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...

0

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.

0

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...

0

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.

0

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.

0

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...

0

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.

0

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.

0

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

0

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.

0

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

0

funny an off topic comment about off topic comments!

0

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.

0

I agree Guy!

0

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

0

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.

0

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••¶§§

0

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!

0

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."

0

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

0

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.

0

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

0

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...

0

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.)

0

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...

0

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..

0

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

0

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).

0

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??

0

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

0

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!!

0

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?

0

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.

0

h=head Nuts!

0

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.

0

A post of mine cracked 50 on the Linux forum.

0

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

0

Orvie me? Yeah

0

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...

0

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.

0

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?

0

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...

0

Just wanted to get this up to 50

0

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.

0

Again no facts just stupid opinions & comments!

0

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

0

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 !!

0

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

0

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...

0

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.

0

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!

0

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!

0

I know why... MS havent released the correct joystick API for the flight deck in DX8. or maybe i am wrong ;)

0

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

0

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)

0

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

0

At least Windows supports DirectX.

0

64

0

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...

0

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!

0

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

0

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

0

Your just pissed because you dumb post got removed.

0

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

0

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.

0

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.

0

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!

0

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

0

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---!

0

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

0

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?

0

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

0

Thank you dumbass. Maybe you will take some courses & finish school in your spare time! I have read many a post from you in this forum & I cannot understand anything because of constant mispelled words! And you try to give advice here. GEEZ!

0

It's "misspelled", not mispelled.

0

robbo,good bye,good luck and get lost!!

0

What was an intersting forum thread, with intersting topics and answers from obviosuly intelligent people... has turned into a playskool slanging match... tut tut.

0

I think that Windows XP will be a huge success because it really IS a huge improvement over Windows 2000. It's like going from Windows 3.11 to Windows 95 ... people will think "I just gotta have XP". And this "sure sell" gives Microsoft an opportunity to introduce features that they've been wanting to introduce for some time now but have held back on because they were too unpopular, just like they did with Windows 95. Examples of the shift between 3.11 and 95 include the bundling of MS-DOS with Windows 95, so that 95 would not run on any competitor's DOS, effectively choking out the other DOS's; mandatory product registration and a much tougher EULA; the partial crippling of DOS as an incentive to get customers to spend all their time in Windows proper; and (later) the hacking of IO.SYS to make it incompatible with earlier versions of Windows. From the looks of it, it appears that XP will be the same. XP introduces many advantages over Windows 2000, such as: a 64-bit-ready kernel (though the code is still partly 32-bit); faster boot time (allegedly); and a Windows 98 compatibility mode. But Microsoft is introducing a lot of unpopular features as well, such as: Continuous registration (must renew registration every 10 days if any hardware has changed); remote root privileges for Microsoft tech support; the removal of file security, except as an extra-cost add on; and the replacement of the old Explorer shell by the MSN 6.0 browser, with pages written in XML. Despite all these crippling injuries, I predict that XP will be a great success with Microsoft because it appeals to the less educated "home users" that make up more than half of all Windows users.

0

-was 95 really such a great succes over 3.11?(except the succes for microsoft in world domination) -what if i am away from my computer for more than 10 days and cant reregister it? Regards Miro :-)

0

I'm just trying to keep this topic going. Really, I see the release of XP as a sign that it's time for me to practice what I preach, and really get away from Microsoft once and for all. As much as I hate Microsoft, I still run Windows about 50% of the time, about equal to Linux. But there's almost no chance I'll ever buy Windows XP.

