I'm thinking of installing Windows XP when it comes out

bettyboo

But before i install, can anyone tell me if hardware/software support is available for XP. Will my stuff (CD RW/DVD/software) still work ok?

Any ideas guys?

JustHalf

As far as I can remember, Microsoft have a hardware compatability list somewhere on their site. Check there... but you *should* be okay.

However, certain programs won't work with XP... specifically, those programs designed to use the old versions of NTFS 5.0 and the networking code. This is due to changes in both (the changes in NTFS 5.1 are minimal, but they're still incompatible).

Typedef

bahhhh

stay away from micro$0ft product$
away
away I say
away.
away,away,away,away,away.

Why not save your self loads of heart break with crashes overpriced s0ftware and rescrictive user licences and go and get yourself Linux-Mandrake or Red-Hat linux and @ least feel assured that you have a reliable and well made 0s not like using m$ products.

R. Daneel Olivaw

Because he like 90%+ of people suffer the minor minor reduction in OS and kernel stability when comparing Win2k's kernel and Linux for the ability to play every new game, get every new app, and have access to legal DVD playing software (Livid isn't there yet).

People put up with MS because the actual things that you use computers for - the applications or games - are far more plentiful and more stable than the GNU/linux alternatives.

The linux kernel is reliable and well-made, but the apps are an unholy mess. Compare CDR apps like Nero or CDRWIN to the X apps. Compare the hardware support for scanners, printers, whatever.

And the Win2k core which sits under XP Home and XP Professional is just as uncrashable as Linux, only the app choice makes a difference now.

And for all the godliness of Linux, I like the way the 2.4.10 RAID headers were blatantly stolen. Corrected later sure, but still stolen.

Hobbes

I'd say go with W2K instead of XP if you have to go with MS. Otherwise go with Linux.

Hobbes

Originally posted by R. Daneel Olivaw
People put up with MS because ... games - are far more plentiful and more stable than the GNU/linux alternatives.

Erm. BS. The majority of PC games released these days are buggy POS. Heck you normally have to download at least 1-2 patches before the fricken games will work.

Alternatives are there if you bother to go looking, and btw MS don't want people to use Windows for Games, they want you to use X-BOX.

but the apps are an unholy mess.

What apps is that then? You list what? CDR burning software? Try posting on the Unix forum they will get you a nice proggy.

Compare the hardware support for scanners, printers, whatever.

While it may be true that some companies do not support Linux, it is far from true that the drivers do not exist. Heck I installed RH7.1 and straight out of the box I had support for a 3COM network card (laptop), my laptop, USB. I can even access the windows network as if it was windows and I can even print from the network printer.

Likewise with other stuff. I tried to find a hotsync program for Linux and found it came pre-installed.

If the hardware is popular and no drivers exist, they tend to appear very quick.

And the Win2k core which sits under XP Home and XP Professional is just as uncrashable as Linux

Nothing is uncrashable.

And for all the godliness of Linux, I like the way the 2.4.10 RAID headers were blatantly stolen. Corrected later sure, but still stolen.

Which was easily seen. It wasn't the headers that were stolen it was that the comments were removed citing the original author and it was fixed.

Not that MS would ever do a thing like that... well except that time they stole the code for disk optimization and after loosing the case bought out the company that sued them.

phaxx

At first I Was determined to avoid XP at all costs, but now I'm not so sure, it doesn't sound too bad. The only scary part that I know of is the way it apparently does something licencey (heh) if you change too many pieces of hardware within a few months. I dunno really, just something I read on the reg.

Win2k is nice, I'll be using it for a long while yet.

marauder

First question is what have you got now?
If you have got Win2k then stick with it....
If you like to tinker then go on by all means.

IMHO installing a newly released OS until at least the first SP is out is always a bit risky. Besides paying a premium for it , you WILL have problems with compatability, drivers etc etc. as well as the bugs in the OS itself. Waiting for a later version or after the first couple of SPs will save you hastle
95 OSr2 was much better than 95
98 SE is much better than 98
XP +? will be better than XP

if you have 95 or 98 then go with 2k + SP. you might be able to pick up a copy cheap from someone when xp comes out.....

Supercell

Used XP here (note past tense) for several weeks..my thoughts ..

