Gamers prefer XP
-
its going to be a close race... Who do you think it is that is mainly accepting vista? As that hardware survey from steam shows, most gamers prefer XP, and I saw a thing recently saying that corporate environments are holding off on installing Vista.
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
Thunderbox666 wrote:
Who do you think it is that is mainly accepting vista?
I am. I am also a serious gamer and play games on Vista. I also play console games, but this is irrelevant. I had slight problems with a couple of _older_ titles on Vista, but nothing that couldn't be solved by trying out different compatibility settings. New games (those marked by 'Games for Windows' tag) run well on Vista without any problems at all.
Kind regards, Pawel Krakowiak Miraculum Software[^]
-
I really shouldnt be supprised.... A survey by Steam (http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html[^]) shows that over 80% of people that play on the steam network use a Windows XP machine.
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
To be honest, I think the message your post gives off is very misleading. So, lets assume that the Steam survey is pretty accurate, which means that approximately 14.6% of gamers are using Windows Vista (in both 32-bit and 64-bit forms). Lets also assume that the November census for Hitslink is also fairly accurate, which states an approximately 9.2% market share for Vista. What does this tell you? This tells me that gamers are much more likely to be running Vista than people in general, which is a completely different meaning from "hey look, XP has more market share than Vista when it comes to gaming". In fact, your statement should be very obvious, unless Vista has somehow balooned 20% in market share over the last season, or some kind of magic like that.
-
Thunderbox666 wrote:
and I saw a thing recently saying that corporate environments are holding off on installing Vista.
As I sit here on my corporate PC with it's Vista sticker on it and XP installed, I can positively state that it is true. As this corporate has 13k PCs it seems fairly significant :-D
-
I really shouldnt be supprised.... A survey by Steam (http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html[^]) shows that over 80% of people that play on the steam network use a Windows XP machine.
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
Last time I tried to install Half-Life 2 on my Vista machine, it failed. I managed to get the installation process going by mucking around on the DVD. The took forever, and when it was all installed, it just wouldn't work. Maybe that is the reason? :)
-- Kein Mitleid Für Die Mehrheit
-
To be honest, I think the message your post gives off is very misleading. So, lets assume that the Steam survey is pretty accurate, which means that approximately 14.6% of gamers are using Windows Vista (in both 32-bit and 64-bit forms). Lets also assume that the November census for Hitslink is also fairly accurate, which states an approximately 9.2% market share for Vista. What does this tell you? This tells me that gamers are much more likely to be running Vista than people in general, which is a completely different meaning from "hey look, XP has more market share than Vista when it comes to gaming". In fact, your statement should be very obvious, unless Vista has somehow balooned 20% in market share over the last season, or some kind of magic like that.
Cyrilix wrote:
which states an approximately 9.2% market share for Vista.
Hitslink is including ALL OS's on the market, not just PC's. For you to make the statement you just made, is more misleading then mine. Once you take out 14 irrelivant OS's from Hitslink, then you can compare the two. either that or add in all those consoles, etc to the one on steam... either way, you will have a different result to what you have shown above. For instance, Steams survey shows 83% use XP, while the market share shows 78% If you are going to do a comparison, do it right. For all you who think I was trying to bag out Vista in my original post, I wasnt, I just thought somebody might find those stats interesting.
Cyrilix wrote:
which means that approximately 14.6%
Oh and btw.. its 12.25% at last update
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
-
SK Genius wrote:
Money? I find that money is usually quite the motivator.
Your talking about a group who are know for spending hundreds of $$'s just to get the latest game to run, or on the latest case to show off. Also, I dont know if you read the stats or not, but the most common graphics card among them was the nVidia 8800... Have you seen the cost on those lately?
SK Genius wrote:
Saying that gamers prefer XP is also quite the assumption
Have you been to any LAN parties lately? Hell have you even talked to many "gamers"? Not the people who play maybe one or two games a month, I mean REAL gamers! If you are near one anytime soon, just take a walk along the rows of computers there. Ask around, and see how many people, even if offered it for free, would install Vista. I would be willing to bet all my possesions that more would rather stick with XP, and I would most likely win!
SK Genius wrote:
80% of steams users are on XP.
True, 80% of over 600,000 gamers are still on XP after a year. Doesnt that alone say something?
