Print 62 comment(s) - last by tastyratz.. on Apr 21 at 1:17 AM

Service Pack 3 release details revealed.

With Windows Vista taking quite a bit of heat from customers and pundits around the web, many people have looked to its elder brother -- Windows XP -- for solace. The nearly seven-year-old operating system still soldiers on for many and is seen as a relatively "lightweight" and better-performing alternative to Windows Vista.

However, with Windows XP showing more than a few gray whiskers in its beard, it's important to at least keep the operating system somewhat relevant in today's world. Service Pack 3 (SP3) promises to give Windows XP a nice caffeine boost to allow it to stay fresh for at least a few more years.

As DailyTech previously reported, SP3 contains nearly 1,100 hotfixes and patches. In addition, SP3 provides new features to the operating system including a new activation process, Network Access Protection Module, Black Hole Router Detection, and Microsoft's Kernel Mode Cryptographics Module.

Microsoft began pushing out betas of SP3 in August 2007 and released a Release Candidate (RC) version to the public in early December. The last public release came earlier this year with a SP3 RC2.

Today, however, Neowin was able to get the release schedule for the Release to Manufacturer (RTM) version of Windows XP SP3. According to Neowin, OEMs, Volume License customers, Windows Connect users and MSDN/TechNet subscribers will have access to SP3 on April 21. The public will have to wait until April 29 to access SP3 via Windows Update and Microsoft's Download Center.

Microsoft will not push SP3 via Automatic Updates until June 10 which should give IT managers enough time to work with the service pack should things go awry.

The news of the SP3 release schedule comes just weeks after Microsoft gave Windows XP a 2+ year extension on life. Microsoft initially set the end-of-sale date for Windows XP for January 31, 2008 but later revised the date to June 30, 2008.

Mounting pressure due to the increasing sales of low-cost computers forced Microsoft to further push the end-of-sale date to June 30, 2010 or one year after the release of the next version of Windows; whichever is later.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I love how...
By pauldovi on 4/15/2008 10:09:21 AM , Rating: 4
Every Dailytech Article about any OS starts off with a commentary on how much people hate Vista.

RE: I love how...
By yacoub on 4/15/08, Rating: 0
RE: I love how...
By HaZaRd2K6 on 4/15/2008 10:53:18 AM , Rating: 5
Should they just not report on that fact?

Not fact. Opinion.

You don't like Vista? That's cool, but don't assume everyone "hates" Vista. I love it and I've been using it for the better part of 9 months now, pretty much exclusively. The only problems I've had were my own fault (usually resulting from aggressive overclocking).

RE: I love how...
By V3ctorPT on 4/15/2008 3:14:04 PM , Rating: 1
i use it too... and i love it... no compability issues at all... but it still freakin' LAGS behind XP... and where the hell is my SP1 for vista... it came out ages ago and I still don't have it...

RE: I love how...
By darkpaw on 4/15/2008 5:25:55 PM , Rating: 5
It's not an automatic update yet, they usually give a few months before doing that.

Go to Microsoft's website, search for Vista SP1, download, install, enjoy!

You should be able to install it through manually running Windows Update as well, but personally I like having the download version available.

RE: I love how...
By HaZaRd2K6 on 4/15/2008 8:41:06 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah I could do that, too. I can't install SP1 because of my lousy Creative drivers. Last time I ever use a Creative sound card. I just with my onboard wasn't Realtek.

RE: I love how...
By darkpaw on 4/16/2008 11:15:15 AM , Rating: 2
I feel your pain there, I took out my Audigy 2 Platinum when I rebuilt my system a few weeks ago and tossed it in a box. I really don't miss it at all, the Realtek HD on my board works better then the Audigy was under Vista anyways.

(Oh yah, and Creative can just go away, they're done time to bury em)

RE: I love how...
By Locutus465 on 4/16/2008 11:41:18 AM , Rating: 2
So far my x-fi fatal1ty seems to be working very well in vista. Though I am at the point where if I have issues with the sound card at this point I will switch to onboard and give up on some of the "cool" game audio processing provided by the Fatal1ty's OpenAL support.