0

Kudos to my man "Lispeb" above for finally stating it...yes WINDOWS is better than Linux for the average user, now SHUT UP about it!!..LOL.....now when I say average user, I am not referring to majority of you who ran this ridiculous off topic post up 85+ (ahem 86 now))...I am talking about Earl in Wiccamaw County, GA, Tiffany the hot blonde in biology, or hell even my moms who has 2 PhDs.....we as have humans over the passage or time invent things for laziness as much as we do for neccessity, ex, remote controls, microwaves, & yes the COMPUTER, invented mostly to peform task we as humans did not want to do....that is 1 reason Linux won't be a desktop OS any time soon, "why learn something harder when I had & still have a hard enough time understanding what I do have"...say the word "compile" to Earl, & he thinks you want to stack a hay bail, tell tiffany to "debug" something & she'll go get a can of raid...and my moms & C++, well to her thats a very very low "B--".....its the same reason, we all dont drive diesel engines in our cars even though those engines are the backbone of construction, trucking, & military industries, even though better mpg, dependibility, & cheaper parts....are you gonna see one in a honda anytime soon...NO!....2nd reason, is Linux is free!, mistake as whole when aimed at the average user...who will mistakenly associate free with worthless, I said Linux is free to a friend when I first heard of it..his reply, "whats wrong with it?",...offered to build a PC for my aunt, which would have had everything she wanted for 1/2 retail price..no dice, she found it "much easier to & less hassle to order from QVC", even if it meant costing more $$ (hmmmmm or maybe she just didnt trust me)....they HAVE to give it away because they know with MS 90%+ foothole in the home user market, there is no way Moms, Earl, & Tiffany, are gonna pay for something they will soon find out is harder to learn than Windows AND won't run the majority of the software they already have w/o them having to then learn use an emulator of some sort, then start telling there friends how much it sucks, & you know what rumors do to things....the 3rd reason, and getting back to the original topic of this discussion (which is suppose a SUPPORT forum, not a gorilla chest beating match over OSs)....but XP itself, having been running betas since their releases, its PAINFULLY, painfully obvious that its aimed at the average user & they will succeed, with the Luna theme & endless redundant icons to keep the average user from getting lost, like I said way earlier, they took W2K & dressed it like a clown...inside it's got the stability & power of 2000 & then some, but on the outside the made it overappealling to Moms, Earl, & Tiffany....I will give you Linux lovers the nod when it comes big corporate web server use (only so you will be quiet)..but Windows has & will have it made for a long time to come in the home market....(unless they really screw it up with this activation nonsense, but that too has been cracked as well, LOL)

0

What do people get out of immatating me?

0

LOL !!! hang on, thought you werent coming back? ;)

0

robbo,a BIG LAUGH

0

I know.... Why doesnt someone merge the OS's to Form a super OS called Winux, It would cost a fortune, have a nice colorful GUI, a badly drawn penguin for a logo, loads of up time, but run F**K all. Then we could all stop moaning.

0

In the words of Monty Python.... GO AND BOIL YOUR BOTTOMS

0

I think you're all very sad. Go outside and GET A LIFE!!!!!!!

0

No... its raining, and I will get wet. Besides... How does one actually "get a life" is it bestowed upon you magically... or do you recieve it from the queen?? *confused*

0

Do you all remember what colour the sky is???

0

The queen only bestoes pain upon her followers. YOU are a raving Queen.

0

And on the seventh day the sky was full of fire... The heavens rained down there holy vengance... to smite the injustices of mortal men.... so... red, i think

0

What was this thread about again??... damn i need my pills

0

You probably have fantasies about the virgin Mary when in your local church

0

Does anyone actually put anything intelligent on this forum? seems like a bunch of saddos with too much time on their hands.

0

You f*** your pills.

0

Isnt there a room that shares the same number as this post??

0

up the a***, too

0

now you talk about WAAAAAAAAY the f*ck off topic!!

0

These "off-topic" posts are still much better than those in the Voyetra WinDAT topic, which by the way is now only 12 posts longer than this one. By the way, for anyone who might be confused about who I am: My name is Andrew, and I am a college student in Vermont, USA. I am majoring in meteorology. It is here that I first learned about Linux, because every one of the many different programs that we use at the college to interpret model data and produce forecasts is for Unix only, because if ported to Windows these programs would require vastly more hardware resources and would be unworkable. But this isn't the only reason I prefer Linux to Windows. The second reason, put concisely, is that Linux gives the user far more power over his computer than does Windows. Windows and MacOS try to keep all the power to themselves. The power benefit to the user is the result of Linux having been born under the GPL license, which has many other benefits as well.