SK Genius wrote:
you probably think FF is better than IE right? And if not, you probably think that Opera is better than IE? And if not... i guess you like IE
Care to take any more gueeses? I guess your a male right? If not, you are probably a female? and if not.... LOL sorry, I couldnt resist.. no hard feelings? :-D But yes, I do prefer FF
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
Thunderbox666 wrote:
Your talking about a group who are know for spending hundreds of $$'s just to get the latest game to run, or on the latest case to show off. Also, I dont know if you read the stats or not, but the most common graphics card among them was the nVidia 8800... Have you seen the cost on those lately?
You can't take it out of context, the 8800 took only 10%, the second most common was the 7600, which is err... not quite so expensive ;P
Thunderbox666 wrote:
Have you been to any LAN parties lately? Hell have you even talked to many "gamers"? Not the people who play maybe one or two games a month, I mean REAL gamers! If you are near one anytime soon, just take a walk along the rows of computers there. Ask around, and see how many people, even if offered it for free, would install Vista. I would be willing to bet all my possesions that more would rather stick with XP, and I would most likely win!
I am not saying that XP is or is not better, i'm stating that this survey doesn't PROVE that it is.
Thunderbox666 wrote:
True, 80% of over 600,000 gamers are still on XP after a year. Doesnt that alone say something?
Ok then 80% of 0.005% of all gamers, are still using XP, according to this survey. ;) According to a Nielsen Entertainment Study from 2006, there are 117,000,000 active gamers, 54% of those play online. So just to put it into perspective. I imagine the trend will follow with the majority of people still using XP. But that is not an assumption you can make, especially from one organizations user base.
My current favourite word is: Bauble!
-SK Genius
-
Cyrilix wrote:
which states an approximately 9.2% market share for Vista.
Hitslink is including ALL OS's on the market, not just PC's. For you to make the statement you just made, is more misleading then mine. Once you take out 14 irrelivant OS's from Hitslink, then you can compare the two. either that or add in all those consoles, etc to the one on steam... either way, you will have a different result to what you have shown above. For instance, Steams survey shows 83% use XP, while the market share shows 78% If you are going to do a comparison, do it right. For all you who think I was trying to bag out Vista in my original post, I wasnt, I just thought somebody might find those stats interesting.
Cyrilix wrote:
which means that approximately 14.6%
Oh and btw.. its 12.25% at last update
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
Alright, fair enough. I agree with your point that we do need to take out all the Non-PC operating systems in the comparison. The second thing I'd like to say is "yes, I thought you were bagging on Vista". I see that you've clarified your stance. Bashing Vista seems the "in" thing to do on the net these days, so I apologize if I was wrong there. Last thing I'd like to say is... It is 14.6%, if you add Vista 32-bit and Vista 64-bit, which is what we're interested in, right?
-
Alright, fair enough. I agree with your point that we do need to take out all the Non-PC operating systems in the comparison. The second thing I'd like to say is "yes, I thought you were bagging on Vista". I see that you've clarified your stance. Bashing Vista seems the "in" thing to do on the net these days, so I apologize if I was wrong there. Last thing I'd like to say is... It is 14.6%, if you add Vista 32-bit and Vista 64-bit, which is what we're interested in, right?
Cyrilix wrote:
Bashing Vista seems the "in" thing to do on the net these days
Dont worry... I would have no hesitation in bashing Vista, but in this case I was not.
Cyrilix wrote:
It is 14.6%, if you add Vista 32-bit and Vista 64-bit, which is what we're interested in, right?
My bad, I didnt see you say both.
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
modified on Monday, December 10, 2007 6:53:48 AM
-
Couldn't agree more. For decades, adult entertainment has been the driving factor behind internet bandwidth growth and gaming has been the driving factor behind hardware acceleration. Just look at the games themselves (especially FPS). When a new game comes out, its minimum requirements are most often for a graphics card that is less than 6 months old, a CPU less than 12 months old & a memory interface less than 2 years old. If you want to turn on all the bells & whistles, you're going to need hardware that often still hasn't been released to the retail channel yet! To make the most out of the demanding gaming market, new games always have to bring something new & visually exciting, so each new game is more resource intensive than the last. Run a resource hungry game on an OS that is already resource hungry (Vista) & you don't get the most out of the game. Run the same game on a leaner OS (Xp) & you get more of a WOW factor. Back in the day, the keenest gamers absolutely loved it when ID ported Quake II to OpenGL under Linux - frame rates like you wouldn't believe (at the time). Don't know if that sort of thing happens these days, I'm not in that scene so much anymore...
