What is WINDOWS xp

Windows XP is the next version of windows to come out sometime in August i believe. It is a very nice windows i might add, ive used the beta version.

its windows 2000 dressed like a clown!!

It's the Windows Experience (supposedly)...

Remember that Microsoft said that Win 2000 was going to do away with the separate Win NT and Win 9x technologies, but they didnt?

Well, Windows XP will finally do that, being upgradeable from 98, Millenium or 2000.

XP Personal edition will be the standard desktop version for home users. XP Professional edition will correlate to NT Workstation, and is for power users, and XP Server, XP Data Server and some other versions are for large corperate machines and such like. I doubt you'll use them as much!

Its currently codenamed "Whistler" by the way, so if you can't find it, stop searching for XP because its not called that yet!

Oh, and I beleive that there will be fully 64 bit versions for the chips that require them. This isn't 2000 dressed up... Microsoft have FINALLY got an operating system that is powerful and reliable enough for the workplace.

Windows XP is trash like all the other versions of Windows. Get Beos!

hit'em joker
This site is for help, not stupid comments

Instead of shutting up Candy Man, why not ask him to give reasons why, There has to be a reason BeOS has a market share of about 0.5% compared to Windows of over 92%.
To shut some one up, you need to hit them with facts, this then leaves them trapped and unable to answer, telling him he can't get laid is asking for him to come back and get offensive.

Robbo
For the record, BeOS is a peice of s---

HOLD ON THERE ROBBO! The reason people leave windows is because it crashes WAY TOO MUCH. This is why the mac/linux/beos/etc markets are getting bigger. BeOS has such a small percentage of the market because microsoft ceized the market a long time ago. Quite frankly, Microsoft's business practices in ceizing the market have been quite apauling. Maybe instead of getting defensive, you could think why exactly you are getting that blue screen of death every third boot and your comp is getting slower by the day whilst you win32 logs grow 15mb per boot!!! I completely sypathize with BeOS/Linux/Mac fans and they've got great points. Now maybe candy man shouldn't have posted in a windows forum, but that doesn't mean he should be attacked. I have shown no disrespect to you avid windows enthusiests and i expect the same courtesy/maturity...

Well said Greg S. And you stated true facts all the way. You will probably be attacked also because you spoke the truth, & every Windows user knows it. Microsoft did seize the market along time ago. It is not fair none whatsoever. And in do time they will get theirs. What goes around comes around. Dont you people know there are more talented people/programmers out there than Microsoft. But they cannot get any lead way because Bill Gates/Microsoft are cowards & are scared of a little competition. And the judge thought so also.

Well said MR. Anderson ;) That is why Excel costs $200 and Gnumeric (Linux Spreadsheet) is open source and free. Also, AbiWord (Linux Wordprocessor) or StarOffice (Linux Suite). These are all excellent products compared to MS Office, but Microsoft is making SOOOO much money on their suite that they wouldn't want to see a little competition...

I too have been attempting to surmise what, exacty, Windows XP is. As far as I have been able to determine, it is a highly graphical version of Windows in which any gain in performace is lost in trying to render the seemingly infinite ammout of graphics.

I recently donwloaded Linux for several reasons, as much because I wanted to get away from Windows as I liked Linux.

1) Windows is slow. Many applications now have highly graphical interfaces. While I recognize that many people enjoy this aesthetically pleasing turn, I must protest to it. It has caused a sharp decrease in performance, specifically on lower-end, less powerful boxes. Granted, this is happening somewhat to Linux, but not to nearly the same extent.

2) Windows is weak. It has become so obscenely user-friendly that it has forgotten its "technically enlightened" users by severly resticting access to it in order to prevent the "technically challenged and/or incompotent" users from modifying important data which, if done incorrectly, may harm the system.

Note to Microsoft: perhaps a "Windows Advaced" might be a good idea. A version of Windows designed for the advanced user that does not place the same restrictions on user activities, and therefore enables the user to customize a little more for a more powerful computing experience...