1) It looks pretty even gaudy, but you can change the appearance back to the Win2k one if you prefer (the colour tone is not the same though..made me feel ill )

2) If you are used to Win98/ME then its going to be a bit of a change, that said it is a LOT more stable...basically if it doesnt like an application the first indication you get of a problem is that when you try to shut down it reboots instead (its hiding a BSOD)

3) Most if not all games run a lot better in XP than in Win2K

4 So far so good you think..eh...so why is this pc back to running Win2k?

5) It IS a complete RESOURCE MONSTER!! Frankly my athlon 750 box w/512mb ram..ran like my 133 with '95..though the 1.4gb with 512 pc2100 ddr ran..O_K..not lightening fast.

6) The most irritating thing i found was that it doesnt like TNT2 video cards...outlook express took 1 minute..yes one minute to load on a pentium, and two athlons..however when i stuck an old ati128 card in there it opened straight away..g'force 3 owners don't have this problem, that said many have reported refresh rates no better than 60htz gaming even with the nVidia 20.81 reference drivers (this is fixable apparently with tweaking..but why should a new OS thats gone retail need such measures with one of the most popular gaming video card around?

7) So my recommendations are these...

a) Forget about XP if you are a gamer (at least for the moment, until updated drivers and fixes become available) and own an nVidia card

b) Unless your pc is SERIOUSLY fast....bare minimum 1ghz..do not expect anything but sluggish performance, added to that , 256mb of ram is an absolute min..512mb is recommended, it will run with less...barely

c) For all that, i'll probably go back to it in a year or so when the box its installed on is running a 5gb cpu with 1gb ram ..and service pack 1 or later is out.

R. Daneel Olivaw

Originally posted by Hobbes


What apps is that then? You list what? CDR burning software? Try posting on the Unix forum they will get you a nice proggy.

I've been using Linux since 1996, not as long as some people I know, but I've used plenty of different apps for different tasks over the years to know that Windows-based equivalents are, more often than not, far more complete. CDR software was just one example. I won't start on the likes of Emacs which I just don't need and use, but is monstrous (as are a lot of the GNU utilities that make up a Linux installation).

MS Office, for all it being the spawn of satan, is great and far more usable (for me) compared to the likes of Star Office. Now I haven't tried the new release, but the last time I used it in version 3 it had that gay StarOffice desktop crap so no way. I used Office 97 anyway, it does all I need.

Free MP3 apps like WinAmp and CDex work better together - making playlist making automatic, both free as well. X11amp or GQmpeg take longer to make a directory listing using ext2 (I haven't the patience to update my aging partitions to reiserfs as I don't have a spare HD to throw everything on).

IE 6.0 beats the living **** out of Konqueror. Both are free. Konqueror just takes an age compared to IE for page rendering, which it admittedly gets just as "right", but takes a long while. Netscape is clunky and buggy and I don't use it on either OS.

Hmmm....what's left.......ah yes, I make music. Old-school Soundtracker stuff just to piss around with, and ModPlug Tracker (also free) on Windows is better than any X/Linux-based equivalent, no contest at all.

The absolute latest technology in games hardware and audio is on Windows first, and always will be. I will not be able to upgrade the graphics card in an XBox, nor the soundcard to get whatever the next 3D audio thing is. Nor will I be able to plug in an ultra-reality USB 4.0 Force Lifefeedback helmet or whatever. Whatever the latest technology is, it has always appeared on PCs (and Windows) first. Even with the Linux "craze" that started in around 1998 or 1999.

Don't get me wrong, I like linux. I like the way my Window Maker desktop looks incredibly hi-tech and has temperature monitors for my CPU. It's insane really....but Windows suits me better on the desktop and Linux for more messing around stuff.

While it may be true that some companies do not support Linux, it is far from true that the drivers do not exist. Heck I installed RH7.1 and straight out of the box I had support for a 3COM network card (laptop), my laptop, USB. I can even access the windows network as if it was windows and I can even print from the network printer.

Likewise with other stuff. I tried to find a hotsync program for Linux and found it came pre-installed.

Sure, but I also couldn't get my HP 3400C scanner to work (yes, just like CmdrTaco from Slashdot if you remember the article who made the same mistake about checking compatability on USB scanners). It's cheap and I prefer to spend £90 on a scanner that works the same as one that costs £200+, the only difference being lack of driver support for Linux.

If the hardware is popular and no drivers exist, they tend to appear very quick.

But what is "popular"? NVidia have decent drivers, and X-Traceroute looks really good to impress people with when it's 3D acclerated, but I don't see much "new" development for mainstream drivers these days, or at least, I don't see them trying to attempt a DirectX-style platform (or is it that linux itself is the DirectX platform). It seems that mostly for recent kernels all that is done is try and "catch up" to Windows as opposed to offering a better way. Maybe that doesn't read right.....

And the Win2k core which sits under XP Home and XP Professional is just as uncrashable as Linux

Nothing is uncrashable.