0

Aussie Aussie Aussie>

0

While we off topic: Did anyone here watch "the dream" on during the sydney olympics? with Roy & HG? Pretty funny eh? Rumour has it they'll be back the "Ice Dream" for the winter olympics, the catchphrase being, an Ice dream, its a little more solid than a wet dream Robbo

0

Judging by the time of the posts here... I must be the only Brit here... Joy.

0

Seems that way James

0

ok, so i think i've been able to piece together a little of what WinXP is, from about 3 posts here. correct me if i'm wrong: winxp is a win9x+win2k/NT hybrid, with a more graphical gui, with mandatory periodic registration (how does that work, exactly? what if you don't have an internet connection?), and worse security? i was looking forward to winxp, but i'm not so sure now. (although there really have only been a few answers to "what is windows xp". =P thats why i'm asking.) by the way, how would you set up a computer to boot from the network? (with a windows server) if you didnt want to use up so much space on your harddrive, but wanted a windows os. thanks. =) oh yeah, what's winDAT, anyway? and winux. that's great. i'll be sure to look out for that. =P

0

The server needs to have "Network Client Boot" enabled, and your terminal's network card or modem has to be PBX-enabled (I think that most cards are). Then you will be able to boot from the network. WinDAT is an old 16-bit Windows program that used to come standard on a lot of multimedia computers in the mid-90's.

0

Hmm... This is definitely getting long. With all the religious wars going on here, it's no wonder people are so trigger happy. Ok, now that everyone's angry at each other and has no trouble judging one another I'm going to inject my stupid little opinion in. A) I am a programmer. If I am missing a feature that I want, I implement it, regardless of which OS I am using. B) Instead of complaining, I make up for deficiencies. C) I use whatever OS is best suited to the task at hand by profiling with performance tools. Then I perform stability tests, and so on and so forth. While I am not a zealot about any OS, here are a few I have used: Linux, Windows, BeOS, Sun, AmigaOS, BasicOS, CPM, MacOS... I've even messed around with a few custom OSes and exokernel designs. But I digress. I have noticed a pattern of OSes becoming more general purpose. Unless the users have no control whatsoever over the products they buy, download, or pirate this trend will continue. One thing that does irk me is the lack of driver support from hardware vendors for different OSes. But I am doing something about this: I am telling them that if they don't develop a driver or release source for someone else to, I will not buy their product. It's simple. It's capitalism - it's the American Way. The internet is the common ground that enables all these different computers to communicate. It is remarkably vague to say one OS outperforms another without backing it up with sound reasoning and facts on specific cases. To be so vague only does more to harm your religious choice of OS than help it. Windows 95/98/Me tends to peform for a more general audience, where NT and 2000 strike a balance between the general audience and the networking environment. Linux tends to stray from the standard user environment and procure more for the networking environment. These are my *impressions* of the OSes. Both are capable of being extended sufficiently to promote more general or more specific purposes, so the argument that one outperforms another in every aspect (or even specific aspects) is a moot point, as long as the hardware can be directly accessed and addressed from either OS - And it can. As with games, I don't really appreciate (but I can understand) people who try to discourage game development on the PC. I was a game developer on the PC for over 2 years. It was fun, readily accessible and people enjoyed the software I wrote. Games drive a much larger percentage of the OS market than most people realize, and they are indeed a main reason hardware has improved so quickly. So I wouldn't be so quick to say they have no place in the PC market. In many ways, they *made* the PC what it is today. Anyone who disagrees, just say so and I will get the facts for you. I am going to assume for reasons of shortening this message that everyone agrees. Whatever people's problems are, I don't care... I will continue to use the OS that is suited to the task at hand and make up for deficiencies by developing new applications. If you are unhappy with the OSes that are dealt to you, no one is preventing you from writing your own. I know - I am developing an OS right now. If you are happy and content with your OS and feel it is perfect, then there is no turmoil in perfectionism. Prove by example, not evangelism... Furthermore, I am here to offer my services if you need help with an OS, though there are things that even I don't know. Finally, I can say with great fervor that these religious wars are a detraction. Debate on the specifics doesn't bother me. This does. We don't need to start an Inquisition or witch hunt over someone's choice of OS. There are far better things to do with one's time, like learning how to program and extend an OS to support features you desire (hint hint). If you have time, learn to program. If you have money, you can pay me to write the OS you want :-) Good luck and enjoy!

0

Winux, WinXP is the Win2k engine with all the benfits of WinME built in. The GUI is supposed to be making it easier to use. You won't need an internet connection, you would be able to use a normal phone number. I read somewhere the retail versions for home users will not have to go through this, they will simply buy it, and register it in a similar way to Win9x. (ICON 17th march) Robbo

0

John Thomas????? (teeheehee!!)

0

Robbo: That's the "Family" version of Windows XP you are thinking of. That will most likely cost extra, and will STILL be crippleware because it doesn't come with file security.

0

Said it was Windows XP personal in the article. Should cost less than the Pro versions.

0

116 and counting..... Aint free speech great :)

0

Registering every 10 days would be a big pain in the everywhere. that's got to be one of the worst ideas ever. =\ i dont know if it's worth it to get the extra security. it may be better just to stick to the older version of windows.

0

I can tell you, there is no way on this planet, MS are going to make you register every 10 days, go on email them and ask, they will confirm this. Stop fighting amongst a bunch of ppl who dont really know. Free speech doesn't really exist, if it did I would be allowed to say I didn't like Lebanese ppl*, but I cant or i'd get arrested for racism (i think?) Robbo *that was an example not a statement.

0

Congratulations, Winux, you've made this the longest running topic in history! Just as a comment, I know a few people from Australia that are members of the One Nation party and they have never been afraid to say who and whom they like and don't like. Robbo, like everything else in Windows XP, the USER doesn't do anything, Windows registers ITSELF and only complains if there was a hardware change detected. The next logical step, and we can only hope Microsoft does not go there, is to take even more power away from the user, and start automatically assigning homepages and email addresses to each user of Windows (imagine members.microsoft.com/robbo or something) in order to bankrupt Geocities and free hosting services. They've expanded into every other computer industry. Also, Microsoft's behavior is rapidly coming to sound like that of Wamiotech, a company in a science-fiction story I read. I will do my best to recount the story as well as I can remember it: Wamiotech's supporters grew so many that the company was voted control of the government, and once in total power they acted only for their own profit, which they had been afraid to do before. Their country, Wamia, became the richest country in the world, but the people became totally dependent on Wamiotech, not just for news and information (the original purpose of the company), butfor absolutely EVERYTHING. Meanwhile, Wamia's eternal rival was not getting much richer, but its miitary was getting incredibly powerful because they relied on a company called Camiotech, whose business practices bear some resemblance to the efforts of the Free Software Foundation -- in this case, they worked only for the benefit of Camia, withou making a profit themselves (there wasn't much to buy in Camia anyway). So one day an anti-Camia third party attacked Camia with a species of deadly flies that survived on human blood and could reproduce while living in a human body. But the flies didn't succeed because the Camians had the resourced available to prepare for the attack, as they put on thin but nearly impenetrable armor and released chemicals into the air around their homes that would kill the flies. Eventually the flies, never ones to give up, wandered southeast and entered Wamia, where they discovered millions of Wamians shivering in fear of them. Wamiotech had refused to prepare for the animal invasion, because it would have cost them incredible amounts of money, and had told the people to prepare themselves instead. Now that the flies had arrived, the Wamiotech executives fled to another planet, and let the flies eat a good portion of the population of Wamia, which eventually survived the attack, but only at the cost of destroying their civilization and returning to a primitive way of life. The point of this story is that I am AFRAID of Microsoft's power. It isn't that there aren't other companies even more greedy than Microsoft, but that in the area of computer technology, none has anywhere near as much power as Microsoft. I'm sure Microsoft is serious about its 10-day registration plan, and I don't think that the average user will even object to the plan, which effectively forbids them to uninstall Windows.

0

I wasn't aware of any extra security features Microsoft is planning to incorporate into Windows XP. All I know is that they have TAKEN OUT fil security so that they can charge extra for it, a la Windows NT.

0

If i were rich, i wouldnt have to worry about that at all... pay extra, whatever. but i'm not, so i'm worrying. =P

0

ah well. maybe its time to try a different OS anyway... i dont need the windows compatibility now as much as i used to. so what version of linux would you guys reccomend?