3) Windows is an invitation to viruses. How long will it take someone to write a VBScript that distributes itself via Outlook Express (like the I Love You Virus), and adds the following key to the registry:
[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run]
"Shutdown"="C:\WINDOWS\RUNDLL32.EXE shell32,SHExitWindowsEx 1"

Other things to do in the registry: Change IE's security levels. After doing this, you could launch IE and automatically download (and RUN!!!) any file you want! Or trick a box into thinking it is a 20 mHz system with 2 megs hard drive space and 1K of RAM...

4) Windows applications are expensive. Here's a quote for you: "...understand that only knowledge, and not money, has any meaning at all." -Zarathustra. Mirosoft is the ultimate Capitalist organization. It has established a near-monopoly on one of the largest industries ever. I believe people must work not for more money, but rather to better the life of not only their hiers, but rather every human to follow. Until we decide to work to better humanity rater than our pocketbooks and egos, we have reached our physical, social, and technological evolutionary peaks.

Now that you know why I abandoned Windows, here is why I switched to Linux:
1) Open-source. Linux strongly encourages open-source, enabling applications to evolve well beyond their Windows counterparts by not only accepting, but also embracing, ideas from the outside.
2) Free. Not just the OS, although that is a definite plus, but also the applications. This will allow technological evolution, because in order to buid the tommorow's software, we must build upon the foundation of the most cutting-edge software of today.

From reading all post in this XP forum, 7,8,9,& 10 are the most intelligent/truthful answers I have read so far. It is great to here people speak knowledge & truth on occasion instead of nasty ignorant responses.

Rive has it right about the vbscript (and everything else). I remember back in the old ie4 days (i'm sure it's still this way) that you could go to microsoft's website and interactively download/install updates to IE using only vbscript. This gave me no security warnings and rebooted when it was finished. I don't want a webpage to have that kind of power!!! If it can REBOOT MY COMPUTER from an !HTML FILE! then I don't care to think what else it can do...

I've heard that Bill Gates has been very nice to the new US President George W Bush and the ruling about splitting MS up could be overturned. Oh by the way in the UK we have lots of IT writers who believe that MS would become more powerful whatever happens over the split up thing. Linux users, BeOS users (ha!) wake up, Microsoft is here to stay. There better, but above all there stronger. And the actually spend money on their products.
Having tried BeOS and being left with a quivering wreck of a PC when Win98SE leaves me the the fastest PC I have seen (on a P120), I realise what an advantage being able (or wanting) to spend money on their products is.

O love how robbo talks about facts! LoL what
a joke! I throw a cnet article at him that
show in the server market: windows has 41%
and all unix's/linux's make up another 41%
this is after he said windows would gain 100%
market share, the article also said how
windows is losing ground in the server
market! I forget where Cnet got the numbers
but it was some stats company, very reliable,
and robbo just laughed and made some snotty
comment. so when he talks about facts I
wouldn't really listen to him.

hmmmmm everyone made valid points which can
be backed up, wheres robbo now? I would love
to see your reply to ALL these points with
FACTS that can be BACKED up, NOT just what
you personally think(which is fine to each
his own! I am not aginst what a person likes
to run on there computer it's there own
choice) can you do it? I think if you can or
can't do this will finnaly put an end to
these "robbo" type threads
Were waiting?
Discussing which is better is great WHEN BOTH SIDES use FACTS
Robbo2

NicB,

Bill Gates' friendship with George W. Bush cannot cause the recent verdict to be overturned. In America, we have three branches of government; the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. The Legislative branch (the House and Senate) make laws ("legislate"). The Executive (President, V.P., etc.) enforce these laws. The Judicial branch (our courts) interpret these laws. Each are seperate. The judicial branch is the one who made the decision, and that decision cannot be reveresed by the Executive branch.

Now, lets take a look at America Online. AOL's service is extremely slow, disconnets often, and is occasionaly too busy to allow users to gain access. Their advertising slogan is "So easy to use, no wonder it's number 1!". Their slogan is entirely correct, but everyone who knows anything about the internet has switched to a "real" ISP. Even I started out with AOL, but I now have a "real" ISP.

