Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 2nd Jun 2006 19:51 UTC, submitted by Tyr.
Windows Computerworld's Scot Finnie details 20 things you won't like in Windows Vista, with a visual tour to prove it. He says that MS has favored security over end-user productivity, making the user feel like a rat caught in a maze with all the protect-you-from-yourself password-entry and 'Continue' boxes required by the User Account Controls feature. "Business and home users will be nonplussed by the blizzard of protect-you-from-yourself password-entry and 'Continue' boxes required by the User Account Controls feature, for example." Update: Apparantly, Vista Beta 2 sucks up battery juice much faster than XP does.
Thread beginning with comment 130363
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: 20 ways to flame Vista
by rayiner on Sat 3rd Jun 2006 18:05 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: 20 ways to flame Vista"
rayiner
Member since:
2005-07-06

There isn't really anything WPF can do that OS X's stack cannot. Both expose a PDF-like imaging model, both expose pixel shaders to 2D graphics, etc. The major difference between the two, aside from the API is that WPF renders vector graphics on the GPU, while Quartz does it on the CPU. On the other hand, Quartz 2D (as of Tiger), runs perfectly acceptably on a 1.67 GHz G4, and there is absolutely no reason an X300 should bog down with WPF.

The biggest issue here is likely optimization. Quartz 2D has been optimized over four or five years. It's implementation in Tiger is really fast, and approaches to speed of much more primitive APIs like QuickDraw. WPF is brand new, and hasn't seen the same sort of optimization. Of course, that's on of the advantages of OS X --- they've got a half-decade head start on the process.

Reply Parent Score: 1

sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Does Quartz do compositing?
Does Quartz render text using the graphics card?
Does Quartz store all rednered windows as objects in video memory?

I didn't think it did all of these.

edit: This is a pretty good read of other things WPF does that are cool for developers: http://msdn.microsoft.com/winfx/technologies/presentation/default.a...

Edited 2006-06-03 18:17

Reply Parent Score: 1

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Does Quartz do compositing?

Yes. That was the job of the Quartz Compositor and now Quartz Extreme.

Does Quartz render text using the graphics card?
Does Quartz store all rednered windows as objects in video memory?


Certainly can do, dependent on the capabilities of the hardware. Besides, rendering text using the graphics card looks absolutely awful and will continue to do so until graphics cards improve more. It just isn't a method that's scalable, and it certainly isn't pretty. I don't particularly consider font rendering and typography a graphical operation you can reasonably ask a GPU to do.

Additionally, I think he was referring to what WPF and Quartz can do, not how they do it. All you've said there is "WPF is going to make Vista use a tonne of video memory and process everything it can on the GPU, dictating a pretty hefty graphics card".

I know Vista has some minimum requirements, but when you start running it along with many other applications and games, God knows what you're going to need to get something acceptable. Making the GPU the primary processing unit seems to be in vogue (and whatever - the work has to be done somewhere), but in order to do what Microsoft wants the graphics card is going to have to be a whole computer in itself rather than a piece of hardware as a supplement to the main CPU, memory and hardware. That's a huge change and one I can't see working at all until hardware gets way more efficient. The only way we'll truly know is when it gets released and people start using it.

Edited 2006-06-03 20:46

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: 20 ways to flame Vista
by rayiner on Sun 4th Jun 2006 03:32 in reply to "RE[4]: 20 ways to flame Vista"
rayiner Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, Quartz does compositing. OS X has been fully double-buffered, courtesy of Quartz Compositor, since OS X 10.0.

Quartz renders text using the graphics card, to the same extent WPF does. It renders them as bitmaps, using the GPU to perform the compositing operation. It does not draw glyphs as vector shapes using the GPU, but neither does WPF.

Quartz does keep rendered objects as textures in video memory. It has done this since OS X Jaguar.

The only significant difference between WPF and what OS X has in Tiger is that WPF rasterizes vector graphics via the GPU, while Quartz 2D does it in software (by default --- Quartz 2D Extreme can do it on the GPU, but is disabled by default because it breaks apps).

Now, Vista probably leverages GPU effects more than OS X does, but its not a matter of capability. If you can do something in WPF, you can most likely achieve the same effect using Quartz 2D and CoreImage.

Reply Parent Score: 2