![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
And I agree. Over to you leg humpers. 
http://www.shacknews.com/extras/2007/032907_alexstjohn1_3.x
Shack: Microsoft's tendency to force its users--and internal staff--into adopting their technology seems to be a common theme with the company. Many PC gamers right now feel that they're being not so much nudged, but shoved in the direction of Windows Vista. Do you see Vista as a viable gaming platform at present?
Alex St John: Well, the PC--forget the operating system--is always a great platform. Modern PCs have superior graphics and memory and processing power to any next-gen console. I don't think Microsoft did anything to help the PC as a gaming platform with Vista, and that's a tremendous frustration because I take it very personally. If I would've been there, I would have made much more aggressive efforts to make sure Vista stayed out of the way of games. What you see with Microsoft is, without people at Microsoft who realize that the operating system does not add value to gaming, it gets in the way, they think they can add more value by adding in more shit that only gets in the way of making a good game. Unfortunately, Vista does that. Microsoft added more shit that impedes game development. It's certainly possible to make great games in Vista, it's just more of a pain in the ass than it needs to be. I think Vista is a missed opportunity for Microsoft to have done a better job in supporting PC gaming.
Shack: What are some of the bottlenecks that you see Vista causing for games?
Alex St John: The Vista game explorer is a dumb idea. They hard-coded a game browser that was somebody's idea, at Microsoft, for what a good user experience is for discovering games. They imposed a parental control system that doesn't work, and because it's hard-coded into the OS, you can't replace it, and you can't work around it; it has implications for the user experience that can't be fixed by Microsoft. Essentially they put a roadblock right in the center of the screen that developers and users are going to have to maneuver around.
The biggest foolishness is Vista's security architecture. Any time someone questions Vista's security, Microsoft accuses that person of being anti-security, or is just bummed because they can't do naughty things that they otherwise wanted to do. Vista's security is weird, it's like a house made out of concrete walls but has screen doors. It's an enormously overbuilt security system with huge, gaping holes. It's extremely intrusive, and it gets in the way of the user's experience without actually being secure. It makes it even harder for consumers to download things and play games, without actually gaining any security benefits. It basically fucks up legitimate applications while leaving holes for the bad ones to just climb on through.
http://www.shacknews.com/extras/2007/032907_alexstjohn1_3.x
Shack: Microsoft's tendency to force its users--and internal staff--into adopting their technology seems to be a common theme with the company. Many PC gamers right now feel that they're being not so much nudged, but shoved in the direction of Windows Vista. Do you see Vista as a viable gaming platform at present?
Alex St John: Well, the PC--forget the operating system--is always a great platform. Modern PCs have superior graphics and memory and processing power to any next-gen console. I don't think Microsoft did anything to help the PC as a gaming platform with Vista, and that's a tremendous frustration because I take it very personally. If I would've been there, I would have made much more aggressive efforts to make sure Vista stayed out of the way of games. What you see with Microsoft is, without people at Microsoft who realize that the operating system does not add value to gaming, it gets in the way, they think they can add more value by adding in more shit that only gets in the way of making a good game. Unfortunately, Vista does that. Microsoft added more shit that impedes game development. It's certainly possible to make great games in Vista, it's just more of a pain in the ass than it needs to be. I think Vista is a missed opportunity for Microsoft to have done a better job in supporting PC gaming.
Shack: What are some of the bottlenecks that you see Vista causing for games?
Alex St John: The Vista game explorer is a dumb idea. They hard-coded a game browser that was somebody's idea, at Microsoft, for what a good user experience is for discovering games. They imposed a parental control system that doesn't work, and because it's hard-coded into the OS, you can't replace it, and you can't work around it; it has implications for the user experience that can't be fixed by Microsoft. Essentially they put a roadblock right in the center of the screen that developers and users are going to have to maneuver around.
The biggest foolishness is Vista's security architecture. Any time someone questions Vista's security, Microsoft accuses that person of being anti-security, or is just bummed because they can't do naughty things that they otherwise wanted to do. Vista's security is weird, it's like a house made out of concrete walls but has screen doors. It's an enormously overbuilt security system with huge, gaping holes. It's extremely intrusive, and it gets in the way of the user's experience without actually being secure. It makes it even harder for consumers to download things and play games, without actually gaining any security benefits. It basically fucks up legitimate applications while leaving holes for the bad ones to just climb on through.