This same principle applies to Microsoft, albiet to a lesser extent. People purchase Windows for its ease of use and visually pleasing nature. After time, most advanced users do (or at least should) move on to a more powerful system.

Its truly amazing how every conversation turns into MS vs the rest of world debate..the orginal question has nothing to with what you guys are babbling about or this topic forum for that matter....the bottom lines...U guys are on diferent sides for different reasons...and U not getting the other to convert...so get over it..and get back to the topic

funny an off topic comment about off topic
comments!

BTW, How about all the programmers remembering that most folks (even business users) aren't running a P3-800 machine with 256MB when they write stuff. I wouldn't mind giving Win2k a once around but the stupid thing requires twice the resources of anything MS has ever put out.

I agree Guy!

to rive

you have all those things in america but one thing is still true there money is more powerfull

Windows is quicker than Linux (running a GUI) by a long shot.

Haven't been checking this forum of late, which is why I haven't been posting.

I'm not here to discuss BeOS , MacOS or anything compared to WinXP, so I won't bother.
I'm looking into the people who use Linux, those who use windows, why they do so, and if its a protests against bill G, or they actually have a reason.

I will close by saying,
Windows9x (and XP personal) were made to give the user the best possible daily computing experience.

Note the daily bit, Win98 won't crash if it is used as to how it was meant to be used. If you want 2years up-time, you shouldn't be using Win9x, if you want 1 weeks uptime you shouldn't be using Win9x. If you want the best possible daily computing experience, use win9x. There are server versions of windows to do those other things. An from all I have seen, Win2k outperforms Linux in ALL catergories, except for price, you pay for what you get though. Linux is not near the standard of Win2k, and as such has a lower cost, Comparing Linux to win9x (XP personal also) is stupid.
Its like saying a F1 engine is better than a standar ford engine, yes in a car race yes, but try driving up the east coast of Australia with an F1 engine, they are not reliable over long distances, but are bloody brilliant over shorter distances.

i believe every participant in this post is
using wins, ahem why degrade
something you are using! Oh, i am eating
a rotten cake. by the way, it is a freshly
made.... bla.. §§¶••ª••¶§§

robbo while I agree windos9X is best for the
avrage home users daily computing (I have
said this many times) you either missed my
post or disregarded it all togther.people
here made valid points aginst windows and you
did not counter them excpt for saying windows
is better. I hardly find your argument
convincing! where are the facts/stats/points
to back up your claims??? I know your very
smart and do know what your talking about,
but I fail to see any points you made so one
must conclude you either
a)know you cannot counter the claims made
aginst windows in this thread.
b) you don't know the answers.
c)don't care about truth or fact and just
like heated arguments with no real answers.
d)realize people here have made points that
you cannot dissprove (because you know there
true!)
why should anyone take any argument with you
serouisly if your only answer is "windows is
better" not very good debating skills or YOU
kknow you have lost!

Robbo: Windows is faster than any operating system- just barely. But only if you run the other operating system on a 133 mHz box with 8 mb RAM and a 20 mb hard drive while you run windows on a 1.5 gigahertz Pentium 4 box with 512 mb RAM. I run Linux (Red Hat 7.0, kernel 2 something- haha not even sure!) with GNOME. And have Windows 2000 Professional installed on another partition. Linux is about 10 times faster.

Yes Robbo, there are versions of Windows to do all those things, however they are far inferior to their counterparts. Win2K Pro crashes all the time on me, and that is Microsoft's "stable" server!

I am also insulted by the fact that despite reading my post from earlier (#10) in which I clearly outlined not only my reasons for abandoning Windows, but also my reasons for using Linux.

You also thing that a protest to "bill G" is not a valid reason to stop using Windows when in fact it is an excellent reason. By protesting something we force the manufacturer to rethink their product and therefore improve it.

As far as getting what you pay for, that phrase is becoming more and more obsolete on a daily basis. People are slowly beginning to realize that in this new digital age, where infinite reproduction is possible at zero cost to the manufacturer, you can get much more than what you pay for. People are beginning to work not only to better themselves and their hiers, but also humanity. Talented programmers are recognizing that open-source will enable their program to become better and more powerful much faster since thousands of people will be working on the source code rather than just one or two. They recognize that the future of software lies not in the programming, but rather the data.

To print123: money and power are not interchangeable, although they often go together. If money were all-powerful, morals would not exist, nor would Microsoft have been broken up. No rich man would ever be punished, and no poor man would stand a chance.

In order for us, as a species, to take the next step, we must first realize that at the root of all evil is greed. Perhaps not always monetary, but sometimes power, sometimes love, sometimes revenge. Those who would work solely for monetary gain rather than the bettering of humanity are no better than those who would exterminate humanity in its entirety if the opportunity presented itself.

To "solaris cracked my h": "Never assume because it makes an @$$ out of you and me." Before calling someone a hypocrite, hear what they have to say. It was made quite clear that not all of us use Windows.

To all those who are reading this, I beg of you; question society! Do not conform to societal norms! Form your own opinions based on logic and reason. Take nothing for granted, and above all, remember "Those who seek truth call on reason, those who seek conformity call on faith."

ROBBO YOU ARE A TRUE f---ING ASSHOLE I SEE YOUR POSTING YOUR 2 CENTS WORTH OF s---

Come on now! I sometimes get frustrated with
posts also, but I am trying to get a "true
and meaningful" answer from Robbo. I really
enjoy discussiong things like this , when
they stick to facts and hard proof.

In case anyone is interested, Red Hat 7 comes with the 2.4 kernel. :) It was bugging me...

H=head,
ok, i have never used the word
"ASS-U-ME" anywhere on this board. nor i
assume anything, i have used Redhat 6.2
to browse the internet before.. i no what it
is like, o-yeah, what happen to sound in
linux, ok, you need a creative-lab board,
crap.. how do i play DVD on linux? oh,
some kid wrote a dvd program jest for
linux.. where the hell is it? damn how do i
save this dorn mp3 on a zip? crap... ain't
supported! wa wa wa... better cry baby...
linux made pretty server as dumb box but
not desktops, dude! by the way, i am
using my original imac... jest for the heck
of it...

SOLARIS CRACKED THIS GUY'S HEAD:
Why do you say that Linux didn't support mp3
or zip? I've personally set up a parallel zip
on Corel LinuxOS 2 (Debian equiv.), a SCSI
jaz on RedHat 7, and a SCSI zip on
Mandrake 7 (RedHat 6 equiv.)

Also, SolarisGuy, if you have problems with
Linux you do a very simple thing called
"asking people". Linux has a worldwide group
of users that form a "user-support
mechanism". it's the largest and greatest
resource a user could ask for. it sure beats
paying microsoft $175 per NT crash...

h=head
ok, hmmm..., my redhat seem to be outta
date.... i still like 175 dollars per crash
than some user unfriendly OS! oups did i
make an invalid point again!.. bla..

Wel you like windows great! thats your
choice! my choice however is Linux and
solaris. Differnt people have differnt needs
or preferances for there computer.solaris
craked my head, you seem to have given up
real easy Unix is not meant to be like
Windows at all there two totally differnt things

s--- people.
I'm not sure who mentioned Win2k crashing, that has been prooven more stable/reliable than linux, it is your hardware, or drivers, or most probably your lack of maintenence crashing that system.
NT has proof it outperformed kernel2.2 . Win2k has been prooven to outperform NT4 in every way. Even Linus himself said, if the 2.2 kernel is working for you, don't worry about the 2.4kernel, from wat I know 2.4 is more an upgrade for compatibility and has no real speed improvments over the 2.2 kernel.
So if NT4 was better than the 2.2 kernel, that makes Win2k many times better than Linux now.
Linux's only strong point is it's cost, usually 1/4 of that of Win2k (approx, this does vary). I suppose it comes down to the personal opinion in learning a strange OS, that is harder to use, alo harder to use, harder to get on the spot help for etc... is worth the few hundred dollars savings.

Robbo
I can't be bothered linking proof to this message, i'm not writting an Essay. Goto a search engine, fine oud that NT4outperformed 2.2, then that Win2k outperforms NT4, and that 2.4 is really no better than 2.2 (for what we are discussing).