T-Mac-Oz
Absolutely. Windows is really bloated at the moment. Microsoft should just make a bare minimum OS where the unnecessary components aren't even on the disk platter, and allow the users to choose the parts they actually need. I believe Microsoft is already working on componentizing the OS?
ROFLOLMFAO
-
Thunderbox666 wrote:
Who do you think it is that is mainly accepting vista?
I am. I am also a serious gamer and play games on Vista. I also play console games, but this is irrelevant. I had slight problems with a couple of _older_ titles on Vista, but nothing that couldn't be solved by trying out different compatibility settings. New games (those marked by 'Games for Windows' tag) run well on Vista without any problems at all.
Kind regards, Pawel Krakowiak Miraculum Software[^]
I do a lot of gaming on Vista. My old XP box (Geforce 5 series video card, 1GB ram, 2.2 GHz single-core CPU) is too slow for any heavy graphics. My laptop has Vista, a Geforce 8600, 2GB ram, and a 2.2GHz dual-core processor. I have had no performance problems at all with it. There were a few minor compatibility glitches with some of my software, but nothing that a little recoding wouldn't fix.
-
Yes but I opt for one with XP or if thats not an option, the first thing I do is upgrade it to XP when I get it home. I also do this for quite a few of my friends too.
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
Are you buying XP licenses for them? IIRC only the retail business/ultimate licenses allow downgrading. OEM or boxed home basic/premium need not apply.
Otherwise [Microsoft is] toast in the long term no matter how much money they've got. They would be already if the Linux community didn't have it's head so firmly up it's own command line buffer that it looks like taking 15 years to find the desktop. -- Matthew Faithfull
-
its going to be a close race... Who do you think it is that is mainly accepting vista? As that hardware survey from steam shows, most gamers prefer XP, and I saw a thing recently saying that corporate environments are holding off on installing Vista.
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
Thunderbox666 wrote:
I saw a thing recently saying that corporate environments are holding off on installing Vista.
I haven't heard anything about it at my employer ~1400-1500, but the first userland heard about the january Office07 install was early this month. MY SWAG is that vista will be handled like XP apparently was and just get rolled out via new machine issues once they're happy with being able to manage it. (assumption based on the handful of people at the tail end of the laptop cycle who still had 2k when I started).
Otherwise [Microsoft is] toast in the long term no matter how much money they've got. They would be already if the Linux community didn't have it's head so firmly up it's own command line buffer that it looks like taking 15 years to find the desktop. -- Matthew Faithfull
-
Actually i think i could. :rolleyes: And you wonder why schools block these kinds of websites... as well as workplaces. (Of course, if your clever, there's no block that can stop you)
My current favourite word is: Bauble!
-SK Genius
thats OK your employer will respond to your proxy showing up in the logs with a nice piece of pink paper. :doh:
Otherwise [Microsoft is] toast in the long term no matter how much money they've got. They would be already if the Linux community didn't have it's head so firmly up it's own command line buffer that it looks like taking 15 years to find the desktop. -- Matthew Faithfull
-
thats OK your employer will respond to your proxy showing up in the logs with a nice piece of pink paper. :doh:
Otherwise [Microsoft is] toast in the long term no matter how much money they've got. They would be already if the Linux community didn't have it's head so firmly up it's own command line buffer that it looks like taking 15 years to find the desktop. -- Matthew Faithfull
Ah ah, no proxy. Another website, but it must remain secret, else it would be blocked too.
My current favourite word is: Bauble!
-SK Genius
-
its going to be a close race... Who do you think it is that is mainly accepting vista? As that hardware survey from steam shows, most gamers prefer XP, and I saw a thing recently saying that corporate environments are holding off on installing Vista.
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
Thunderbox666 wrote:
and I saw a thing recently saying that corporate environments are holding off on installing Vista.