Exactly. And right now the variety of Windows apps is available on Win2k platforms, which for all intents and purposes of a home user, is as stable as any Linux installation. The only difference these days is that MS, whether by virtue of the presence of Linux or not, has finally made a decent stable kernel. So all those games and apps can run on a stable system. Linux is also stable, but is missing the crucial games and apps to make it a commercial success (yes, a COMMERCIAL success.....if that didn't matter, then why bother with KDE/Gnome desktops. WHy not keep old-school NeXT style WMs, whyt try and just catch up to Windows?)


The only that will kick Linux into the bigtime is the Windows Product Activation thing. It's going to piss of a lot of companies. Even more so the licensing scheme they have introduced.

Now Linux may be a better "MSDOS" for the next 20 years that people will be saying "enough with the legacy libc5 crap PLEASE", maybe. Personally I'd rather be using an Amiga.

DiscoStu

Wasnt the AmigaOS a unix offshoot like linux?

R. Daneel Olivaw

Originally posted by DiscoStu
Wasnt the AmigaOS a unix offshoot like linux?

Nah, but developed on Sun systems. It has a similar CLI (but what OS doesn't, except for MacOS Classic), has fully pre-emptive multitasking (like Unix systems, and unlike all non-NT Windows versions). The kernel (for comparison) for all of it was 12k ("exec"), compared to the 1MB that linux takes these days.

It lacked memory protection and so was a bitch sometimes and needed reboots when an app crashed......this meant that apps were all pretty well programmed, and a reboot only took around 5 seconds anyway.

Just about every OS came from Unix in one way or another, except for DOS, which shunned all efforts of completeness, lacked everything good, and conquered all. Same with MacOS Classic, which for some reason also lacked all the good points of an OS's construction and made it through.

Amiga was a fine line between GUI usability, like Windows or MacOS, and real OS like Unix. Nowhere near as "big" though. QNX is a nice modern alternative and is very small and also very free and is a basic 27MB download if you want to try it.

Compared to the 2GB+ linux installations, 1GB+ Windows XP and 2xOS MacOS X (which is just stupid and just like MS including DOS after the WIn95 GUI upgrade), small efficient OSs are a blessing.

Of course 10 years ago people would say "get a real computer, that Amiga is for games" and now 10 years later all technology progression is for game hardware, and Microsoft are releasing a game console.

seamus

Originally posted by Hobbes
I'd say go with W2K instead of XP if you have to go with MS. Otherwise go with Linux.

Yep. Agree completely. If I could I would help organise a boycott on XP. The registration(which can only be done online, btw) involves giving you a unique I.D. for your copy of XP, and so letting you activate it. Therefore, you cannot install it on another computer, without re-registering with MS, and having to fork out money to them to actually pay for another copy of XP. And, for all you OS junkies out there who ocassionally do something completely daft, or simply prefer a change, you cannot reinstall your copy of XP on your computer, without paying money to MS. I believe firmly that you should be allowed reuse any software you pay for, ad infinitum, so I will never, ever install XP on any computer of mine, ever(unless it's for work, and I'm not paying for it). And if I got any of this wrong, please re-educate me, 'cos I am really[/ i] píssed off at MS.

Giblet

Most people i know who rant and rave about linux haven't acutally USED the thing!
Theres no denying that linux is far more stable that Windows,
But windows leaves linux behind in terms of usability, the average joe on the street doesn't give a sh*t about anything cept pr0n and games and linux is bullsh*t to him.
A program on the scale of the windows os's''s's's(?)
is gonna be unstable of course, and there gonna charge money cause it took time and effort. Bill is a smart man , he has loads more money than any of us will ever have combined and he definatly doesn't give a sh*t about anyone who disses windows coz in the end he's rich and ur not*
oh i like linux btw

im just annoyed at this M$ scum crap it it wasn't for bill and apple , we'd have a DOS type thing

c:\my porn:> deltree -mammys home

*Less of course u are

JustHalf

Seamus: Nope, it can also be done over the phone.
Giblet: Would you mind changing your Avatar please?

Supercell

Will the linux ppl please stop posting off topic, bettyboo asked a question about XP not linux, and i believe a lot of people are probably interested in her original question,

Try the UNIX board for your petty squabbles.

Giblet

HEH! Hey sorry man its was a complete coincendence

JustHalf

Np... it's not like I can do anything I do anything about it!

Well, I *suppose* I could give DeVore some cash stuffed in a brown envelope

I'd just like you to change your Avatar, if you don't mind. If you do mind, fair enough. It's up to you.

Giblet

done and done
RATBERT ROCKS

Typedef

2) If you are used to Win98/ME then its going to be a bit of a change, that said it is a LOT more stable...basically if it doesnt like an application the first indication you get of a problem is that when you try to shut down it reboots instead (its hiding a BSOD)

Typedef picks teeth with (another) useless m$ OS and nurchures the warm feeling of smugness

The absolute latest technology in games hardware and audio is on Windows first, and always will be.

ehhh, have you ever heard of the windows 95 & piix pci controller problems with USB. Long story short as windows was supporting cutting edge USB on x86 architecture when you reinstalled windows 95 with an intel 440
bx pci controller you had to open up the machine and clear, yes clear the nvram . Imagine the amount of newbies that end up having to reinstall windows for whatever reasons, now imagine if the only way for those newbies to get said reinstalled OS to work was to clear the nvram?
There were 4 piix issues in all piix 1 to 4 yeah?
This is just a single example of m$ and the many disasters caused with this kind of fundamentalist mantra.


Face facts Linux supports 98% of the hardware windows does but as I'm sure you know is sooooo much more reliable and better designed yeah? For example while NT based systems don't BSOD as much as win9x systems you still have to reboot NT based stuff much more than *nix based systems right?

QED


But if you want to be chained to M$ and their pontifications in XP then who am I to stop you.

Oh btw - if you add too much NEW hardware to XP it will not allow you to run it until you pay M$ an extra licence fee for the advanced features you are availing of under XP ok? Huh what a crock, OEM's are forced to sell windows so you have to buy XP and if you upgrade your hardware you effectively have to pay a tax to m$ now is that the way you want your new PC @ Christmas when you decide you need a new AGP and more ram and a new harddisk to accomodate all the space windows is using up?


Just think 98% of all hardware for intel based systems supported, arguably on a par with windows - (as the new hardware supported probably won't work properly anyway (piix evidence suggests typedef is right ok?)), but the operating system is free and you are not obliged to give M$ euro one (unless you feel mad) if you upgrade your hardware while using
LINUX
yeah?

IE 6.0 beats the living **** out of Konqueror

IE 6.0 is for muppet ppl and people who have double digit IQ's yeah?
Errm what about Mozilla - if you wanted you could get a new build for that on at least five different platforms every night yeah? Also sockets were invented in Unix yeah? and god the problems windows has distinguishing between winsock and winsock2 make you wonder how they could send a character through a serial port let alone build a http request yeah?, as well as 90% of all servers being *nix based yeah?
Ehh get a grip the IE integration in windows almost had the Feds break up the company yeah?

Hobbes

I would just like to say that Konqueror beats IE hands down. There are just lots of features in it that IE does not have and should.

Some of the arguments are a bit lame as well.. Star office sucks? Yes the old version did and from what I gather they updated the latest version to suit what the user wanted. Plus you fail to mention the other Office suites on linux. There are more then just Star Office.

EMacs? showing your age Most people who start off on Linux now just use the built in editors.

The absolute latest technology in games hardware and audio is on Windows first, and always will be.

Erm.. NO.

R. Daneel Olivaw

Look I don't have a problem with linux, I keep my installation up to date, even though I don't use it that much (except sometimes to get that warm fuzzy feeling from using XChat which OK, kicks all other IRC apps, but in itself is a copy of AmiIRC).

Unfortunately I don't tend to have many crashes at all with Windows or Linux. Windows 2000 I have found to be as reliable as Linux, and it can stay on continuously without reboots for days, just like Linux (without the inevitable memory leaks of 9x).

But when you have a Win2k setup, with nice functional Office, and all the games and everything is all nice and fine, it's great and very very stable, as anything I have ever seen on Linux (and this is for home use, not office use or my own server).

Linux itself has never crashed, but in itself is just a bloody kernel. Windows 9x never crashes if you never install any apps or software. The problem I have is that the apps themselves lack the slickness and completeness of Windows apps. That is changing, but still, for any home user and sane person without loads of time, Windows in the 2000/XP form is as stable as any Linux installation, only with all the apps and games choice.

Or are you arguing that in tests Windows 2000 needs to reboot more? Oh my god, a standard user needs to reboot once a week.....shocking, because they PROBABLY DON'T GIVE A ****.

I would like a nice clean sub 100MB usable Linux distro, with X, with a decent GUI, etc., but I can't because everything is so bloody interlinked. It's a total mess, so I go back to Windows, and then I feel the need to feel to compile a new kernel, and I go back for a while.

Don't start on Mozilla, it's a bloated load of ****e, and the project is the most convoluted attempt at making a decent X browser. the KDE accomplished 10x in the same time as Mozilla were busy making it bloody skinnable when it really needed to just not crash.

Things are getting there, and I would say XP's licensing structure (and all the recent hassle) will hopefully push big businesses to Linux, where a more defined "direction" can be made for desktops (and of course it can also be used for whatever you want, e.g., Playstation 2 devkits).

In aroudn 2-3 years it'll be the OS of choice. It all depends on how XP does, etc., .

Just too many goddamn libraries. I download a game and it needs a squillion different things. I spent ages building a perfect clean installation of debian years ago, but I can do exactly jack all with it so I end up installing all the crap just to get the 3D installed, the sound, joystick for X games, etc., . And now I'm back up to a 2GB installation with everything ready and working, but christ why oh ****ing why must every app NOT bring it's own libraries with it. Why must everything depend on everything else, can't it just ****ing work, and if I want to delete it, no, I can't remember half the crap I needed to install just to get the real thing I wanted installed. ARGH!

QNX/BeOS/Amiga = much nicer and cleaner

And plus, it seems like every dickhead uses it these days so it's not cool anymore. Time to resurrect STOS.

flamegrill

I have heard a few nice things about windows XP from people who are using it currently. A friend has a 5 user liscence from hsi MSDN collection and he offered it to me to try out. I didnt at the time, but i might yet.

Its TCP/IP stack has been taken from FreeBSD so you can expect its networking engine to be far more stable and more advanced than any previous versions of windows yielding loads of nice new features like packet filtering and raw socket writing.
On another Note IE6 is supposed to be pretty good. Ok it wouldnt be anyones browser of choice, but hell since IE 5.5 i havent stopped using it. IE6 has a nice new download manager, which should have been introduced years back, but hey its microsoft.

I am using Win2k at the moment but i had been usng Windows ME for the previous 12 months with no probs. I just said id chance it and see what its like. Its fine to be honest. The only thing that sadens me is that i cant play my DVD's with hardware motion compensation switched on. Its something to do with the limitations of Win2k drivers.

so in closing, as they say if its not borken dont fix it, if you use win2k stay with it for now. You can always stick XP in another folder and play with it and leave win2k as your primary OS.
If you are using Windows ME and you find its a bit on the unstable side(i had no probs for 12 months!!!!! with ME) maybe a change to XP would do you good. But id say stick with Win2k for the time being.

Just a side note, up to 2 weeks ago i wouldnt have touched win2k with yours... but iv been using it for 2 weeks and it seems to enjoy my system specs and my half gig of ram.

JustHalf

Hey Giblet! Thanks for that

Typedef... if you're going to argue about Windows being bad, at least argue about it's faults - actual faults, not some half-heard rumour or some desire to increase your Unix snobbery level by an extra point or two.

Windows 2000 rocks. It's very stable, and far easier to use than FreeBSD - or any Unix variant I've come across.

Typedef:
This is just a single example of m$ and the many disasters caused with this kind of fundamentalist mantra.
Ha! Pot... kettle... black... shocker!

Typedef:
Oh btw - if you add too much NEW hardware to XP it will not allow you to run it until you pay M$ an extra licence fee for the advanced features you are availing of under XP ok? Huh what a crock, OEM's are forced to sell windows so you have to buy XP and if you upgrade your hardware you effectively have to pay a tax to m$ now is that the way you want your new PC @ Christmas when you decide you need a new AGP and more ram and a new harddisk to accomodate all the space windows is using up?
Explain where on earth you're getting this information from. I can tell you it's false, for a start.

If you put "too much" new hardware in, you have to ring up Microsoft (btw, notice the "s" in Microsoft... that's how you spell it). Let's read a little from El Reg:

Yes, if you change your hardware too much after activating XP then you'll have to call up to reactivate, but the number of pieces of hardware you need to change to trigger this is now six, and the change counter resets every 120 days.
-- http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/22073.html

You don't have to pay a new licence fee... I don't know where you're getting this information from. Unless you want to call a telephone conversation a "tax"...

IE 6.0 is for muppet ppl and people who have double digit IQ's yeah?
So smart people use only other things, yes? *laughs*

I guess that means I'm a muppet for using IE5.0. And here was I thinking people would take my opinions drawn from years of experience in IT, several courses, the training of Phil Brennan (Gerry) and the wealth of material on Anandtech and Tom's Hardware Guide... but what's it worth if I use a Microsoft browser?

Guess I'm off to bang my head repeatedly against the wall in an attempt to lower my IQ, too...