RE: I love how...
By eye smite on 4/15/2008 10:23:00 AM , Rating: 1
You know, when I ask Joe Blow on the street, most everytime I hear the same thing, that they don't care for vista. Some people actually like it. I'm indifferent for the most part, although I don't like how much hardware it takes to run the OS as effectively as XP. So, it's more a perception issue at this point than actual problems with the OS and MS can only blame themselves for not putting the fires out as they came up. Also, their unethical use of UAC is something they should have thought over a bit better, with better explanations and an option to disable UAC right on the popup so that Joe Average user didn't have to deal with that nonsense. I understand from a techy position it's a good thing, but the average user does not want to have to deal with a popup everytime they click on a program they've installed just to use it. In the end, MS can only blame themselves for the bad image Vista has on several issues, and they've done very little to correct any of it. Have they actually got any RC's available yet to fix WHS? I haven't seen any. I'll wait a while after sp3 for XP is released and see what they rehashed in it before I download it. If they put vista like bloatware and DRM in sp3, forget it, won't go near it.

RE: I love how...
By HaZaRd2K6 on 4/15/2008 10:56:18 AM , Rating: 4
Also, their unethical use of UAC is something they should have thought over a bit better

Unethical how? Does it kidnap your children and demand a ransom? Or perhaps it puts a gun to your head before you can open up that clearly virus-infested .exe file from

UAC is designed to annoy users, perhaps. But for the most part, unless you're installing something that's a little out-of-the-mainstream, you'll never see UAC prompts. I turned it off simply because I know what I install, and when I first set up the machine, I was getting tired of having to allow Windows to install so many of my normal applications.

RE: I love how...
By 306maxi on 4/15/2008 7:42:57 PM , Rating: 2
Since when does Joe Blow know **** about the IT world? The vast majority of people merely ask their "tech guru" friend who has probably never even built a PC in his lifetime and he merely spews forth what his ignorant anti-Microsoft friends tell him.

If I hadn't used Vista in various shapes and forms for the last 2 years or so I'd say it was a pretty horrible OS going on what a lot of people say. But I can honestly say hand on heart that at release it was the most polished Windows version I've seen on launch day. XP took two service packs to be decent. Vista was good without SP1 and is even better now.

RE: I love how...
By archcommus on 4/15/2008 6:30:07 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, it is absolutely ridiculous. This article is about XP and SP3, why the HELL would it start off by saying how much everyone hates Vista. I like DT for the news it delivers, but I am starting to see great bias in its writers, and it's starting to get really annoying.

I said basically the same thing as you in the Gartner article, but got rated down hugely for it.

RE: I love how...
By jimbojimbo on 4/16/2008 1:10:10 PM , Rating: 2
The whole point of mentioning that is because that is one of the reasons they extended the support time for XP and thus SP3. If everybody loved XP and went to Vista, Microsoft would've been happy to end XP support way back when and there would never have been a new service pack.

I for one still use XP for the same reason ultra-portables are using XP. My desktop will drag like all hell with Vista so I'm with the leaner XP which worked and still works perfectly.

XP vs. Win2000
By vailr on 4/15/2008 10:17:45 AM , Rating: 2
If Microsoft wanted to be realistic, why don't they continue support for XP, to include a future SP4? Windows2000 had a SP4, so why not WinXP as well? Continue selling XP discs as potential upgrades, for all those still using Win98/ME/2000. An older 500 MHz CPU machine is still adequate for your basic email & web surfing box. Maybe even consider a "planned price reduction schedule", so that a retail WinXP SP3 package would cost only: $39 at Office Depot/Staples/Fry's. Or: bundled with a MS keyboard/mouse, for $59 after $10 MIR.

RE: XP vs. Win2000
By Alphafox78 on 4/15/2008 10:58:02 AM , Rating: 3
WinNT - SP6
Win2K - SP4
WinXP - SP3

Each OS has 1.5 service packs less than the previous version, it is impossible for XP to have SP4!! IMPOSSIBLE IS SAY!! ;)

RE: XP vs. Win2000
By PurpleDiamond on 4/15/2008 11:30:58 AM , Rating: 2
Windows 2000 SP4 was for the pro and server versions, it made more sense to continue making service packs since they were used by multiple products.

RE: XP vs. Win2000
By PICBoy on 4/15/2008 12:03:57 PM , Rating: 1
Usually M$ tends to be more opportunistic than realistics, so I wouldn't keep my hopes up with something as dreamy as this. But hey, we can always dream, right? ;-)

RE: XP vs. Win2000
By ltcommanderdata on 4/15/2008 12:33:20 PM , Rating: 2
I also think that an SP4 would be a good idea, especially now that XP Home's EOL has been extended for an in-determinant amount of time. At the very least, we should get an SP3-Rollup Update in a year or two's time, like Windows 2000 got for SP4.

One question I've had is that with XP Home being extended, has Microsoft extended mainstream support for XP? I believe mainstream support is set to end in 2009, which means after that they won't have no-charge incident and warranty claims, which will be strange if they intend to keep selling XP for a year or 2 after that with no warranty.

RE: XP vs. Win2000
By Master Kenobi on 4/15/2008 1:17:41 PM , Rating: 2
Yea, no word on the extended mainstream support. Logically one would assume it would also be extended but not necessarily. They may shift the caveat over to the individual vendors that they have to support it because they wanted it. Microsoft is crafty, best check the fine print on the extension.

RE: XP vs. Win2000
By darkpaw on 4/15/2008 5:28:01 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see them extending mainstream support either. The continued sales are specifically OEM for companies selling ultra low cost systems and OEM is always vendor supported.

Since MS will be ending retail sales on schedule as far as I know, I'm pretty sure mainstream support will end on the scheduled date.

activation process
By tastyratz on 4/15/2008 1:22:45 PM , Rating: 2
Does anyone know if the sp3 change in activation impacts company wide roll outs using corporate keys that wouldn't normally require activation?

RE: activation process
By ltcommanderdata on 4/15/2008 6:52:02 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think so. As I understand it, the activation change is that instead of entering your serial number during the installation phase, you do so after XP is installed and the OS booted.

RE: activation process
By Master Kenobi on 4/15/2008 7:50:16 PM , Rating: 2
Corporate keys do now require activation. The days of "XP VLM" that required no activation are over. Now we have to setup internal boxes to "re-sign" the keys every few months. Under the VLM program this is all included of course, but the signing servers have to dial Microsoft every so often as well to maintain the ability to validate keys internally.

RE: activation process
By kzrssk on 4/16/2008 5:55:10 PM , Rating: 2
I thought that was only Vista and the KMS servers. Have they implemented that system for XP now?

RE: activation process
By tastyratz on 4/21/2008 1:17:32 AM , Rating: 2
that's what I wanted to know.
Right now for xp we have to do nothing of the sort. Perhaps your thinking vista?
Real legit xp corp keys for big corporations don't take activation or re- anything. Perhaps corp keys leaked to the net that were blacklisted may have trouble but for the rest I'm curious.

The Truth
By SamoanPower on 4/15/08, Rating: 0
RE: The Truth
By Master Kenobi on 4/16/2008 8:50:54 AM , Rating: 2
Your first mistake was listening to the media.

RE: The Truth
By marsbound2024 on 4/16/2008 11:50:37 PM , Rating: 2
Dailytech also reported on this. So what are you trying to say?

awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By yacoub on 4/15/08, Rating: -1
RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By TITAN1080 on 4/15/08, Rating: 0
RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By yacoub on 4/15/2008 10:24:09 AM , Rating: 2
Ignore the rate-downs here by Vista aficionados. They are welcome to enjoy Vista. Personal use is really not the concern for MS, where the greatest revenue comes from volume licensing.
Anyone who talks to or reads the blogs of most all IT managers at large companies knows that the vast majority have zero interest in Vista even though they've had hands-on with it on their own personal machines and may even find some of its offerings appealing on a personal level.
The bottom line is that it's just not worth the expense and effort to upgrade entire infrastructures to Vista for no real useful business benefit.
Then throw in all the end-user frustrations with the heavier-handed DRM, the inability to use certain software, and the early hardware & driver issues, and you have even more hesitancy to touch it, and the situation you have today where people would rather stick with their existing OS that meets their needs, requires no additional expenditures, and adds none of the headaches of going through an upgrade cycle that is essentially pointless (especially so long as MS keeps extending the security patching expiration date for XP, which they will be forced to keep doing for business customers so long as the major corporations refuse Vista, which is likely to continue until the next OS release - which in turn is incentive for MS to get it moving along a faster programming lifecycle).

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By Master Kenobi on 4/15/2008 11:04:06 AM , Rating: 3
XP was a fluke. Normally MS releases new Operating Systems every 3 years. It was an abnormally long time between XP and it's successor Vista. The time between Vista and it's successor (Windows 7) should be back to the normal 3 year cycle.

especially so long as MS keeps extending the security patching expiration date for XP, which they will be forced to keep doing for business customers so long as the major corporations refuse Vista, which is likely to continue until the next OS release - which in turn is incentive for MS to get it moving along a faster programming lifecycle

Doesn't really work that way. XP's expiration date was only extended for the Home version, which is present on the dinky little Sub-Notebooks. For corporations they are usually on VLM agreements so they operate outside the range of being able to purchase XP (It's already purchased per VLM agreement). However, corporations will upgrade through attrition to Vista, much the same way they did to XP. Heck, at my company we just started moving to XP less than 3 years ago and still have 1/5th of our environment on Windows 2000.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By jay401 on 4/15/2008 11:30:50 AM , Rating: 1
Sure, except, as you noted, the next OS is roughly two years away so that would mean corporations with tardy upgrade schedules who didn't upgrade to XP until a couple years ago (like yours) won't upgrade to Vista since the next MS OS will be out by the time they would be ready to upgrade to Vista. =)

By Master Kenobi on 4/15/2008 1:03:58 PM , Rating: 2
Possibly. But that would mean in 2 years we would be upgrading to a brand new OS, which will be likewise full of all sorts of problems and unproven/untested. We will likely do the migration to Vista and take our sweet time since Vista will be field tested at that point. Corporations are generally not big fans of jumping on something "brand new".

By FITCamaro on 4/15/2008 1:19:46 PM , Rating: 2
I know new machines at my company are getting shipped with Vista. Our IT department though reflashes them to XP.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By B3an on 4/15/2008 2:20:41 PM , Rating: 3
You're probably too young to remember, which would explain your stupid comment. But XP had an exceptionally long life. Just because Vista isn't going to be around for as long before a new OS comes out doesn't mean MS thinks Vista is crap. There trying to get back to there old ways. Although i wouldn't be at all surprised is Windows 7 is delayed, just like Vista was, and possibly comes out 1+ year later than scheduled.

By the time Windows 7 comes out, assuming it's out on release, Vista would have been around for about 4 years.
MS should release a completely new OS every 3 years if you ask me.

By V3ctorPT on 4/15/2008 3:08:38 PM , Rating: 2
Oh well... Vista off... SP3 in...

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By 306maxi on 4/15/2008 3:40:02 PM , Rating: 2
Tbh I'm not fussed with timing. Microsoft should release a new OS when it's needed and when it's ready. For me Vista was ready. But I sure am glad they chucked all their code in the bin and redid it because it's stable and it runs well.

On an unrelated note Paul Thurrot has responded nicely to Gartner's criticism of Windows.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By Master Kenobi on 4/15/2008 6:28:45 PM , Rating: 2
Yea, several of the regular tech bloggers seemed to recognize Gartner's crazy talk for what it is. Slow week at the Gartner office. :P

By 306maxi on 4/15/2008 7:21:33 PM , Rating: 2
I think it's slightly unfair to call Paul a blogger. His site actually has original content unlike and the content is usually quite objective. Though to be fair I did link to his blog :)

Got to love sites like

Informative and don't have all the crappy spin and sensationalistic "journalism" that a lot of "news" sites have.

By jimbojimbo on 4/16/2008 1:17:33 PM , Rating: 2
MS should release a completely new OS every 3 years if you ask me
Hey, you don't work for Microsoft do you? New OS every 3 years = more money. Service packs every couple of years = $0.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By amanojaku on 4/15/2008 10:19:46 AM , Rating: 3
I haven't used Vista so I don't know what's wrong with it other than the complaints about UAC (hey, at least they tried,) drivers (not their fault,) slowness (could be related to code and hardware both,) etc...

My reason for not using Vista is even more basic: all of my applications run fine on the hardware I have, which just happens to be running XP. I don't need to upgrade since I'm not on the latest games (time constraints made worse by DailyTech :-) or running aggressive apps. Knights of the Old Republic runs fine on my company-supplied IBM T43, making my dual-core Athlon rig redundant until I get the urge to buy something new. Crysis doesn't quite appeal, but that's another topic...

Anywho, Vista is like Windows 2000 to me (didn't need it, so I rarely used it) but unlike ME I would actually recommend Vista to certain users. In my opinion Vista is less of an upgrade and more of a competitor to XP.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By 306maxi on 4/15/2008 7:31:10 PM , Rating: 1
If I hadn't already posted I'd rate you up for that.

I always reccomend Vista for new builds. But if someone already has a PC and it does what they need it to then there's no need to upgrade to Vista. I simply have Vista on my PC now because I like it and there was no value in buying a 6 year old OS when I want to keep this PC for 2 or 3 years.

I've never seen the point of upgrading to a new OS on an old PC. Why pay twice for Windows? Seems silly to me.

By darkpaw on 4/15/2008 8:26:35 PM , Rating: 2
This is the advice I give to people that ask me too. If you have an XP machine there is very little reason to upgrade unless you're buying a new machine anyways. If getting a new machine, there is very little reason to get XP unless there is a specific application or hardware that isn't supported on Vista*

*Businesses will likely keep XP for quite a while.

By xzourska on 4/15/2008 10:24:27 AM , Rating: 2
Well now with this new 2 year extension and up and coming release of XP3 hopefully they will release another update pack or roll-up pack before the two years limit MS has set is over. I intend to keep XP around on my machine or at least in my library for backwards compatibility for a while to come, the same with my old Win98 copy that I have sitting around.

Like yacoub I hate the DRM of Vista, I know that MS is a big sponsor of it since they don't want their stuff stolen but do you have to extend it to the content it runs? Windows Retail copies are already hard enough to get installed on a computer if you sometimes have to reinstall it over and over again. This DRM stuff is just another thorn in everyone's side curtsy of the DMCA.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By AlexWade on 4/15/2008 10:24:33 AM , Rating: 2
I'm glad I'm a TechNet member. I had Vista before it went on sale. I had Vista SP1 a month before public release. And now I'm getting XP SP3 before others. TechNet is the best $300 my business spent.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By ImSpartacus on 4/15/2008 3:02:47 PM , Rating: 2
Technet is free. At least for me it was. I am a member of Technet, but not MSDN.

I've been getting Technet newsletters and little betas and things (like Vista and SP1 as you said) for almost a year now.

I can't even remember what I did to get a Technet subscription.

By Master Kenobi on 4/15/2008 3:23:38 PM , Rating: 2
Your on the Technet mailing list, not the Technet subscription. There is a big difference.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By 306maxi on 4/15/2008 11:01:05 AM , Rating: 4
What's with all this DRM B$?

I turn my PC on in the morning, I can play my games, I can watch DVD's and so on. DRM doesn't enter into it. DRM in Vista is a nice bit of FUD that people dreamt up and included with UAC and so on. Yes there is DRM involved with Blu-ray but that's the media.... not the OS.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By Master Kenobi on 4/15/2008 11:07:48 AM , Rating: 2
They are just spouting FUD because Vista will honor DRM requirements on hardware and media if the hardware and media possesses it. It has no DRM inherently that prevents you from doing anything. Intel will be implementing DRM at the hardware level soon as well so it's a moot point.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By jay401 on 4/15/2008 11:42:21 AM , Rating: 1
So why would I want an OS that does that when I have one that doesn't? :)

As far as fair use goes, if Intel cooperates with Big Content and tries to lock things down at the hardware level, people concerned with maintaining acceptable rights over products they've paid for will move to AMD or, by that time, NVidia.

Bottom line is you're right though - most people don't know or don't care and Big Content takes advantage of that. DRM -will- increase and people -will- be forced to pay multiple times for things they've already paid for just to be able to play it on different devices, but at the same time the black market to alleviate such nonsense will grow and normal people will be stuck between having their wallet raped or doing something actually illegal in order to do what they used to be able to do just fine. It's similar to Prohibition, only this time Industry is the lead antagonist and Government is the accessory. This is a more difficult scenario to fight than the People vs Government-sponsored morality.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By Master Kenobi on 4/15/2008 1:14:53 PM , Rating: 2
Once Intel rolls out DRM at the hardware level, nVidia and AMD will be forced to follow suit. Or risk things not working on their products. Same goes for older Operating Systems. It's not a far cry to build in a check to make sure that the OS and Hardware are DRM friendly. As a result this will lock out many Linux distros and hardware vendors that don't want to play ball with the media companies. If the Linux/Open Source communities attempt to "fix" it and get it to bypass the DRM protection then they are legally liable since circumventing copyright protection is technically illegal.

That is the road I see things going down in the future and only the media companies are to blame. If Intel/Microsoft refused to play ball, then they would press that Intel/Microsoft is an accessory to theft, and they directly help pirates by deliberately leaving loopholes in their systems. It's a sticky situation and I'm sure it will end up in the courts in a big way eventually.

By 306maxi on 4/15/2008 3:00:34 PM , Rating: 3
Check MATE.

Until someone cracks it all of course!

By retrospooty on 4/15/2008 1:11:08 PM , Rating: 2
I have been using the beta for several months without any issues at all. Seems as solid as can possibly be.

By inperfectdarkness on 4/15/2008 1:21:02 PM , Rating: 2
i'm confused. will sp3 update compatibility for gaming? or will i still be forced to bite into the "vista" apple in order to keep up with the latest/greatest/highest resolutions/quad sli/etc?

imho, the only thing that xp improved on over win98 was removing the blue screen of death. i REALLY don't want or need "bells and whistles".

By darkpaw on 4/15/2008 5:24:18 PM , Rating: 3
imho, the only thing that xp improved on over win98 was removing the blue screen of death. i REALLY don't want or need "bells and whistles".

You're kidding right? Windows 98 didn't have a clue what to do with more then 512mb of memory and could be hacked by a Chinese lab rat.

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By Locutus465 on 4/15/2008 2:05:21 PM , Rating: 2
Hmmm, I take it you're yet someone else that has yet to use vista? What aspect of the "DRM Laddenness" of vista scares you? I've been using Vista since launch and none of my media, NONE has been affected.

I agree that you need a beefier computer to run Vista, the same will continue to be be true moving forward with Windows I would imagine. But "beefier" means dual core CPU, 2GB memory, reasnobly powerful graphics for aero and a reasnobly big hard drive (80GB+). Is there anyone visiting anandtech/DT that doesn't have a machine that meets these specs? Hell my $600 HP laptop doesn't have any issues runing vista ultimate edition with aero enabled running dual monitors!!!

By inperfectdarkness on 4/16/2008 9:18:01 AM , Rating: 2
then perhaps it's a ploy by microsoft to sell more xbox 360's. console gaming is improving...while pc gaming is languishing.

and rather than faster/better hardware components provinding even better gaming--microsoft keeps inventing ways to saturate system resources with even MORE o.s. crap that runs in the background. consoles don't have these issues.

having dual core processors is nice...but it it takes one of them alone to just run the O.S.; you're really not improving on much.

maybe vista should come with a "minimal boot"...something that brings up the desktop and pretty much nothing else (no, i'm not talking safe-mode). microsoft has pushed us quite a ways away from the background resource requirements for running a program in DOS (i.e. NONE). they need to step back in that direction.

seriously, at this point microsoft is inventing new O.S. to justify its existence and to try and bilk consumers out of more $$$.

By Locutus465 on 4/16/2008 10:52:34 AM , Rating: 2
Except Vista will automatically disable all resource hogging features when a game starts up automatically, case in point while a game is launching Aero will automatically be disabled while the game exe is running as not to steal GPU resourcese from the game. So in fact this is not a microsoft ploy to kill pc gaming, to the countrary they with through a lot of fuss and bother to come up with the Games for windows "platform"/logo to ensure a good vista gaming experience. The main problem people have experience with regard to vista gaming are bad drivers and DX10 hardware generally not offering the frame rates we're accustomed to with DX9 hardware.

That said, I just upgraded my computer's video card to an ATI Radeon 3870 video card and I can finally play crysis fine at my 19" LCD's native resolution. I'm very happy with that. I also played it last night on my 50" 720P TV for a little while, that was completely amazing fun. Doom also ranked up there even though it doesn't support "HD resolutions" (think 1280x720).

RE: awesome, i hope SP3 is a solid release
By jimbojimbo on 4/16/2008 1:29:40 PM , Rating: 2
Is there anyone visiting anandtech/DT that doesn't have a machine that meets these specs?
I'm sure there are a ton of people like that. I have a laptop at home with a 1.2GHz Celeron and a desktop with an Athlon 2500 1.8GHz, oc'd to 2.2. It plays all the games I want and does everything I need. Sure if I'm encoding a 1280x720 video I'll have to plan it out since it'll take a couple of days but no harm in that. Why would I want to buy a new PC or install Vista and make my system slower than it is? My parents are using a Pentium 800MHz with Win2k and all they do is browse the internet. Should they buy a new computer? Definitely not.

By Locutus465 on 4/16/2008 1:40:38 PM , Rating: 2
This off hand it sounds like your machine won't have an issue with vista and aero glass.

"Vista runs on Atom ... It's just no one uses it". -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini

Most Popular Articles5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
No More Turtlenecks - Try Snakables
September 19, 2016, 7:44 AM
ADHD Diagnosis and Treatment in Children: Problem or Paranoia?
September 19, 2016, 5:30 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki