Poll time.

Just curious who are keen on a Vista or Office 2007 upgrade. Even if not immediately, I think from a gamers point of view, the lure of DX10 is far too strong...not to mention the upcoming DX10 cards :)

For some tantalising insight as to what DX10 will enable, check out the demo of the CryTek Engine (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RactW8Gkvuk&mode=related&search=) Even if you're not a Far Cry fan, you must admit the enhanced lighting and volumetric effects look awesome :) Within the space of a few months(or arguably already) PC gaming will surpass the capabilities of the next gen consoles...even the mighty (and expensive) PS3 and its cell processor...

As for Office 2007, IMO it is an awesome improvement to its predecessors and far outshines any of its competition. Ive only been using the beta2 and I'm mightily impressed. Unlike Vista, they MS seems to have a very creative and lateral thinking team on Office 2007. That one is definitely a must for work/uni purposes(they can pay for it too lolz) :p

I haven't tried out the Vista beta yet, and I don't even want to, honestly. I was blown away by Office though. Its swanky, easier, more powerful and cooler by a mile. Its got functions that make professionalism a breeze, and I am so going for it once it comes out.

Astro, you said that DX10 allure is strong. I agree, yes. But is DX10 Vista-specific, or will we see a friendly download at the Microsoft webby? :confused:

Astro, you said that DX10 allure is strong. I agree, yes. But is DX10 Vista-specific, or will we see a friendly download at the Microsoft webby? :confused:

DX10 is indeed Vista specific. For all the gripes people have with it's 'bling vs function' factor, there has been alot of work done to enhance graphical processing potential and efficiency. Its for this reason that its unlikely that DX10 is even applicable within XP, but I dont know enough about each OS' architecture to say that with any certainty :)

I wouldnt bother with the Vista beta as a main OS. I used the excellent VM ware to set vista RC2 as a virtual machine so I could launcg it *within* xp :) Saves alot of partitioning/dual boot config hassles.

mtfbwya

Well then, that turns the tables. I'd rather wait and see if DX10 really turns out to be the Holy Grail, before I take the plunge though. I bet the critics will just swarm over it. :xp: Of course, my switch is inevitable, and will come somewhere next year, possibly with the release for Halo 2 for PC.

I'll eventually get vista on my home PC but not before several months as I don't see any particular need to upgrade right away.

As for office, I rather like the new version too although I find that it takes a lot of resources (the search indexer alone was eating about 80-90 MB of ram. It was a bit better after I killed that process but it is far from being a "lite" application). I'll definitely get it at the office but I don't really have a need for a new office version at home.

I'll get Vista when I build my new system. I'll upgrade to Office 2007 as well, since I can't live without Word and Excel! And you're right Astro: Machines with DX10 cards will make any console's graphics look cheap, making a DX10 card THE logical place to invest your gaming dollar. Whether it should be an Nvidia or ATI card remains to be seen.

well, i'll be getting Vista eventually if and only because i want to be able to run DX10.

and for the record: Open Office pwns M$ Office.

well, i'll be getting Vista eventually if and only because i want to be able to run DX10.

and for the record: Open Office pwns M$ Office.

MS Office 1997-2006...sure... 2007: Nuh uh. It makes open office look like....a MS Office 1997-2006 clone(which is what it is)

Unlike some of MS recent efforts, it *is* unique and innovative. It bleeded quality and ease of use even in beta1... thumbs up to MS for getting something right, lolz :)

mtfbwya

^^^^
lets see, something that is both free and is more than adequate vs something that will cost me lots of money and is a bit more user friendly than the previous versions. :dozey:

again, the fact that Open Office does the majority of tasks that M$ Office does without the price tag is reason enough for me to choose Open Office over M$.

^^^^
lets see, something that is both free and is more than adequate vs something that will cost me lots of money and is a bit more user friendly than the previous versions. :dozey:

again, the fact that Open Office does the majority of tasks that M$ Office does without the price tag is reason enough for me to choose Open Office over M$.

lolz...luckily I wont have to foot the bill in this instance :) (Vista yes)

Everyone's needs are different of course, open office cant even come close to meeting my needs.

I use word, excel, access, publisher, powerpoint for work and my masters project work. I use outlook like its going out of style, and I need something that integrate with my(and my stepdaughters) various windows mobile platform devices. Open office dont cut it. Now, for basic word processing etc, sure. I often recommend it often for anyone needing the basic setup. Great for students on a low income :)

mtfbwya

Neither - Linux pwnz j00 :)
Well duh!

Actually Windows XP ain't that bad, and Vista's Aero interface looks great. But, seeing how I'd rather spend money on new hardware than a copy of Vista, I'll stick with XP and Ubuntu for now. As for DX10, most people won't jump to it unless it runs on current DX9 cards. I could upgrade a 2000 model laptop to DX9 just by installing it over DX8 but I've heard this isn't the case with 10. Also, I think that office programs should be simple and easy to use, providing smooth functionality. Therefore, an office program that eats a lot of memory just to provide a new look (and one that no one's used to) isn't the greatest of ideas. Like I said earlier, Microsoft has some nice products, but A: Linux and OpenOffice are free, and B: Microsoft is trying to put too much into their new OS, and people sometimes just don't want pointless features that they may never use taking up space of their hard drives.