Vista 64bit

[nurizeko]

Does Steam and Source games work with it, because I'm on my new machine and its got Vista (I know...no choice....*sigh*) 64bit and Steam installed and otherwise works but I've had to remove Portal and HL2 because they won't start, it just gives me the preparing crap and constantly gives me the updating dross even though the game starts off at 100% and ugh.

 

[Kyorisu]

Yeah it works with Vista 64. You didn't have to remove anything, the preparing/updating but not running is a common problem. Usually rebooting fixes it. At least it does for me in XP 32.

 

[Uriel]

Vista 64 hasn't given me any problems except running older games that require windows 95 and won't run through dosbox.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

No problems.

 

[MRG]

Too bad Microsoft hasn't released a "Gamers Edition" OS. Have it enable to do everything. Dosbox, Win95, Win98 compatability, Online Gaming network tweaks, plus others. Hell, how many versions of Vista are there? 5? They all suck. (Sorry Vista users, you know i'm right) You know something, a group of gamers needs to get together & make their OWN damn operating system. Sure it'll do the important stuff like browse online & run a word processing program or two, but it's main function, is to support gamers. How many billions of dollars do gamers spend, well WoW alone should answer that question. So the money is there, we just need to make a product now. So whos with me?

-MRG

 

[Eejit]

Many steam games crash when you quit. Which is kinda irrelevant.

I also used to get occasional crashes when changing maps in TF2, but SP1 fixed that.

 

[Laivasse]

Running Vista64 and every Steam game works with no problems apart from the small irritation of the crash-on-quit thing.

Also I suspect Vista64 may have had something to do with the 'AI node graph rebuilding' and 'AI disabled' errors I started getting when I replayed HL2 recently, but that went away when I experimentally deleted the hl2/graphs folder.

 

[No Limit]

There is nothing wrong with Vista, you guys need to stop hating.

 

[Operational]

I regularly play TF2 on Vista 64bit and was playing Portal the other day just fine.

If you think your problem is with the 64bit versions you can always try adding "-32bit" to the launch options to force HL2 (or whatever) to start in its 32bit mode.

 

[Operational]

Too bad Microsoft hasn't released a "Gamers Edition" OS.

You know the needs of gamers don't differ much from the needs of general OS users...

Have it enable to do everything.

Like what?

Dosbox,

Works fine under Vista.

Win95, Win98 compatability,

Vista, Compatibility Mode and Dosbox covers >95% of the games people still play. The small amount left can use Microsofts Virtual Machine or a VMware product.

Online Gaming network tweaks, plus others.

Yeah 'cus they deliberately left Vista unoptimized

Hell, how many versions of Vista are there? 5?

Who cares and why does it matter? Yes there are varying versions of Vista that target the differing users out there.

They all suck.

When was the last time you tried Vista? I reserve the right to disregard anyone's opinion on Vista who hasn't tried it as their main OS for a couple of weeks since, say, SP1's release (although arguably Vista's issues were cleared up before SP1).

(Sorry Vista users, you know i'm right)

You know I really don't. The anti-Vista bandwagon is getting real old.

You know something, a group of gamers needs to get together & make their OWN damn operating system.

Yeah 'cus what PC gaming really needs is another OS that dev's are asked to support.

Sure it'll do the important stuff like browse online & run a word processing program or two, but it's main function, is to support gamers.

Good luck with that, DirectX is used by a ton of games and I guarantee people will have more issues getting DirectX going on a non-MS OS than a MS OS.

-MRG

-Operational

 

[nurizeko]

KK, so restart my machine after installing and updating the games?.



Cheers for the feedback. :thumbs:

 

[DreamThrall]

...

FLAWLESS VICTORY! :bounce:

 

[Kadayi]

There is nothing wrong with Vista, you guys need to stop hating.

Agreed. I've been using Vista 64 pretty much since launch and aside from some early issues it's been all good (and even when it was going to crash it told you so and allowed you to save). I really don't understand the hate and frankly the UAC stuff is no different to what you get on Mac OSX tbh.