0

Sorry to flood the message board, but it seems like in order to get answers to questions, you have to go to a frequently read place. =P please ignore this if you don't like off-topic posts (although i suppose you won't find anything but those here. =P) anyway, my question is about whether windows 98 (not second edition) can install the ICS (internet connection sharing) feature. I've searched the microsoft site and found nothing, so i'm expecting the worst. but you're all knowledgeable people, so i thought i'd give it a shot. thanks in advance for any help you can give. =)

0

ok, i tried out sygate, but it's 30 day trial. are there any free internet connection sharing programs?

0

I would recommend SuSE 6.4 if you can find it. I've heard that SuSE is getting scarce in the United States however as they were not making a profit. Second to that, I've heard Mandrake is the best Linux out there for most pe

0

Okay. This MacOS bug that cuts off people's posts is getting really ANNOYING. If you don't know what I mean, browse through the Mac forums and you'll see that it is happening to all the people in there who use Internet Explorer. It's not the fault of anyone at computing.net, it's Apple and Microsoft's fault. (I'm on a Mac right now, as much as I hate Macs.) The last line of my last post should read simply "people". MacOS SUCKS !

0

Id use Mandrake..& no 98 (non SE version) does not have ICS included

0

Look if MS want to supplt free email, free browsers, free IM, free Media players , free webhostinng etc.... is there really a problem with that? i mean if they were trying to charge for it yeah, bu they aint. If you must use linux, Redhat seems the safest bet. Robbo

0

Robbo, if that were all Microsoft was plotting, nobody would be complaining. The problem is that them giving away software is simply to monopolize the market, then re-commercialize it after their software is the only software of its type. Please learn to use the shift key, proper grammer, and proof-read your posts. Also, aint isn't a word, and if it were there would be an apostrophe (e.g. ain't). If you are going to use Linux, Mandrake is the safest because it is easiest, but if you know what you're doing I reccomend getting Partition Magic [unless you want to completely get rid of all your FAT-16 & 32 data, in which case don't bother with Partition Magic] and Red Hat 7.

0

The existence on Linux basically means MS won't be able to commercialize everything. Although Linux isn't as good as Windows, as yet, it is at least a good enough alternative if MS were to go overboard in their prices. People aren't stupid, they will flood to Linux (or mac or whatever) if MS tried to do something that stupid. Robbo 130 , reckon we can make 200+?

0

Robbo, you're right about the first sentence. However, you still fail to realize that Linux is far superiour to Microsoft in every way except two- 1. Linux is not as user friendly, however I believe this is due to the fact that it cannot possible be as user friendly as Windows. The reason Windows is so user-friendly is it takes control completely out of the users hands. Linux maintains an incredible proportion of ease-of-use to power. 2. Most software is Microsoft Windows compatible only. This will gradually change as more users migrate to Linux and the demand becomes greater. There will be much more software for Linux since open-source is so strongly encouraged, and therefore there is more software for more prospective programmers to learn from. People are all ignorant (myself incuded. "All I know is that I know nothing at all, and to that extent I am wiser than he") and generally stupid, particularly so when en masse. If Microsoft raises prices [before cornering the market...:)], people will pay. Don't forget to turn your TV off 4/22/01-4/28/01! http://www.searchlores.org/notvweek.htm if you don't know about it yet.

0

My TV is off nearly every week of the year ... I have only hooked it up once, and even then only to watch the Weather Channel.

0

Those two points contadict. If windows is the easiest to us eand allways will be, people aint going to flood to linux in great numbers, which gives developers no reason to work with it. Robbo

0

No, people will come gradually to Linux- they will not flood the market. Peotple are shockingly conformed to sociatal norms, and will continue to be that way for the forseeable future. Everyone will continue to use Windows, with the exception of a few social non-conformists. These non-conformists will be much happier with their new operating system. They will create more and more applications, and gradually people will begin to conform to them. These new-comers will gradually begin to create applications of their own, and more new people will conform to them. This cycle will repeat until the only people using Windows work at Microsoft [but guess what they'll use at home...;)] Robbo, you must realize that not all people are monetarily motivated. I've said this before in this very forum! Developers create applications for Linux not for personal gain, although that CAN be a motivating factor, but rather because they feel the need to give something back to the community from which they have taken so much knowledge. Carpe Diem, Rive

0

I love Windows.