I find your lack of proof reason to not
believe you and gives me the right to say you
are wrong and you have no clue what you are
talking about here is a direct quote from
linus from his interview at www.linux-mag.com
I quote" I think there are some users that
just couldn't use Linux before. 2.4 will make
a difference to them. There are a lot of
performance improvements even for normal use,
even on dual CPUs. It's really painful for me
to go back to a 2.2 kernel because when I do
a kernel compile, my screen becomes jerky
under X, when I do a parallel compile, and
the load shoots up to 30, 2.4 is so much
smoother; it's really noticeable" So once
again robbo your pulling "facts out your
ass!! there are areas where each OS
outperfporms the other why can't you just
admit that and let it go??

At an interview by Linus after releasing the 2.4 kernel he said it.
Yes it has better performance , but nothing to make it better server, or anything.
Go look it up. Where does Linux outperfom Win2k?

Robbo

Actully if you have ever read when 2.4 came
out many stories were printed saying that
most of the upgrades were geared toward
business such a better clustering etc...
security and uptime are 2 places where linux
outproforms win2K ease of use and hardware
support is where Win2k beats Linux, I', going
to go look up some things for other points I
will post them later and I will post for
either side which ever is FACT.
I still see no points robbo???? so I still do
not believe you!!

Okay, in order:

Post #29: I don't know what the- heck- you are smoking! No, you never used the word assume in your post, however you did say "i believe every participant in this post is using wins, ahem why degrade something you are using". You ASSUMED we were using Windows when in fact I am not. I run Linux.

Just because someone wrote a program to let you view DVDs in Linux does not mean that they are a kid. And even if it was a kid who wrote it, the fact that they wrote it proves that they're smarter than you, so shut up. Where to download it? download.com, zdnet.com, tucows.com, sourceforge.net, linux.org, etc. Or you could just search for it! If you need to learn how to use a search engine, fravia+ has some excellent tutorials at http://www.searchlores.org/

The next sentence was asking how to save data to a ZIP drive (I think... please learn how to spell and use correct grammer). I have had no problem attaching a ZIP drive to my box. When you tried, did you plug it in?

The rest is jibberish.

Post #30: Hoo-yah!

Post #31: Also, computing.net has a Linux forum.

Post #32: Yes, RH7 is out and you said you used 6.2, right? ("i still like 175 dollars per crash than some user unfriendly OS!"="I would still rather pay $175 for a user-friendly operating system"??? if so...) That is your choice. Linux is much harder to use than Windows, but it is also much more powerful. If you would rather have an easy & weak OS than something that may take a few days to learn but is about 15 times (conservative estimate, in my mind) more powerful, have fun!

Post #33: I like your opinion but disagree. I believe with GNOME and/or KDE Linux can easily take Windows' place. You should start a topic with a post similar to that in the Linux forum, as the results could be interesting.

Post #34: Nicotine is not addictive. Yes, that has been proven in studies similar to those you refer to. Guess who did all the research? If you've got the dough, you can have any study's results turn out however you wish.

I haven't noticed an improvement from 2.2 to 2.4, but for alot of people that compatibility is a HUGE deal. I have to admit, the *only* problem I've had with Linux has been the fact that my box came with a winmodem and I had to get a new one. Many people have had similar problems with Iomega ZIP drives (like Robbo, although I'm not sure he plugged his in!), and USB (supported in 2.4! YEA BABY!).

Linux only strong point is its price?!?!?! Which is about 1/4 that of Win2K Pro?!?!?! First off, where did you take math? List price for Windows 2K Professional is $319.00 and 1/4=.25 (319.00)(.25)=0??? Yes, thats right! Linux is not cheap, it's FREE! And its strongest point is its price? What about the uptime? The speed? The CAPABILITY???

Is alo supposed to be also or alot?

Post #35: Hoo-yah!

Post #36: Are we talking about server here? Because I've been focusing mainly on workstation. Well this should solve it: Does anyone here believe that, on identical boxes with identical connections and when both are properly configured, Windows 2000 is a better server than Linux? If so, why? Do you have anything to back up your opinions? Please respond.

