to all the people complaining about vista, win7 or both....they are built off the same kernel, win7 incorperates all those features that microsoft had to drop from vista because the majority of existing Intel hardware at the release of vista wouldn't have been able to run it, as well as taking into account all the customer feedback people complained about in the MS forums.
Intel IGP's didn't qualify as supporting DX10 because well....they didn't have an igp that could even do dx9 half way decently,
UVD was supposed to be built into Vista,
offloading the shiny desktop GUI to the GPU (which it now does in win7)
Tesselation which was supported by the HD2900xt cuts GPU texture and model footprints from 95-115 megabytes down to less then one-half a megabyte, which was how the GUI was supposed to be rendered as well as allowing for DX10 IGP's to render 1080p video confrencing across 384 K/B DSL connections on single core 32bit OS's
In fact, upon installing Win7 ultimate onto an old AMD socket a system, with a 1.8ghz semperon that had only a 256K L2 cache the built in performance benchmark gave the cpu a rating of 4.2 out of 7.9. Considering the chip is 6 or 7 years old, that's pretty impressive.
Vista ultimate still costs $400, and was over $700 when it first launched, paying $130 to from the 9 year old XP, or 3 year old Vista, really isn't an obscene amount, or even surprising, actually i'd think most would consider it to be far less of what a new OS that will support DX10 as well as Dx11 when launched would be priced at.
Oh and buying a "new" computer from an OEM that costs $500-$800, and contains hardware worth $200-$400 one could order and assemble themselves to avoid paying $130 to upgrade an old OS and install on their existing hardware....is just stupid.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram