|
OldManDeath
|
 |
January 27, 2007, 08:03:33 PM |
|
Well, I ordered my Vista Ultimate yesterday. I paid for next day shipping so hopefully I will have it on Tuesday.
Then comes the fun of wiping and reinstalling everything. Which brings me to the following question...
Does anyone have a recommendation for good Divx and AC3 codecs that are Vista compatible? I get tv shows in HD with 5.1 AC3 encoding so I can see the shows that I like.
|
|
|
|
xpgeek
|
|
January 28, 2007, 04:08:57 AM |
|
I'm just using Media Player Classic and the standard Xvid codec installed too, with no problems, on Vista Ultimate.
|
|
|
|
Ryan Wagner
|
|
January 28, 2007, 12:28:25 PM |
|
Actualy, I haven't had to do anything with Divx on Vista so I don't have any recommendations. 
|
|
|
|
OldManDeath
|
|
January 28, 2007, 12:51:18 PM |
|
I use the Divx player which is awesome. However, for AC3 encoded files, it requires a coded. This is what has messed with my Vista. I should hopefully have Vista Ultimate on Tuesday, so it will be time for a fresh install. Hopefully with it being officially released, there will be updated codec's and programs for it.
|
|
|
|
OldManDeath
|
|
January 28, 2007, 03:39:08 PM |
|
Ok, another question...
I am planning on switching over to SATA drives only, with 2 300GB Seagate drives. I plan to use one drive, with the other backing up just data from the first.
Currently I have Vista RC2 running on a 250GB PATA drive with the 2 SATA drives just for data. I also have 2 other PATA drives, 120 & 160GB that will be taken out. All drives are 7200 RPM.
I have heard some issues with XP/Vista booting on SATA drives. However, I would assume any issue like these would no longer be an issue with how long SATA has been out.
Does anyone know of any issues botting Windows Vista off an SATA drive?
|
|
|
|
xpgeek
|
|
January 28, 2007, 07:59:06 PM |
|
I have a SATA drive. And besides my Windows Sidebar sometimes starting up missing a gadget that I just had on it, I doubt thats related, no problems at all.
|
|
|
|
Nogg3r5
|
|
January 29, 2007, 11:41:34 AM |
|
**shudders at the thought of the windows sidebar** 
|
|
|
|
xpgeek
|
|
January 29, 2007, 02:01:34 PM |
|
Why? Its not too bad actually. I don't overload it with crap, just have a clock and a little notepad on it. And it uses a LOT less resources then the yahoo widget engine uses.
|
|
|
|
Nogg3r5
|
|
January 29, 2007, 03:08:54 PM |
|
How does it compare to the Google sidebar?
I shudder, because most Microsoft "enhancements" slow the world down!
|
|
|
|
OldManDeath
|
|
January 29, 2007, 04:50:07 PM |
|
How does it compare to the Google sidebar?
I shudder, because most Microsoft "enhancements" slow the world down!
I take it you are totally against Microsoft??? While I am not one to jump on their wagon, they do make some really good software. Yes, their software is bloated, looking back at the trend of software, at least on the Windows platform, and DOS as well, software bloated over time and continues to bloat. I have no Apple nor Linux experience, however, I would bet the software written for them have bloated over the years as well.
|
|
|
|
Ryan Wagner
|
|
January 29, 2007, 09:19:49 PM |
|
Does anyone know of any issues botting Windows Vista off an SATA drive? XP does indeed have problems installing on a SATA drive because it does not include the drivers. If you don't slipstream them into the CD you'll have to insert floppies in the beginning when your setting up XP. Vista, however, does have all the drivers you should need. I have installed it on my SATA drives without any issues. How does it compare to the Google sidebar?
I shudder, because most Microsoft "enhancements" slow the world down!
I don't use the sidebar because I think it takes up too much room, but I do put the weather gadget on the desktop because it is really nice to have. As far as slowing the computer down I don't notice any performance hits.
|
|
|
|
OldManDeath
|
|
January 30, 2007, 04:40:02 AM |
|
I currently have the sidebar running on RC2. It does take up a bit of room. I only use a couple gadgets, so I may just put them on the desktop and do away with the sidebar. I have not noticed any performance issues with it running.
|
|
|
|
Nogg3r5
|
|
January 30, 2007, 10:58:50 AM |
|
hey do make some really good software. Yes, their software is bloated Thats a direct contradiction. Thats one reason I hate microsoft. People claim there software is good, but...(Random reason for microsoft beign crap) Its not like I hate them, they just cant think of n e thing original and then when they do copy people, its rubbish
|
|
|
|
Ryan Wagner
|
|
January 30, 2007, 04:25:11 PM |
|
I would say that Microsoft does make good software in terms of usability because they spend a lot of money researching what people want/need. It's pretty apparent that one of the drawbacks from people switching to Macs is the difficulty to learn how to do somethings, like install programs. This is something that only takes a few clicks in Windows but a lot of Linux applications still need to be done through the terminal if it's not already in the library.
With that being said the software is bloated because they try to offer a little of everything that some people will find valuable, which is a problem that is encountered when you're trying to release software that millions upon millions of people and businesses use. I would compare this to the Opera browser: it has a ton of features and I constantly hear people say that its bloated, but it is still a well made application that runs great.
|
|
|
|
Richard
|
|
January 30, 2007, 05:10:38 PM |
|
Look at it this way. No Microsoft = No Windows = Totally different computer industry and computer world
|
|
|
|