Post #37: Hoo-yah! My god my post will be 38! Anyone know of another thread on computing.net this big?

There were more posts, but a couple got deleted (by moderator I assume). Which does make it the logest thread I have ever seen. About the topic: I use both: windows and linux. At work I have been using unix for last five years, but at home that was my first time setting up anything other than windows. I tell you, I had hell of a time setting up redhat on my machine, whereas win2K, I just popped the CD in.
For work, and when I take my work home I use linux, but for my personal things, I PREFER to use windows. I think that some of us forget, that OS is up to one's preference, and there is no point in arguing about it and smoking ass hair.

h=head
Nuts!

Dear concentriq,

What do you mean there's "no point smoking ass hair." I love smoking ass hair. Ass hair is great, especially when it has little brown chunks or tiny bits of paper clinging to to it. Try it sometimes.

A post of mine cracked 50 on the Linux forum.

Yea you love attention & will do anything to get it. Do you have a life, friends, or girlfriend?

Orvie me?

Yeah

to robbo, i can't find this "post that cracked 50"; got a URL? also, nobody ever said that Linux was user-friendly, although if it's user-friendliness you are looking for then you could try HelixGnome...

Hope you guys put as much thought as to why kids like to shoot other kids at school as you do about which stupid OS is better. Hmmm, maybe they cant stand all the STUPID arguing about OS superiority. The saying is correct, opinions are like well you know. (Warning: old school "truth or dare" flashback) TRUTH---who the hell pays for windows anyway, when you get it free just like Linux with novice type search skills?? DARE---bet you won't raise your hand if you really paid???....ok didnt think so....o o o , I got one, is the Win XP Server (beta) Im running better/more stable than my other box w/ kernel 2.4??? oooo, can you feel the drama on that one? LOL, geeeezzzzus, and my family says I need help.

excuse me, mr. questionMark, but have you
read some of the stuff the windows
enthusiests have written up there? now i'll
have you know that I paid
110-some-odd-dollars for the windows 2k
upgrade, and downloading warez is ILLEGAL AND
IMMORAL! Also, what relevance does this have
to school shootings? you think just because
it's not life-or-death it shouldn't be discussed?

also, for the record -- i dual-boot RedHat
Linux 7 w/kernel 2.2.16 and BeOS R5.03
Professional; i sold my copy of windows 2k...

Just wanted to get this up to 50

Come on guy's, you know that Robbo is right.
Running Linux is like boiling an egg in a swimming pool.
We don't need it and we don't deserve it.
Long Live Windows.
The best by far.

Again no facts just stupid opinions & comments!

point of fact...robbo your the wort on the a$$ of mankind...even the people who run this fourm don't like you

Blimey... I have just read this thread from start to finish.. took some time too !!

Robbo

I can see your point ( to a degree ). Windows is worldly accepted as the norm of operating systems, even though it may not be the best. We cannot however all sit here and slag off windows entirley. It may be slow most of the time and crash regularly too. But it was an operating system designed to support nearly everything that it available on the open market. It supports new and old technology fully, which makes it the most versatile operating system available. Also bear in mind that 95/98/ME were made with the home user in mind.

It seems to me that all of us on here are industry professionals of sorts, and therefore shouldnt be wasting our time winging about an OS designed for the consumer market. If you want to play around with programming or server side apps, use the server products that microsoft produces. And before you all shout down my neck about other servers out there bieng better, I look after a 7000 user domain, and internet precense running on NT, Novell, Unix and Linux. All of these have there advantages and disadvanteges ( novell more than most ;)

But overall from a design and administration point of view, NT is still the best for ease of use and client end apps.

If I was a home user tho... I would probalby be taering my hair out at the shear frustration generated from using the windows platform... luckily tho, i am not ( so why winge about it ).

For all the hardcore developers out there, I totally agree that an open source OS should be fully supported, and I intend to give as much support as I can to the growing industry.

So why dont we all hang up our guns and just appreciate the fact that there are many products out there to satisfy whatever needs we may have, and not argue about which is better.

(my dads bigger than your dad) arguments ended when we were 7 yrs old.

I have to give a lot of respect to MS prgrammers tho, as they must have one hell of a job programming these "fully compatible" OS's, and everybody loathes them !!

Was removed by Justin whoever asked about the Linux post, was title Windows V Linux, and became quite rude and offensive by about 26.
Pete, don't think I ever said the owner of this site does like me? He said in an email he didn't mind my posts, though not to start any flamewars?
I forget who said it, but its true. Linux seems only to exist because people dislike MS as a company, or Bill Gates as a rich person. There is no real reason to use Linux, Windows outperforms it. I guess the cost is the only factor in it. Really though, why use something so damn complicated and hard to use, when there is a very very easy to use alternative, that is actually better at most things. Comparing Linux to Win9x is stupid, there is no contest there.

? why do kids shoot other kids at school? No discipline in schools, bad parenting, OD on political correctness, easy access to guns, drugs. Fairly easy to work out.
Australia: General population, in general, has no access to guns, government/police force, working hard to disarm everyone.
US: Any kid can get a hold of one, accesible from homes across the country, current President, encouraging use of guns.

The end result?
Australia: No mass shootings in schools ever.
US: A mass shooting at school is starting to be fairly common, mass rise of incedents of late.
There we go, I put some thought into it. Don't give people guns, and they can't shoot no-one. Fairly easy to work out.

Robbo

i'm sick of robbo stating opinions as facts. He's said repeatedly "Windows outperforms Linux". Windows gets slower ever boot, and anyone whose had a w9x box running withoiut formats/new installs knows it. I'm not talking about fragmentation, either; i'm talking about all the crap that gets thrown in the boot sequence.
and, to James Stone: I think you're right about how pointless this conversation has become, although my people (Linux Users) stated a helluva lot of good facts that i believe will be completely disregarded by windows users, which is why it has become pointless...

Robbo gotta agree with you on the whole guns
thing!
Now as for your windows comments , I HAVE YET
TO SEE YOU POINT OUT ONE FACT When I and
others have pointed out many.

James Stone, well said! And I know what you mean about time. Some of mine basically essays!

Robbo, you keep rephrasing the same posts over and over. "Windows outperforms Linux.", "The only good thing about Linux is the price.", "Windows is the best OS out there.". All these facts have been more than adequately rebutted, and I believe it is time you try to rebut the significant points risen by the rest of this forum (this time, with facts rather than opinions, please)

Now, the only good point (thats true) you have brought up is Windows' compatibility with nearly every piece of software availible. This is true, and this is why Linux has Wine. Also, sometimes in order to take two steps forward you must first take one step backward.

Also, I do not believe that gun control is the problem; there is an excellent reason behind the 2nd Ammendment. I believe the problem lies within the schools themselves. People are forced to study matters they are completely uninterested in and will, in reality, never use. This is extremely frustrating, especially when you are smarter than every one of your teachers! This frustration is bottled up and, sometimes, is eventually released in the form of a shooting. Personally, I go home and beat the crud out of a punching bag- if I've had a really bad day I may even use a baseball bat! It seems odd, but it works!

Ok Ok we should really get away from the gun
topic this thread is already sooooo far off
topic, but anyways Robbo, I found this
article today here is the headline:

"Boeing on Wednesday bought a 96-processor
supercomputer based on the Linux operating
system and Advanced Micro Devices processors
for use in designing the new Delta IV rocket
that launches satellites into space."

Hmmmmmmm why wouldn't they trust such a task
like this to Windows2000?
Makes ya think a bit don't it? I'm sure with
such a big company Money was not the reason
they did not go with Windows2000!

I know why... MS havent released the correct joystick API for the flight deck in DX8.

or maybe i am wrong ;)

Or maybe the joystick drivers they do have suffer with the rudder controls drifting to the left all the time.

This message is here for a sole reason of breaking a 60 message barrier. (Its supposed to be 62, but some ass deleted my post)

Good, it needed to be deleted because it was sick just like yourself.

At least Windows supports DirectX.

64

Well I'll say this again Linux was not
intended for the avrage home user who just
wants to play games, if you wanna play games
all the time boot windows OR dual boot if all
you do with windows is play games thats no
big deal! Me, I never play games on my
computer, I just use my N64 or Psx or my PS2.
but thats just me! Saying Linux dosen't
support directx is a moot point seeing as
it's maade by microsoft! Linux dose support
openGL again I say Linux was not made for
the avrage home user who [lays games,checks
email and surfs. It's more for people who
like to tinker with there os's or people who
just like Unix etc...

Who cares about DirectX, I dont! If all you wanna do is play some games you wasted money on a pc!
Computers are not toys!

Ozi, they are for 90% of people these days.
Games are much more suited to a computer than a PSX or N64, the PS2 doesn't look overly flash with the games yet, though they are bound to get better.

Robbo

funny, how a simple question like "What is WinXP" (Post 1) turned into this dumb s---

Your just pissed because you dumb post got removed.

I'd hardly call it dumb s---, its called conversation, who cares if its a bit off topic, his question has been asnwered.

I use windows 98SE
I also multiboot to Linux -
I have never understood the linux side 100%, like when i install something I dont know where it puts all the files and stuff like that but i will learn it.
Whats my point?
No O/S is better then another but one suits a person better to their needs and thats the one they should use - If you run a home P.C with kids that want to play games you dont want 2000 or linux or BEos or Pete Wilsons "fast OS99"with mouse support - and if you look at it, the home market is massive for computers they are in shops everywhere and over here they are mostly running ME, you still get some cheap ones running 98se but most are ME.
Now i believe that linux could take over the market if things were a little different, If a good group of programmers got together and made a friendly Linux which had 'invisible to the user' PC emulation so it could play most games off the shelf and most software then it would be the preferred OS for 99% of computer gurus in a second and the market WOULD catch on - companys like IBM, Dell and Compaq would start bring out P.Cs with it as an option - of course the programmers could charge for the cd but it would be worth it.
The problem with linux is when you go to the computer shop theres no programs there that are compatible and thats why home users dont like it - it needs a few adjustments to make it user friendly and it will make it.

I'm a home user & I love Linux. I disagree with you saying no OS is better than the other. It's simply just not true. I will not state facts because there are plenty on this thread. The whole thing has to do with preference mostly & I prefer linux. Sure Linux makes you think a little. People need to exercise there minds more. I also know of a company here that loads Linux on there pc's for home users. It's called Borogoves computers. Thats where I got mine.

In response to the pst above asking if this was the longest topic on computing.net:

Currently the longest-running post on
Computing.net that I have seen is "voyetra
WinDAT" on the OS/2 forum. The link is here:

http://computing.net/os2/wwwboard/forum/32.html

If 44 more people post here then I think this
will break the record!

Tigrlily,
There are OS's that are better than others. Were talking about desktop use here so i'll stick to that.
1)making you think, doe snot make Linux a better desktop OS, it makes it worse, people don't have to use their minds if they don't want to.
2)An OS shoul blend in and just be there, not be the main reason people have trouble using the computer. You shouldn't have to work on thye OS, just the software.
3) IBM, and many others load Linux onto a computer, you simply have to ask, and they'll replace windows with it. Though your cost won't go down.
4)As you say , it comes down to preferences, yep and over 90%of people appear to prefer Windows, which makes you the minority, past history shows the minority is usually wrong in the long run.

WinNT vs Linux is a different topic alltogether, in that Market, Linux has a better chance of taking on MS than on the desktop.
Robbo

Robbo,

What in the hell is doe snot? (message 74) Will you please stop posting here nobody understands what the hell your saying you illiterate piece of s---!

robbo is living proof of a person who does not use his mind

doe snot is simply does not with a space in the wrong place, can type fast enough, have trouble with accuracy sometimes.

Da, and why do you say that?

I have had enough of all you garbage Linux users constantly mocking Windows.
If you feel that strongly about Windows, why the hell are you in a Windows XP forum?
Answer me that you fools.
I'm going now, and NOT coming back.
The Pleasure was all yours.

Robbo