Errm what about Mozilla - if you wanted you could get a new build for that on at least five different platforms every night yeah?
Oh yes, please give me a decent guarantee of stability and standards compliance.

And good lord, please give me a browser which is fully CSS1 compliant AT LEAST. IE isn't there, but neither is Mozilla. Word to the wise... they BOTH suck.

Also sockets were invented in Unix yeah?
And your point is?

and god the problems windows has distinguishing between winsock and winsock2 make you wonder how they could send a character through a serial port let alone build a http request yeah?
They're that dumb and yet they managed it? Good on you, Microsoft! I applaud your triumph over the odds!

as well as 90% of all servers being *nix based yeah?
If you mean web servers, then you're wrong. Unless a large proportion of them are running IIS on WINE or something. Go check out any recent Netcraft survey.

Ehh get a grip the IE integration in windows almost had the Feds break up the company yeah?
Oh no! That means the browser is bad!!!!!!!1

No. It doesn't.

I mean, I actually *like* Unix... particularly FreeBSD. But there is many things that the Windows platform can provide that Unix can't. The ever so sweet Photoshop, for example (and don't cry "What about the Gimp", I can't stand that user interface, and it doesn't support PSD files perfectly AT ALL). Macromedia Dreamweaver. Jeskola Buzz.

Please. Attack MS for its swiss cheese web server. Attack it for its terrible security record. Attack it for its far too restrictive OEM licencing schemes which assured BeOS would never gain any sort of commercial success... and if they remain will almost certainly stop Linux from making any sort of impact on the desktop of the regular consumer. Attack it for its ridiculous pricing schemes.

Don't attack it for the things it does right. Don't attack it for things it doesn't do. And don't attack something just because it's Microsoft.

*hugs Microsoft Natural Keyboard* Mmh, sacreligious.

Giblet

Nice

Typedef

Typedef... if you're going to argue about Windows being bad, at least argue about it's faults (of which there are many - for example the US government has backdoors to all of M$ $0ftware ehem why not just send the pentagon you're email and save some time?).


Windows 2000 rocks. It's very stable, and far easier to use, than FreeBSD - or any Unix variant I've come across.

Easier than what Gnome - well if you say so Commrade Stalin? easier then answering a few simple install scripts? Windows has so much removed the power of the PC from the user that it is frustrating and akward to use at this stage yeah? Take installing a linux driver yeah modprobe some_driver right? Now windows - huh I could fill this page with instructions involving numerous reboots and poxy drivers (Sound Blaster Live ring any bells?)?, and that is considered the base level of stuff you have to do to get an M$ machine working yeah? Install reboot once(if lucky) etc,etc,etc,etc............... also windows is slow, my Debian system boots in 1/3 the time ME does never mind Slackware or FreeBSD yeah? Tell me why is windows so slow

machine is speced like this
[Typedef OEM]
512mb pc133 sdram
Voodoo 3 3000
Ensoniq 1371
15gb ata-66 primary
15gb ata-100 sec
Dvd
Cdrw
Tulip generic nic
Kt7a mobo
Athlon 1.4ghz
[/Typedef OEM]
ok?

Windows takes 5 times as long too boot is 20 times as unstable, so even with my machine speced like that it locks up and dies 6 out of 10 boots ok? Now are you telling me that having built my system and chopping and changing cards - ram - cdrom drives between various machines that if I do that too much in a short space of time I will have to pay more money to micr0$oft? Eh hello? It's a good thing I use warez windows eh?


A system that is based around a GUI ie explorer/internet explorer is dependant on the GUI interface, when that interface eventually crashes you loose or stand the chance of having start-up group items crash etc - items you have to reboot to start again this is muppetry yes? In FreeBSD if X-Windows were to lock up then what ctrl+alt+backspace and startx - yes even for X in *nix you need suid permission right, heres a word the c:\windows\system32 directory should think about learning - PERMISSIONS, come on now spell it with me P E R M I S S I O N $, hmmm..... interesting how an unpriveleged user can maul an m$ box no?
Put a program listening on tcp port X that executes any command given to it and wallop bye bye windows box right?
Do the same in linux ? By by the user directory of the user who started the program? Not really the same thing is it?

Yes, if you change your hardware too much after activating XP then you'll have to call up to reactivate,but

If I what? On hardware I paid for ? On software I paid for? If I what? Listen matie if I choose to burn my fscking computer after I buy it that should be my business and my business alone ok? Who the goddam hell does micro$oft think it is telling me when where and how I can use my pc? I mean we all knew that m$ was doing harm to the computer industry by with it's monopoly but now it is seeking to curtail the individual and the hardware manufacturer too...
QED.