0

Eh, got no answer to that one do ya's.

0

I just found out Wamiotech was secretly owned by a Camian company all along, and that's why they abused the Wamians so badly .... maybe Bill Gates and the other Microsoft execs run UNIX in their spare time!

0

Yeah, to work out what is soo crappy about it so they can tempt people off it with their future releases.

0

138 comments, debates and silly remarks And all of you are right, just let me tell you, if you want all really good OS you should get something like MacWinLin. I work with the 3 OS's, followed courses on all three and every one of them has it's advantages and disadvantages. I detain an MSCE and an MLCE and none of my OS's sucks Why ??? I know how to use it and how to get the most of it, try to get those courses and we'll go on speaking. And if now after all there are some people you have a kind of same degrees, try out the following : Write an OS (including File Management, Driver Support,...) having a user-friendly desktop (KDE, WinExplorer whatever it looks like). If you can handle it, your system stays stable, it works and you're having fun with it, go on posting some silly messages I must say that this is not a silly kind of challenge. I have tried it and got to an OS which reached at the state of an Win 2.x (for camparison) So all the Bill Gates, Linus Thorwald, Ken Thompson had an idea and realized it, all three have developped OS'S that are used by far over 90% of all people worldswide. Why don't you just keep shutting up with all this hate about which OS is best. I know Windows rules for the moment, but does that make it a bad OS ? When perhaps in several years Linux rules the same hate will come up again and Linus Thorwald will be the bad guy. Again the advice : First understand and learn to use an OS before cackling around

0

What sorta Productivities does Linux provide beside as dumb servers? Will a stupid secretary like to mount a floppy each time she want to save a Doc(very unlikely) will a dumb ass administrator pull his hair out (very likely)when his boss kicking his ass and asking "Where the hell is the backup, u moron?" hehe... i think that wraps up this topic. linux booshed... 2k usable!

0

What drivers do you use for windows xp? do you use windows 98 drivers? or windows 2000 drivers? or do you need a new set of windows xp drivers?

0

By the time of retail release, most hardware mfg. will have new/compatible drivers out. You betcha! BIG $ on the line........

0

One of my friends and I are having problems with the task manager in windows 2000 and whistler. it's the same problem even though we run different OSes: the title bar and menu bar have disappeared from the task manager. now we have to alt-f4 close it, and we cant switch to the other menus that show performance, etc. can anyone help? thanks a bunch.

0

Aha. all you have to do is double-click the border. that's very funny. someone explain *that*.

0

All the discussions above were pretty interesting. And everyone of you has a good point when deffending the OS of their choice. I do not have a new machine, only an AMD K6-2 @ 350 mhz and 162mg Ram and I have a dual dual boot system with win98 and win2kpro, and i also have winlinux and beos pe5 installed, but i very rarely use the last two because of hardware incompatibility. i must admit that i am from the so called "windows" generation. i learned to use a computer at work (windows 3.11) and progressed from there. i unfortunately don't have much time to learn programming, so i sticked to what was offered. and i got used to it. i've encountered many crashes with win98, some caused by me and others unknown, but i can say that i learned a few things from these. I am a so-called musician in a band, without much hardware, but pretty used to working with acid pro from sonic foundry. and i am sticking to windows because of this. and also because my lil bro and sis can manage through windows while with winlinux and beos (which didn't detect my keyboard), they could get much far. i'd thank microsoft for 1 thing, making something easy to get along with, but i would recommend to anyone who can. if what you're looking for can be found outside windows, give it a try, if it suits you, stick to it, but if you see that its gonna take you ages to handle a new OS, then maybe it would be better to try keeping this one running as long as possible. One more thing, i know its not permitted by laws, but you should try to get a copy of the program u want to know about through friends or even warez. try it, and if you are happy with it, buy it. if not, let it go, cuz spending some money with something that can bring you joy and make you better in someway, is worth it. I'm satified with win2k, even if i cannot run all my softwares from it. i like win98 cuz i can run acid on it. i'm pretty happy with winlinux since its very stable, too bad i can't get on the internet because of a winmodem. im sad beos doesn't detect my keyboard, can't do much without it. keep sharing your views, and maybe one day, we'll get an OS as stable as linux, as pretty as windows (in a way) and compatible with every OS around.

0

Not to throw a terd into the crap pit, BUT WITH WINBLOWS XP, when making any HARDWARE Changes into your system you have to have a code key. HINT: GUESS WHO YOU HAVE TO CALL FOR IT... Plus, it will COST you everytime. oh yes by the way if think that reformatting your Hardrive and reinstalling XP to get around it. You only have 1 time after that the XP version will work no more.... G GO figure another way of WINBLOWS and Bill RAPE(gates) gets your cash. I guess he does not like the fact he is not the #1 richest man in the world anymore... Mr Walton (wal-mart ceo is #1). Do youselves a favor stick to what you have, HELL they are still making software that supports WINDOWS 95. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO UPGRADE....it's your choice and when people figure that out, then maybe we have a chance to think for ourselves.....

0

Well I read both sides of both arguments. The only input I have is about the so called tests. Now I am about to commit blasphemy here to all you linux users (I am a linux users as well in fact I'm on Suse now), but when you see these so called tests where one system outperformed the other, you have to look very hard at the specs of the tests systems. Obviously windows will run differently then linux on different systems, so people should test the both for themselves on their own systems and throw all those benchmarks away. Secondly, the reason windows is so popular is becasue it's user friendly, and the fact that every computer you buy has it on it. I once went to gateway (gateway country used to have an advertyisement about building a system to "your" specifications, I asked them to install Linux on it (at the time I asked for RH5.1). They told me they couldn't do that. So being intent I asked them to not put anything on it, they said they would have to charge me for windows 98 anyway and they would give me the CD (BTW I already owned 2 copies of 98). Now this did wonderful marketing for MS, and alot of other companies did and still do the same thing, but then good ole billy boy turned around and sued gateway for licensing issues. Oh well just my buck 25 (2 cents isn't good anymore,...... inflation)

0

I completley agree with robbo. If linux would have been so good and free, by now it would have occupied almost 90% of the market.

0

I am a long-standing Windows user, I have been using it since the days of DOS 2.0 and windows 3.0 etc... Recently however, I was growing tired of the Microsoft system. Having used every single workstation version of Windows (3.0 - 2k pro), I grew tired of the annoying limitations, such as the Win2k telnet server allowing only one connection at a time, or IIS being a pain-in-the-butt to configure. I lived with this annoyance. However, news of Windows XP came my way, and I realised that Microsoft make me first of all pay them, and then treat my software as if I'm renting it! I've paid a lot of money for this system, and the idea that I didn't really own any of the 'inside' bits was annoying. Having been familiar with UNIX (good old 'NIX days at work... NOT), I decided to take on Linux. I downloaded Red Hat 7.0 (latest version at the time) and installed it to a secondary hard drive - just to test drive it. My Win2k partition has now gone, replaced with my Linux beast. The Gnome desktop is easy to use and functional, I have all the apps I need, USB support etc, configured my apache server (web server) and got it talking to my other four Windows 98 computers. I will not go back. However, if I want to type a document or something, or even do a bit of heavy downloading, I switch to a windows machine (where I am now). This is because there is yet to be a solid, stable and feature-ready word processor for Linux (Abiword leaves a lot to be desired, and Mozilla as a browser frankly sucks). I don't use Linux because I think Windows 'sux' and I don't use it because I want to recompile the kernel every-other-day (which I have been getting 2.4.5 on my system... ;). I use Linux because I want my computer to be legal, free and upgradable. That's my 50pence worth anyhow. I think one of the reasons I switched was that Linux is constantly evolving. I admit some of the featuers are worse than Windows, and that the concept of the console does take a tad getting used to, but Linux has many strenghts over Windows, such as aesthetics (run GNOME with the sawfish window manager and the Crux theme :). Windows XP has moved me to Linux I'm afraid. Many have followed this pattern. Sorry Microsoft, you've tied your own noose for this operating system! --Matt (sorry for pointless rant - boring, long day)

0

Funny funny funny and funny!! I luv u guyz, finally my working day is finished, spent reading all these posts!!