 

[Iced_Eagle]

FLAWLESS VICTORY! :bounce:

:cheers:

64-bit is the way to go, so just give it some time. Just becuase apps have problems doesn't mean it's Windows fault.

Restart and try opening it again. If that doesn't work, open steam in Administrator mode and in either Vista RTM or XP compatibility mode, as those will do the trick in most cases.

*Edit* Kadayi: UAC isn't bad when you compare it to other OS', but it still does have its annoyances, many of which were fixed in SP1, and will be fixed in SP2 in a couple of months. The UAC in Win7 is much better in terms of configuring it to how you want it to notify you about certain things.

 

[Kadayi]

*Edit* Kadayi: UAC isn't bad when you compare it to other OS', but it still does have its annoyances, many of which were fixed in SP1, and will be fixed in SP2 in a couple of months. The UAC in Win7 is much better in terms of configuring it to how you want it to notify you about certain things.

I don't object to it tbh. I like to know what's installing etc, on my machine. At work all our Macs are passworded and you have to enter your password whenever you want to install an application etc.

 

[No Limit]

I don't object to it tbh. I like to know what's installing etc, on my machine. At work all our Macs are passworded and you have to enter your password whenever you want to install an application etc.

You can make vista work the same way by setting up a limited user account. If the user account you are logged in doesn't have admin rights it will actually ask you for a username and password to perform an administrative action. This is probably a lot more secure as I don't trust UAC. With UAC the administrator password has to be stored somewhere in your session, it's just a matter of time before malicious programmers figure out how to get around it (if they haven't already). I could be wrong on this point but it just seems like common sense and it's always better safe than sorry.

 

[xcellerate]

Hell, how many versions of Vista are there? 5? They all suck. (Sorry Vista users, you know i'm right)

Omg how many different versions of XP are there? Like 2? They all suck. (Sorry XP users you know I'm right). I mean who the **** wants big bubbly blue shit everywhere? Why can't I run DX10 apps? The microsoft update site sucks ass, it takes forever to load and my mom's sister's daughter's best friend one time got a bsod from it, so it sucks.

 

[nurizeko]

Haha, paused HL2 download, and got round to restarting, it restarted at 1%.



Either its Vista or Steam has suddenly got shitty since I last used it on my old machine.

 

[Krynn72]

Its not vista. So there. Ive had it happen to me on XP several times. Its a really common quirk of Steam's. You cant just blame the OS everytime something doesnt work.

Also, I use Vista x64 right now and have only gotten that bug once, and it sorted itself out.

 

[xcellerate]

You cant just blame the OS everytime something doesnt work.

But! those apple commercials with the fat, stupid PC guy! He says vista is a bad operating system! ...And I think we all know that apple would have absolutely nothing to gain by scaring people away from microsoft, so it must be true!

 

[nurizeko]

I can if it goes wrong on a Vista machine, I never had any greif with Steam on my XP box, if you can believe it.

 

[Kadayi]

But! those apple commercials with the fat, stupid PC guy! He says vista is a bad operating system! ...And I think we all know that apple would have absolutely nothing to gain by scaring people away from microsoft, so it must be true!

****ing Apple. Trust me as a Pro Mac User I ****ing despise those adverts and all the bullshit that does with them. Is OSX a good Operating system? Yes. Is it miles better than Vista? No they are both robust and get the job done (software crashes on macs just as much as PCs). Is there as much range and flexibility of Software on Apple Vs Windows? Not at all. They also bullshit big time about the quality of the components they put into their machines at every keynote, but trust me they aren't all that in terms of reliability.

 

[VirusType2]

Vista, Compatibility Mode and Dosbox covers >95% of the games people still play. The small amount left can use Microsofts Virtual Machine.

Why haven't I heard of this before?

So you can have XP and like... win 95 or 2000 installed simultaneously? Because I have some older games that I'd like to play sometimes without having a second dedicated, legacy computer.

 

[DreamThrall]

Why haven't I heard of this before?

So you can have XP and like... win 95 or 2000 installed simultaneously? Because I have some older games that I'd like to play sometimes without having a second dedicated, legacy computer.

That's the idea You'll of course still need "licensed" copies of all the operating systems you want to run.