Guess I'm off to bang my head repeatedly against the wall in an attempt to lower my IQ, too...

cough

They're that dumb and yet they managed it? Good on you, Microsoft! I applaud your triumph over the odds!

Wow isn't it interesting they can nick the BSD code for their tcp stack and still call open source software, full of security holes?

If you mean web servers, then you're wrong. Unless a large proportion of them are running IIS on WINE or something. Go check out any recent Netcraft survey.

Hmm I think the FreeBSD blurb has some facts like linux on 40% of web servers, *BSD on about 14% and most of the rest being Sun systems, because windows is a hunk of *sheite* ok? So I dispute these facts in favor of the ones that came with the FreeBSD 4.4 distro I just installed ok?

I mean, I actually *like* Unix... particularly FreeBSD. But there is many things that the Windows platform can provide that Unix can't.

Yeah like fascist user licences, CIA backdoors and outrageous prices
Only a Red-Hat user could dis the Gimp, are you a Red-Hat user?

Don't attack it for the things it does right. Don't attack it for things it doesn't do. And don't attack something just because it's Microsoft.

But seeing as how nearly all things microsoft SUCK I feel I am perfectly endemnified to attack ok?


Oh btw, I am empolyed as a VB programmer yeah? So I have received all priveliged information about m$ through my neural tranciever when I was assimilated

JustHalf

Typedef:
Easier than what Gnome - well if you say so Commrade Stalin?
What

Typedef:
easier then answering a few simple install scripts?
Yes, easier. Anyone who believes that Windows is less intuitive than any Unix CLUI is not the average user.

Typedef:
Windows has so much removed the power of the PC from the user that it is frustrating and akward to use at this stage yeah?
Explain how.

Typedef:
Take installing a linux driver yeah modprobe some_driver right? Now windows - huh I could fill this page with instructions involving numerous reboots and poxy drivers (Sound Blaster Live ring any bells?)?, and that is considered the base level of stuff you have to do to get an M$ machine working yeah? Install reboot once(if lucky) etc,etc,etc,etc............... also windows is slow, my Debian system boots in 1/3 the time ME does never mind Slackware or FreeBSD yeah? Tell me why is windows so slow
Debian system boots with X in a third the time? Is this a guess?

And why oh why are you using ME? What have we always told everyone?

Typedef:
Windows takes 5 times as long too boot
Changing your mind again? That's not what you were saying just a few sentences ago.

Typedef:
is 20 times as unstable, so even with my machine speced like that it locks up and dies 6 out of 10 boots ok?
*cough* *cough* Don't use ME ever *cough* *cough*

Typedef:
Now are you telling me that having built my system and chopping and changing cards - ram - cdrom drives between various machines that if I do that too much in a short space of time I will have to pay more money to micr0$oft? Eh hello? It's a good thing I use warez windows eh?
Read what you say. Read what I say. Recognise that they are two different texts written by two different people. Match up each text with each person.

You said that. You seem to be getting annoyed at something you said, which I refuted.

Typedef:
A system that is based around a GUI ie explorer/internet explorer is dependant on the GUI interface, when that interface eventually crashes you loose or stand the chance of having start-up group items crash etc - items you have to reboot to start again this is muppetry yes?
For the average person, it's still easier to use than a CLUI.

Typedef:
In FreeBSD if X-Windows were to lock up then what ctrl+alt+backspace and startx - yes even for X in *nix you need suid permission right, heres a word the c:\windows\system32 directory should think about learning - PERMISSIONS, come on now spell it with me P E R M I S S I O N $,
You spelt permissions wrong the second time.

BTW, I know about permissions.

Typedef:
hmmm..... interesting how an unpriveleged user can maul an m$ box no?
I reckon they've got admin (or 'root' if you want a Unix synonym)privileges by default you know.

Typedef:
Put a program listening on tcp port X that executes any command given to it and wallop bye bye windows box right?
Do the same in linux ? By by the user directory of the user who started the program? Not really the same thing is it?
Please tell me why anyone with any sense of security would put such a program up.

Typedef:
If I what? On hardware I paid for ? On software I paid for? If I what? Listen matie if I choose to burn my fscking computer after I buy it that should be my business and my business alone ok? Who the goddam hell does micro$oft think it is telling me when where and how I can use my pc? I mean we all knew that m$ was doing harm to the computer industry by with it's monopoly but now it is seeking to curtail the individual and the hardware manufacturer too...
Just ring them up and get a number. Fairly simple. No need to 'justify' yourself.

Typedef:
Wow isn't it interesting they can nick the BSD code for their tcp stack and still call open source software, full of security holes?
Yes. This is something interesting. Except I think you're mixing up several events.

Typedef:
Hmm I think the FreeBSD blurb has some facts like linux on 40% of web servers, *BSD on about 14% and most of the rest being Sun systems, because windows is a hunk of *sheite* ok? So I dispute these facts in favor of the ones that came with the FreeBSD 4.4 distro I just installed ok?
Or a much more independent source:

http://www.netcraft.net/survey/

Typedef:
Only a Red-Hat user could dis the Gimp, are you a Red-Hat user?
No. I can't stand Linux.

I use FreeBSD.

Typedef:
But seeing as how nearly all things microsoft SUCK I feel I am perfectly endemnified to attack ok?
Attack it on the things that suck, not the things that don't.

Typedef:
Oh btw, I am empolyed as a VB programmer yeah? So I have received all priveliged information about m$ through my neural tranciever when I was assimilated

Haha! VB? You hate Microsoft so much and yet you work as a VB programmer?

Class.

Gerry

Typedef, apart from anything else, you are extremely annoying. Why do you feel the need to write "yeah" or "ok" after each sentence? Is it some process of self affirmation? Also, you keep spelling words like ms wrong, and putting in dollar signs all over the place. Whats the story like, yeah?

Giblet

he does it coz he's l33t

VB HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

i used to teach 3 yr olds that (as in people who haven't a clue about anything)

cout >> "U SUCK"

Typedef

I don't know if you have installed many hardware devices on a micros0ft windows platform, but IMHO clicking though 5-10 different screens, pointing to directory X or Y and possibly rebooting as much as three times or more for one single piece of hardware is ludicrous, take the USR33600 horrible install IMHO I guess you are entitled to disagree but even if the install goes ok the minimum reboot factor is 3 times eh? What gives?

Debian system boots with X in a third the time? Is this a guess?

hmm call it an estimation if you want?

And why oh why are you using ME? What have we always told everyone?

Do you think I would buy m$ products? Shame on you?

Windows takes 5 times as long too boot
Changing your mind again? That's not what you were saying just a few sentences ago.

Again this is an estimation between my various distros - Slackware, Debian, FreeBSD, - ok so booting off the Solaris CD & the HURD from floppy could take a loooong time I guess but, if we average out Slack,Debian and FreeBSD yes windows takes between 3 and 5 times as long to boot give or take, I'm not going to time it for the sake of trolling, as much as I might like to......

is 20 times as unstable, so even with my machine speced like that it locks up and dies 6 out of 10 boots ok?
*cough* *cough* Don't use WINDOWS ever *cough* *cough*

Read what you say. Read what I say. Recognise that they are two different texts written by two different people. Match up each text with each person.
You said that. You seem to be getting annoyed at something you said, which I refuted.

Okey dokey, who's not reading, why should I have to ring m$ to get my system working again if I rebuild it X number of times more than Bill & Co think I should? Who are microsoft to try and impose constraints like this on software I bought?

For the average person, it's still easier to use than a CLUI.

Propaganda, let the average person use a command line for once, surely this command line is difficult to use is a myth created by microsoft to exponenciate their ever growing piles of useless code?

I reckon they've got admin (or 'root' if you want a Unix synonym)privileges by default you know.

Admin is a euphemism for security hole in windows hehehe.

Typedef:
Put a program listening on tcp port X that executes any command given to it and wallop bye bye windows box right?
Do the same in linux ? By by the user directory of the user who started the program? Not really the same thing is it?
Please tell me why anyone with any sense of security would put such a program up.

Not really answering the question are you? Anyway.

Typedef:
Wow isn't it interesting they can nick the BSD code for their tcp stack and still call open source software, full of security holes?
Yes. This is something interesting. Except I think you're mixing up several events.

Like? m$ can plagerise code and then turn around and lambaste that code and it's sources, what could be less ambiguous about that?

Or a much more independent source:

http://www.netcraft.net/survey/

Prove netcraft's objectivity.
Ermm netcraft run apache don't they? This does not really endemnafy your calims does it?

No. I can't stand Linux.

Gasp

I use FreeBSD.

Gerry, apart from anything else you are prejudiced and a snob thanks for insulting me though. I'm sure if you kick me off the board I can find a place with your friends at stormfront. I know you were going to install windows on the boards.ie server and Bill Gates called to say thanks, but I told him you were off lynching Negro's so, he said he would call back.

Typedef