Microsoft has already announced that the next version of their ubiquitous Windows operating system -- dubbed Windows 7 -- will be available in early 2010. It will, if the above image provided by ThinkNext is anything to go by, contain new features to make PC gaming more user friendly.
The screencap shows that Windows 7’s current build has an option to automatically scan the Internet’s many tubes for any new game updates or patches that happen to go live. It might not seem like a huge deal for those of us that are used to regularly starting up a game’s updater or, if it doesn’t have one, going online to download and install patches on our own, but I’m sure some people out there will appreciate the increased simplicity.
Still, I can’t help but wonder why Microsoft doesn’t have this feature running right now in Vista. Do you think it’s something we might see in the next Service Pack? Would you even use it, if it was?
[Via Shacknews]
| BBcode help |
| [b]Bold text[/b] |
Bold text |
| [i]Italic text[/i] |
Italic text |
| [url]http://www.dtoid.com/[/url] |
http://www.dtoid.com |
| [url=http://www.dtoid.com/]Web link[/url] |
Web link |
|
| [img]http://www.example.com/robot.jpg[/img] |
 |
Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
30 comments | showing # 1 to 30
|
Comment with Facebook
Click connect and comment instantly!
|
Comment with Dtoid
New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds
|
Comments policy
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
6:42 PM on 09.22.2008
| 
I dual boot XP on my machines and only use vista to run DX10 software and that is almost never since DX10 games also run like crap on vista.
you can see it in there pathitic little advertizemnts on TV now.
VISta is the new windows ME, you know the OS after win 98 nobody remembers and it sucked. The one before windows 2000 and windows XP (based off the windows 2000 kernel) came and was decent.
So by that track record windows 7 will be the new windows XP you know the one that works kinda correctly while vista does not and is everything vista should have been.
Though, I've never experienced anything to do with DX10.
is helping your weak system run the low system requirements of a unreal engine 3 game like gears of war that runs on a cracker jack toy PC or a console with only 512mb of ram total.
Why do you think Spore and most other games have large system requirements to run the same game as XP?
Spore's system requirements
82 Comments by Alexander Sliwinski Jun 10th 2008 5:30PM
Filed under: Mac, PC, Simulations
We're not exactly sure how long it's been up on the official Spore site, but below we've posted the basic system requirements for running the sim-everything title on PC and Mac. The "recommended" (read: real) requirements are not currently listed on the site. For the super-breakdown of supported graphics cards and other nit-picky details, check out the Spore site.
Windows XP:
2.0 GHz P4 processor or equivalent
512 MB RAM
A 128 MB Video Card, with support for Pixel Shader 2.0
At least 6 GB of hard drive space
Windows Vista:
2.0 GHz P4 processor or equivalent
768 MB RAM
A 128 MB Video Card, with support for Pixel Shader 2.0
At least 6 GB of hard drive space
vista is a poorly cooded fat pig of an Os that either need to be fixed Or shot.
Oh and that ram bump does not even take into account all the other crap vista loads up that is not needed.
Kinda.
Sides, the Graphics card was flappy whappy anyways, trying to run Gears on High. If that's what your...ranting...about......
Like I've said, I haven't experienced any problems with the Vista laptop my mom owns, and neither has she, and it's an HP. The closest thing was the internet, but that's because my mom keeps turning the receiver off, so yeah.
# yum install nexuiz
and updates
yum update --exclude=kernel* --exclude=kmod-nvidia
that is it done.
simple install command line and update program, no bloated Crap like other OS.
I prefer debian based distros myself:
#apt-get update && apt-get dist-upgrade
And have you windows users learned yet that when microsoft claims to make something more "user friendly" that they're just going to cock it up and make it more frustrating for the user while locking out the competition?
Yes, But we are on about updating 'games' here.
Does Ubuntu do that? oh, no games for Ubuntu, hard luck!
But Apple is going to be releasing their new OS next year when their last one came out AFTER Vista and it's no big deal?
I'm sure it will be only "Certified" games and patches that will be updated, further fracturing game playing on PC.
By the way, Microsoft? Since you're ripping off (but only half implementing) another Open Source feature, why not download the source you need and compile it. It will be better than the bloated Ram-sucking monster you'll create!
Pro Tip: There are unused icons on your desktop
I'd rather they just get on with fixing / replacing the OS though: Amazing how many games lost performance / compatibility with the new 'game-friendly' Vista. As for the non-gaming aspects... yeesh.
Vista x64 is so far and away superior to XP it's ridiculous.
Vista is fine if you have the horses to pull it. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Debian guy myself, but Vista x64 is a fantastic operating system. But continue running with the other sheep, don't mind me.
Focus on web operating systems please. I want to boot my computer with a new build of an internet-based operating system just so I don't have to think about patches and THE HORRIFIC WRECKAGE OF A REGISTRY THAT WINDOWS LEAVES BEHIND after dozens of installs/uninstalls.
I actually agree with you but at the same time (due to ambivalence) agree with everyone else. Vista IS EXTREMELY bloated but overall I prefer my x64 install of Vista to XP. (32bit Vista can go suck my anus however...)
Why? Granted it wastes a whopping chunk of my RAM (but I have 4gb so I'm not TOO bothered) but I actually find it to be more 'backwards compatible' than XP. Despite huge claims of incompatibility with Vista circulating round the internet I have yet to have a problem installing anything on Vista (at least no problems common sense couldn't work out). Hell I was just enjoying the wonders of System Shock 2 10 minutes ago.
That said I abso-f**king-lutely hate how Vista challenges my obvious authority in performing system changes etc by prompting my confirmation of EVERYTHING I SODDING DO.
Basically put the best way to deal with things:
Step 1: Install Linux.
Step 2: Install XP and Vista on a spare harddrive.
Step 3: Marvel at the best of 3 worlds.
(alternative method)
Step 0: Add the power of Mac to your PC and build a Hackintosh. All the benefits of Mac with all the cheap power of a PC.
This method is good for the next 7 generations of OS just add the most up to date version numbers names etcetera.
Oh, and get an extra job to pay for it all. The best solutions are always needlessly complicated and expensive because no one person can ever get the damn thing right.