 

[Pi Mu Rho]

I always said I wouldn't switch to Vista, because XP did everything I wanted it to.

Then I upgraded my PC and wanted to use more than the 3.2Gb of memory that XP was going to let me use. So, knowing that XP64 was complete shite, I went to Vista64. Not had a single problem. Not one.

Works beautifully with 8Gb too

 

[Kadayi]

I think people were expecting a lot of bells and whistles with Vista, where as what you get it stability and a fairly no nonsense OS that gets you where you need to go, esp with newer hardware.

 

[Krynn72]

The only reason why people hate vista today is because of the problems with drivers early on.

 

[VirusType2]

I stuck with XP because of the familiarity and the performance reasons. I know where everything is and how everything works.

Also, I have a budget processor from a few years ago. It leaves much to be desired. Vista would only compound that issue.


Finally, I found no reason to 'upgrade' to Vista, when XP does everything I need. Why pay for something new? Especially when it would just make my performance worse.

 

[Warbie]

I toggle between the two. Vista's ok, but is a total memory hog and not as nippy as XP. Navigating through menus and folders is considerbly quicker in XP - I also find it less bloated and convoluted.

 

[Krynn72]

I toggle between the two. Vista's ok, but is a total memory hog and not as nippy as XP. Navigating through menus and folders is considerbly quicker in XP - I also find it less bloated and convoluted.

Thats only because you're not used to Vista. I work on XP at work and Vista at home, and after a weekend of using Vista I find myself sluggish when I get back to work on mondays.

 

[Saturos]

/snip..

/snip..

I've said it other threads before, an OSs' obsolence is mostly user specific.
If XP quits doing what you want it to do for any new programs/games you purchase, (or vice versa) it's time to upgrade/downgrade. Or go to a completely different OS altogether.

Unnecessary hype. The both of ya.

When OS hunting, I'm very practical. No fluffy flutter features for me and I'm using the classic Windows interface on XP even. Uses less memory.
My PC's a speed demon and all I have is 2 gigs and a dual GPU 256MB vid card.
Futhermore, Vista might just be a good OS, I just don't have a good reason to get it. XP does everything I want just fine for me.


P.S. If I weren't a gamer though, I'd probably have Linux on my machine and not Windows. Period.

 

[Krynn72]

Linux is overrated. I used it for awhile and tried a few different distros, and didnt find anything that made my life any easier than it would be on xp.

My upgrade to Vista was almost solely based on how I could open up multiple images at a time Vista's photo gallery. But that was only after 99% of the driver issues had been sorted out.

 

[Saturos]

Linux is overrated.

I want to try it so, so badly though. My former database programming instructor swore by it. Although I could never get him to flat out admit to being a Linux fanboy.

EDIT> I did play around with Fedora Core 5 a few years back and I liked it.

 

[Krynn72]

Anyone who uses it will swear by it, same with OSX. Its really just down to which one has more features that you actually use. All of them work fine and get the job done.

 

[Operational]

Unnecessary hype. The both of ya.

I'm not hyping, I'm just anti-anti-Vista.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

Especially when it would just make my performance worse.

Mine got better, but I was using 32 XP on a 64 bit optimizable hardware, so 64 vista did wonders.

 

[Warbie]

Thats only because you're not used to Vista. I work on XP at work and Vista at home, and after a weekend of using Vista I find myself sluggish when I get back to work on mondays.

I don't think so - perhaps about the ui being convoluted, but XP is certainly quicker on my machine. When I click on my computer, launch/install apps etc etc it's instant with XP. With Vista there's often a slight delay. It's not the spec as my c2d runs over 4 gig with 4 gig of ram.

I also have to trouble shoot vista machines all day at work - many of which only have 1 gig of ram and vista wants about 700 just to do nothing. Plus the local admin account is disabled by default and it always catches me out :/

 

[VirusType2]

My upgrade to Vista was almost solely based on how I could open up multiple images at a time Vista's photo gallery.

any third party image viewer can do that.

You're referring to XP's Fax and Image Viewer program, how it can only have 1 image displayed at a time, right?