for the different companies.. As for software companies, it is their choice to develop for a particular OS or for all OS systems.

So I don't get Vendor Lock-in.

as for #1, MS has done this in the past, however their company has had many, many changes.. AOL now works properly with IE and MS products as well as Netscape.. and I haven't come across any software that MS is intentionally blocking from working on their OS systems.. only trying to get people to come into the 21st century with their software by dropping OS support for outdated / broken technology (MS Visual C++ 6.0 comes to mind as well as DirectX 7 and 8).

So if MS still has some practices that may be inclined to be illegal.. MS is changing these practices.. even though Microsoft may not change them until after a lawsuit.

I too don't agree on monopolizing the market and preventing others work from operating because MS doesn't want them to.. however that practice from my experiences has been over since 2001.

Anyhow, MS is attempting to gain grace in the world's market which in itself forces change.

Maybe instead of looking at how MS use to be.. look at how they are today and the changes the company is making.

[Nemesis]

What is the problem with DRM? I have had no problems with any Media I have attempted to use on any MS OS.

Maybe later I'll post on this in more length but just a few short comments.

Playsforsure.  Microsoft has already tried to drop it which would have cut off those customers who had already paid.  Other companies have done similar things.

XP activation.  Microsoft cut my brother-in-law off when he did a reinstall and until he A/Got nasty and B/ Swore he would install Redhat Linux on all 6 of his machines they were adamant he had to buy a new copy.  At that point they suddenly decided his copy was legal.  At the time he was selling Windows based PCs and servicing them.

What happens when the XP activation server is shut down?  It is only in the last year that I moved my mother off Win98SE (it did everything she needed) and then only because the machine died.  So how many XP users will be cut off when they need to activate and Microsoft says "Buy a new computer we don't activate XP any more". 

My computers get rebuilt over and over again.  Microsoft interprets that as new machines and insist on my paying them again for what I already bought.

Windows 2000 Pro, blocked me from making a perfectly legal (in Canada) copy of a DVD that I owned for my own use calling it "illegal".  Microsoft is NOT the police and they have no right to try and control my usage of what I bought.