windows vista is 100% not compatible with my pc and software and on on on

It will be at least 2 years before non-Microsoft games go Vista only, probably longer.

Quite simply- I think Microsoft is going to run into the problem of people not feeling it's necessary to upgrade XP. I haven't had any issues with XP, and most security holes come through the internet.

The last group to switch over the Vista as well will be Stardock's audience.

I'll make this bold prediction right now:
In 2011 or 2012 when GCIII is out on beta- you will be able to play it just fine on an XP machine. It will not use DX10 unless someone forces a way for Microsoft to make it non-exclusive.

Bold Prediction #2- In 1-2 years, someone will figure out how to get rid of the copy protection crap Microsoft put in Vista.

Bold Prediction #3- Only 5% of the PC owners in America will care about 1 or 2. At most.

Bold Prediction #4- GCIII will be the last GC on the PC. GCIV will be console.

If the big selling point is how much easier it will make gaming, I'm not at all convinced that Vista is ever going to be right for me. I do more than play games, I try to create "art" using 3d animation programs. How is Vista going to be a benefit for me with that? If all the hype is about how much easier it makes gaming, where does that leave the consumer who actually does something productive? If this is Bill Gates' idea of progress, by appealing only to gamers, he has his head further up his posterior than I thought.

Bold Prediction #2- In 1-2 years, someone will figure out how to get rid of the copy protection crap Microsoft put in Vista.

News flash: PMP was cracked yesterday.

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/01/29/1811201

I've had to install XP 5 times (same comp), with Vista thats around 700-900 dollars CND in vista codes my comp only cost 2000!
ho hum I'm such an idiot to be concerned how it would have gone down with vista as my operating system.

Vista does have numerous legitmate concerns for most tech savy and profesional users. It seems microsoft was looking to only make two types of customers happy at launch.

1. the non tech savy that will buy it because it is the new shiny...and because Crysis will look so sweet on dx10 (for the ones that know what dx10 is).

2. Large corporations looking to have more control over employees and data.

Microsoft has pretty much chosen to piss off everyone else. Software developers, including game developers are not happy. John Carmack (programer for id), and Gabe Newell (Valve) were not happy with Vista. Newell went as far to say that Vista might make him go Mac (I'm sure mac users everywhere rejoiced). My wife's company whom she is a programer for seems to despise Vista and refuses to use it (for now).

I believe some of the nay sayers are going over board, but alot of the concerns are valid. There is alot of negativity for vista on the net right now over numerous issues. XP while there was some resistance, never caused this much venom to be spewed forth by the masses.

As a graphics professional I can say that Vista is a kick in the teeth to 3-d artist and developers. It does nothing to help us be more productive. It just hogs more of our precious ram. Almost no graphics software supports it. Vista at one point didn't even support open GL. Now they have some kind of pathetic poorly implemented open GL support that performs far worse than XP. It will be a cold day in hell if they think 3-d developers are going to switch exclusivly to dx10. Is Microsoft trying to force me to migrate to Mac?

It will be interesting to see what Softimage, Adobe, Autodesk and others choose to do in the future. Right now it's looking like once again Macs will be the superior graphics machines and PC's the superior business machines.Both sides seem eager to lockdown exactly what you can and can't do on your machine. So much for moving forward.

I'll be using XP pro sp2 for as long as possible.

Vista might be some kind of improvement, but it can't be that great.

Besides, you can't count dx10 since it could easily be done for WinXP too. Microsoft knows their new 6 billion dollar sink hole isn't worth much alone and you artificially have to make it more appealing.

For a company like Stardock, which has been a beacon of quality, reliability, individuality and loyalty to more than the bottom line, to make a blatant plug for the corporate machine like this...It makes me wonder if the sell-out is far behind.

I couldn't have said it better myself. After all I've gone through just to make a system that is better than it was 'out of the box', not to mention all the money (and more to come) I am actually starting to wonder if I will still be playing computer games in the not so distant future.
First, the difference between computers that are 'Vista ready' vs. 'Vista capable' is vague, not really giving what requirements a PC has to have in order to run the basic version of Vista or the premium version (and why would there be two in the first place?... $$$$)but from what I've read if your PC is Vista capable, you can only use the basic version which admittedly doesn't really have any of the Vista 'features' that you would buy the OS for in the first place.
Second, are graphics cards manufacturers going to offer some sort of discount when I have no choice but to 'upgrade' yet again for DirectX10? You know damn well they probably won't (with the possible exception of evga nvidia).
This wouldn't be such a big deal if it wasn't about the money, at least for me. How much more are we going to take as consumers before we start to flex our buying muscles? I mean come on, is it just me? Doesn't anyone else think that we should try to do more than say, "Oh well, what will be will be... if it means I have to pump out more money who cares?".
This is all a very sore subject to me.

okay, first things first, stop bashing SD, please for the love of all that is good in the world of gaming, stop it. They are are an honest bunch of people and probably some of the most respecting of their customers i have ever encountered, this is not fair to them, or to your intelligence, stop and think for a second.

okay second to all the people saying that everytime you upgrade your hardware you have to by a new license (okay, every second time you upgrade) would you READ for a change? yes MS is a pain in the butt but they do have numbers to call, you say "Hi stu- i mean, Mr. Technician man, i just installed a gig of ram, a new PCIe vid card, and my built in network card went down so i got a 3com, now it tells me I have to input my license, gimme a hand?" you do not have to pay MS anymore money to fix the issue, you just have to put up with customer service for 30 minutes, wa-frikkin-hoo

now i hate MS as much as the next guy, but give a little credit, they are not out to swindle people that bad, cnet and other tech websites wouldn't allow it, that kind of publicity would only be bad for MS and they know it, call them evil, call them the anti-christ for all i care, but one thing they aren't is pure stupid (some decisions they made are questionable, but this ain't one of them)

thirdlyl... STOP BASHING BRAD!

and as to all this talk about cracking stuff on vista... its been done on the beta for motnhs now, won't be long before the Gold version is cracked too, so don't get your shorts in a wad

I really can't agree with any points you made, Brad :/

1) Standardized benchmarks. Hooray, it's going to be easier for the average person to understand what will and won't run.

Lets be fair, the majority of us posting here probably already KNOW how the specs on a game match to our PCs, and how well it'll run. This is for the casual gamer who isn't really interested in computers. I can't see how it'll affect me at all.

2) I have shortcuts for game directories on my desktop, so I can run the client or start modifying it by double clicking anyway. When I was modding GC2, I think I had 5 shortcuts to various folders, so I could modify them all without manually navigating. What's the new explorer got to offer that old shortcuts couldn't do?

3) This is great for people who didn't pay any attention to what their kids played and don't want to go to the hassle of caring. Sorry, but it'll more than likely just turn out like internet parental controls, IE disabled within about 3 days. Built-in parental controls are generally weak, and the only way to actually utilise them is to know how your computer works better than your child does. And if you know that much, you should know enough to not let them buy completely unsuitable games.

4) Joy, I can now fork out for a $600 video card to play any new games built to work on vista. Oh, and I can upgrade to vista. Huzzah. As said, it's just

A) make DX10 vista only
make DX10 OMGUBERHAWT USE IT OR FAIL AT GAMES
C) Profit!

5) So solitaire and minesweeper will look shinier? I've never been a fan of built-in "casual" games. I suppose it could be good, but I doubt it's worth vista.

Yes, I'll be getting vista. EVE is upgrading to a dx10 client and the images and models show the graphics blowing every other game in existance out of the water. I like pretty explosions, so I'll be getting it, and a stupidly expensive video card too. I'll probably have to upgrade my entire computer to get it to run nicely too.

I'll be getting vista, but I'm not doing it because I like vista. I'm doing it because DX10 is vista only, and I'm certainly leaving it for 6 months so it can "iron out the kinks"

Bleh.

now i hate MS as much as the next guy, but give a little credit, they are not out to swindle people that bad,

It has nothing to do with hating MS. I don't hate the company necessarily, I hate the business practice. But if you don't think they are 'swindling' us, you are dead wrong. I know no company is in business to not make money, but upgrading OS systems which are inherently forced upon you (what other OS can I use? If there is one, please tell me)and then charging even 100.00 is insane. MS has more money than God, so please, I think Bill can afford to offer his newest, greatest idea at a relatively cheap cost since he is where he is because of us, the people who use and purchase his products.
Personally I'd like to see someone snipe his ass, just because. Ignorant rich nerd... that's all he is... and it's obvious he spent his life on the playground being picked on because of his cavalier attitude towards society today. Yeah, he got the upper hand.
Sorry for the out of place rant... I'm going to shut up now.
PS: Well put Marcathonas... good to 'hear' from you again.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/01/29/xp-vs-vista/

Humm.. from this, gaming is actually slower :/

It has nothing to do with hating MS.

Perhaps it doesn't for you but it most certainly does for me. I'm proud to hate Microsoft. I despise Microsoft more than Republicans despise Hillary Clinton. I loathe Microsoft even more than Democrats loathe Bush.

I'm not bashing Stardock or Brad, but I absolutely reserve my right to bash Microsoft.

Vista is just another step in the direction of hiding any and all significant OS function on the pretense of making it "easier" and "simpler" (why does this remind me of "kindler, gentler machine gun hand").

I don't want a Media Center. I want to know what files I have on "my" PC and where they are without having to Google for them. I don't want cartoon character puppy dogs or paper clips to "help" me. I want a start menu that’s clear, concise and usable without having to hide a bunch of crap that I don’t want by using personalized menus. Yes, I do want to be shown hidden files and folders. No, do not hide extensions of known file types. No, do not hide protected operating system files from me (Yes, I *am* sure, you flaming a$$h0l3). No, I do not want software error reports downloaded to Microsoft. No, I do not want Windows to automatically check for every new POS update that Microsoft chooses to spit out. No, I do not have .NET Frameworks installed on my new PC. Yes, I specifically uninstalled it. No, I do not want to apply the 133 security updates to .NET Frameworks that Microsoft has deemed to be critical to my system performance.

A PC is a “personal” computer. It should sit there like the lump of plastic, metal and silicon that it is, anxiously waiting for me to press a key and tell it to do something. It shouldn’t give me the hourglass because it’s busy doing something that I don’t even want it to be doing, all on the pretense of “helping” me. None of this stuff that supposedly helps me does any such thing. It helps everyone possible except me. That’s why I hate Microsoft.

I make all the same yes/no choices as Mumble, as I think most tech savvy people do. This is all part of the new MS attitude that says they should really own your computer. If you have any doubt, just remember they decided to make IE7 a "critical" security patch to the OS, when many people decided they didn't want it and would rather stick with IE6 or an alternative browser. I used to like MS many years ago, now I'm very agnostic. I find myself finding more and more of their actions offensive from a user and fairness standpoint. I actually bought their stock at 23, because from a neutral perspective it was under priced. But I still think Vista smells, and it smells in many ways...And we will all end up running it over the next few years.

I'll make this bold prediction right now: In 2011 or 2012 when GCIII is out on beta- you will be able to play it just fine on an XP machine. It will not use DX10 unless someone forces a way for Microsoft to make it non-exclusive. Bold Prediction #2- In 1-2 years, someone will figure out how to get rid of the copy protection crap Microsoft put in Vista. Bold Prediction #3- Only 5% of the PC owners in America will care about 1 or 2. At most. Bold Prediction #4- GCIII will be the last GC on the PC. GCIV will be console.

I agree with your first prediction.  We support Windows 98 which is nearly 10 years old. We certainly wouldn't quit supporting XP.

DirectX 10 doesn't do anything really for us at present, it's mostly first person shooters that get the most benefit.

I think the copy protection stuff will be cracked within a week or two.

I can't envision GalCiv ever being a console-only game.

1) Standardized benchmarks. Hooray, it's going to be easier for the average person to understand what will and won't run. Lets be fair, the majority of us posting here probably already KNOW how the specs on a game match to our PCs, and how well it'll run. This is for the casual gamer who isn't really interested in computers. I can't see how it'll affect me at all. 2) I have shortcuts for game directories on my desktop, so I can run the client or start modifying it by double clicking anyway. When I was modding GC2, I think I had 5 shortcuts to various folders, so I could modify them all without manually navigating. What's the new explorer got to offer that old shortcuts couldn't do? 3) This is great for people who didn't pay any attention to what their kids played and don't want to go to the hassle of caring. Sorry, but it'll more than likely just turn out like internet parental controls, IE disabled within about 3 days. Built-in parental controls are generally weak, and the only way to actually utilise them is to know how your computer works better than your child does. And if you know that much, you should know enough to not let them buy completely unsuitable games. 4) Joy, I can now fork out for a $600 video card to play any new games built to work on vista. Oh, and I can upgrade to vista. Huzzah. As said, it's just A) make DX10 vista only make DX10 OMGUBERHAWT USE IT OR FAIL AT GAMES C) Profit! 5) So solitaire and minesweeper will look shinier? I've never been a fan of built-in "casual" games. I suppose it could be good, but I doubt it's worth vista.

1) No, most people DO NOT know their PC specs.  Look how many people literally dismissed the "Your video drivers are too old to play this game. You MUST update them." dialog and then posted how buggy GalCiv II was?

The numerical performance rating system is really quite nice.

2) I think more and more people will be playing their PC on their high-def TV in their living room. The GAme Explorer makes doing that much easier for average users.

3) I dont' really care about parental controls.

4) DirectX 10 is a pretty major update. I'd argue that MS should be getting paid for it. We charge for expansion packs. MS has been giving away DirectX updates for years now on XP (DirectX 9 was a pretty big improvement too).

DirectX 10 isn't a big deal for us, but for first person shooters, it's a pretty big deal.

5) Having a desktop that is already a 3D surface means that game developers can make 3D games much easier.  Right now, it takes quite a bit of effort to make nice looking casual games.

I can think of quite a number of casual games that dont' exist right now that are possible now that I can do 3D on the desktop using WPF.

Well, that was a creepy random free advertisement for MS. Other than lowering my opinion of SD (something I would have thought very hard to do, but there it is) and scaring me a bit as to the future of one of my favorite game developers, what was that supposed to accomplish?

The one thing that annoys me about some of the MS-haters here is the whining about their so-called "rights." Let me put this simply: you do not have any "rights" to a PC. You do not have a "right" to a freely distributed OS that does everything you want and is user friendly and has no DRM.

Intellectual Property is America's biggest industry at this point and will continue to be so in the future. Microsoft is trying to protect itself against people who want to ignore the law. There is nothing wrong with that at all, and in fact, MS is legally bound to take actions that tend to maximize its profits for its many, many investors (anyone who owns MS stock). If MS did NOT maximize its profits, any shareholder could start a lawsuit (called a derivative suit) claiming that MS has breached its duties to the shareholders. So please, anybody complaining about MS going after profit is simply ignorant of the corporate law.

If you don't like MS or Vista: DO NOT BUY IT. It's that simple. Go ahead and keep XP or use your Linux "distro." I consider myself pretty computer savvy, but I would never bother with Linux. It's too inconvenient for everyday use and I like using mainstream software that I know works. Contrary to the impression you'd get from most of the posters here, you'd think MS products don't work 90% of the time. The fact of the matter is that they work 99.9% of the time and that is good enough for most people.

So go ahead and hate MS with all your soul--but then I suppose you also have to hate Bill Gates and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Which means that you hate the fact that Mr. Gates is easily the largest philanthropist in the HISTORY OF HUMANKIND. Hate the millions of dollars given to combat AIDS in Africa, the billions of dollars that "evil Microsoft" has made available to poor nations and research efforts around the globe. Has MS conducted itself "nicely" throughout its history? No, but those issues were resolved according to the antitrust law.

So go ahead, reserve your right to hate all things MS. I just think you are ignorant of both the law and business realities. I do not defend all their actions, but to demonize them like this is just plain silly.

And I find the sudden backlash against Brad for daring to discuss the positive aspects of Vista to be simply disgusting and disgraceful. Seriously, get a life.

"Daring to discuss the positive aspects of Vista" is fine. I don't really care about that, I have no intention of upgrading to it in the next few years, if ever, and I'm perfectly content to "lose out" on any software that requires DX 10 in that time. What is prompting a strong reaction is fear and concern, I think. Finding an advertisement for Vista on the front page, in Brad's own words no less, makes all of us wonder what's going on. It's very confusing (and concerning) when the anti-DRM, anti-forced-upgrade, work-constantly-to-support-our-products independent company abruptly becomes a vocal supporter of a product that is the opposite of all those things.

Seeing how frustrating video driver incompatibility was for Stardock was when GCII came out, I can see why Brad is excited about Vista and all the system rating stuff. Obviously people who know their computers don't care about stuff like that, but I imagine a developer cares about people being frustrated when they buy a game and it doesn't work (because of system incompatibility) and then posting about how buggy the game is all over the internet.

I totally understand why people don't like Microsoft, but you can't blame them for trying to make money. Like all publicly owned businesses, they're not in it to write great computer software, they're in it to provide long term value to their shareholders. It is interesting, though, that their way to support PC gaming is to make it more like consoles...

Wincustomize stuff. It's been made clear to me in another forum thread that this is the motivating factor for SD (and Brad's) immediate interest in Vista. That makes sense, I suppose. Disregard my earlier comments, in that case. The whole thing's still somewhat confusing, though.

"Daring to discuss the positive aspects of Vista" is fine. I don't really care about that, I have no intention of upgrading to it in the next few years, if ever, and I'm perfectly content to "lose out" on any software that requires DX 10 in that time. What is prompting a strong reaction is fear and concern, I think. Finding an advertisement for Vista on the front page, in Brad's own words no less, makes all of us wonder what's going on. It's very confusing (and concerning) when the anti-DRM, anti-forced-upgrade, work-constantly-to-support-our-products independent company abruptly becomes a vocal supporter of a product that is the opposite of all those things.

How does telling people NOT to get Windows Vista until the driver situation is sorted out an advertisement?

I like Windows Vista. It's a good OS. Why shouldn't I post some of the cool new things they've done in it that will benefit gamers?

Exactly. You just assume that everyone thinks Vista is horrible and that MS is the Antichrist. Newsflash: not everyone agrees with you! Not even all the computer game players of the world! So it's quite possible Brad is just saying, "Look, here's an OS that is kind of neat. It's not perfect yet, but it's good for gaming." It's not a conspiracy and it's nothing to be "afraid of" (a very, very odd reaction to Brad's post, if you ask me). Also, SD has chosen a market strategy. MS has chosen theirs. There is no reason to believe that Brad is selling out to MS. SHeesh.

I wasn't saying you shouldn't, I was just saying it's confusing and a bit concerning to some of us when you do. Do whatever you want, by all means, its your website and your company.