0

I havent tried Win Xp ! But one thing is for sure... I loved Dos 6.2 & Win 3.11, and it tooked me a long time for me to install Win95 on my computer. Because win95 was so "userfriendly", the whole Win95 OS was much bigger, and harder to get a grip on. Dos/Win 3,11 was more fun...you had a grip on the OS...if you know what i mean. The sam thing with Win ME...it Sucks.. Win 2000 is OK, but it is eating up my Memmory....it tooked me a long time to go from Win NT 4 to Win 2000 to......and still i thin Win NT is better, smaller, less memory consuming...win 2000 (professional) is eating about 50-60 Mb Ram. Win NT Server is just around 14-16Mb, when i have disabled some services...do that to win2000 and it wouldnt Boot!!!!!!!!!!!! I Love the OLd OS! Tried Linux and it is good, want to learn more, but it is difficult. But i will learn by time. /Cronos - Sweden!

0

it is just an enhanced version of windows ME

0

BeOS -This OS is super fast and has a nice GUI yet it lacks support for most products. Certainly someone can order products from the internet yet this (at times) can be a pain. The average user can not walk to "Bust Buy" and buy software or even a piece of hardware that would run on BeOS w/o going on the internet and downloading a driver (think how hard it would be to connect to the internet if they needed a driver for their netcard or modem). I love the stability yet it is not worth the space on my hard drive at this moment. When BONE and beWine start working... then I will re-install it. Linux- two words "Powerfull" and "stable" this OS has the MOST potential due to the "open source" label. I would prefer Linux over many OSes yet the problem is with the "ease of use" and GUI design. Windows9x- Unstable yet supports many game API's and can run them quite quickly. This OS is a 32bit OS on top of a DOS 16bit layer. So therfore a 16-bit OS is EMULATING a 32-bit OS. This causes the instability... WinNT4.0 No comment Windows2000 -The most stable (released) version of windows as of today. The kernal is totaly 32 bit.. no 16 bit layer so this improves performance and stability. With it's ability to run certain win9x apps it becomes "a must" for business owners who normaly would run on a 9x-based OS. Windows XP This is the best version of windows.... Added multi-media support, Luna-based UI support, and more stability. For those who do not like the new UI I just want to say that MS created this "clown" design as you call it to counter the new MacOS-X interface. The user interface called "luna" is more then what it seams. The luna interface design can totaly change the user interface. With my experience in looking into the luna control files there is a lot of possibility.. .a developer can add buttons, features, active-X controls, and many other things. If someone worked at it they could make a Carbon (macos-x) User interface just using the luna control api's that would totaly mimic the macos-x interface. Windows XP is the BEST Windows OS of its time. You can not compare it to other OS's due to its nature. Every OS has its stong points. all I can say about windows xp is that it is the strongest windows. My personal solution to the OS war is to release apps in X86 form... The user would simply place the CD in the drive and it would compile on that machine. If apps/games were released in this manner they could run on may different types of OSes as well as make the app/game unique to each system it is installed on.

0

Just an aside ... "XP" is the Greek letters chi and rho, which was used by the Catholic Church to symbolize Christ. So "XP" already has a meaning: it means Jesus Christ!

0

Ok sorry ppl i have to add my own thoughts even th i only read to post 24 b4 my eyes started to hurt... But ne ways I have been using windows for about 6-7 years. I know a good amount about computers and can do my share of stuff with them. But I admit I would like to use linux, beos, or other platforms (not macs they suck imho)... but face it you walk in to best buy... ummm sorry late at nite here cant think of to many other places that sell computer stuff... but you walk into most computer stores and they have shelfs of windows eq/software and maybe one shelf of linux... or beos... or maybe even the ... mac os MS currently has power and there for it is harder to support other platforms other wise i would not use this crap if a good % of the rest of the world did not

0