This almost always happens, and is a poor judge of a new OS. XP waited until SP1 before corporations started loading it on en mass, and the military did not authorize use of XP (using 2000 as a base then), until between SP1 and SP2, and shortly after SP2 demanded that all previous OS's be removed. This is more of an issue of money/timing than the quality of an OS. Corporations understand they will eventually have to move, the military doesn't always, but the military holds out for a carrot from MS in the way of a long-term contract for the new OS via enterprise license prices (unlimited install), and MS holds out with them until they sign a do not use MS competing software. As soon as the two hold out long enough they eventually sign said deal, and the move is on. It has more to do with politics than anything else related to the software. It takes a long time/paperwork to approve a new OS for use by US government and military, it simply takes a lot of money to upgrade corporations, both wait as long as they can with a few developer bases moving ahead first as a forward patrol so to speak. This lets the companies/government through the door for testing without risking assets. These forward looking Vista users are only R&D areas, secretaries and accounting and the likes of general corporate computing wait until much later. This is fully normal, and was the same with XP. If anything, the "forward patrol" is larger on Vista than on XP, probably because of work-base, not due to anything specifically with Vista (more people, more developers, more need for any new OS to be tested). The testing base is simply larger. Smaller companies are usually the first to go to a new OS because they have the flexibility of a single or small numbers of computers to upgrade. If they manage their money with the intent to move by saving prior to release, they can even hit the market faster than the larger corps.
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Sure - but gamers are also most likely to put water pipes on the inside of their computer. On purpose. And overclock $600 graphics cards and $1000 CPUs for a single-digit performance gain. And don't even get me started on the internal neon case lighting... Back in my day, we had rectangular beige metal boxes, and we liked it that way. :)
-- Russell Morris Morbo: "WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!"
Russell Morris wrote:
but gamers are also most likely to put water pipes on the inside of their computer.
not just gamers.... We've been gold-plated water-pipes for almost two years now.
Russell Morris wrote:
And overclock
and I don't even overclock.... we go for cool, as in cold... for stability and long-life. It doesn't pay to run too hot.
Russell Morris wrote:
And don't even get me started on the internal neon case lighting...
awww.... but my motherboard comes with the neon Blue glow.... as did my fans, no upgrades. I took out the cold-cathode tube because it was annoying and always in the way of changing components, but the higher end components often come decked out with such things.
Russell Morris wrote:
Back in my day, we had rectangular beige metal boxes, and we liked it that way.
Mine isn't beige anymore, but it is still rectangular... it barely fits under a table and has 8x 5.25 trays and 3x 3.5, not counting 3 hidden 3.5 in the back that I generally don't use. Its brushed aluminum... and has so many fans it sucks in small animals.... I never cared for beige as a color... to me it is right up there with pink. aluminum.... silver... stainless steel... BLACK... manly colors! ;P It was so nice to drop the girly-man beige for some real manly color. ;P ;P but hey, if you like the sissy beige... no one thinks less of your manhood... ;P ;P
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
dunnydragon wrote:
As this corporate has 13k PCs it seems fairly significant
Meh - The company I work for is six months into a 3-year project to move 360k PCs to Vista. It all balances out :0)
That does put in perspective - thank God I'm a developer and not in infrastructure :laugh:
-
Same thing. I help a lot of people fix their computer problems. So far, none of them want Vista. Any new computer bought is automatically "upgraded" to XP, although I'm a bit disheartened that they still pay for the cost of installing Vista. Microsoft makes money, whether or not people want Vista.
ROFLOLMFAO
I've just rolled a new machine back myself -- I got sick of saying "Wow!", when I should have been working. Weird, isn't it? Used to be that you'd be afraid to roll back to an old operating system, in case the newer hardware wan't supported. Vista has certainly turned the computing world on its head.
-
I really shouldnt be supprised.... A survey by Steam (http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html[^]) shows that over 80% of people that play on the steam network use a Windows XP machine.
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown
Hardware and knowledge problems! Every operating system have little secrets which you learn in time! More users, especially gamers, don't have time for learn operating systems! A single crash, reboot or a restriction in Vista and gamer back to XP instantly! Vista is not an option today for gamers!
-
Hardware and knowledge problems! Every operating system have little secrets which you learn in time! More users, especially gamers, don't have time for learn operating systems! A single crash, reboot or a restriction in Vista and gamer back to XP instantly! Vista is not an option today for gamers!
Member 4177108 wrote:
More users, especially gamers, don't have time for learn operating systems!
It isnt so much that gamers dont have the time, it is more a case of being able to see very easily what will and wont benifit them
Member 4177108 wrote:
Vista is not an option today for gamers!
And a lot of other groups too.... there are still a lot of people that like vista... more fool them lol
"There are three sides to every story. Yours, mine and the truth" ~ unknown