What do you guys think is the best operating systems, Windows or Linux?? I personally like XP proffessional and 2000 professional, what do you think?
Printable View
What do you guys think is the best operating systems, Windows or Linux?? I personally like XP proffessional and 2000 professional, what do you think?
I know alot would disagree,but i liked ME guess i'm one of the lucky
ones who got to appreciate it.I installed it when it was released,hadly had a single prob, and only recently upgraded to xp pro. :D
XP cos there are loads of progs, its new and rock stable. Im used to windows.
Linux - thinking about Mandrake 9.1 looks good and has nice features, just dont like the idea of being able to break it as easily, its quite hard to break XP to the point where it wont work no more. and with linux u have to think of it in a differnet way, the OS is the bottom of the ladder then the HW which is treated as a file not a piece of hw, where as windows u have the C:\ then the OS then other HW which is treated like HW, u dont have to load(mount) it each time as with treating it as a file, it may be simple to do stuff with it since its like just writing to a file but then u also have to access it like a file and open it first.
If linux had the software and hardware compatability without having to mess around with wine or these weird packaged progs then fine id go linux but since most games and progs dont work even with wine, or they run slower etc and cos the gui is weird.
but u can recompile the kernal for ur processor which is funky, no wonder linux runs its progs faster, and id prefer a gui to most progs rather than talking to my pc via command line, and most advanced commands are command line only.
blah
Xan
good old win98 SE..i'd like to try XP but would it work well on my comp?
128mb ram
26Gb
intel celeron 366mhz
Try win2000proQuote:
Originally posted by melgl@27 May 2003 - 18:33
good old win98 SE..i'd like to try XP but would it work well on my comp?
128mb ram
26Gb
intel celeron 366mhz
yeah im still living in the dark ages myself..
although im still on win98SE i rarely have problems with it.
i stilll enjoy using it over anything newer...
i tired xp the other day, installing it at a freinds house..
it wasnt too hard to find my way around it..
i like windows 2000 professional. I'm sick of XP....too bloated in my opinion. never had a problem with win2kpro so.
I think windows xp pro is the best. It never crashes.
i like 200 pro as xp is aimed too much at the "new computer user" and i have never crashed it. thanks for all of the responses and keep them coming...
xp is the best for everyday use and it pretty rock solid.
98se is the best os for gaming because the memmory management is pretty slack which can cause crashes.
linux is excellent for a server os and im playing with mosix which lets you cluster all your machines together so you can share cpu time.
let's see m$ try to incorporate a feature like that into windows
oh yeah and macs are for people who can afford them. ;)
i love the graphics in xp
xp xpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpx
<span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'><span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'>xp</span></span>
XP for me,solid as a rock now and a dream to look at and work with. :)
Yeah i'm using XP pro just now and its pretty damn good, but if you fancy a change try the new windows: code name Longhorn.
Don't install it over your existing operating system, just use it if you've got a secondary hard disc and use a switching program at boot-up. Its just its a tad unpredictable and erronous. :D
the grafix in XP suck...............Quote:
Originally posted by tzone@28 May 2003 - 08:30
i love the graphics in xp
xp xpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpxpx
<span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'><span style='font-size:21pt;line-height:100%'>xp</span></span>
its like sayin Mario64 is better than Mario world cause the grafix r better and u can fall off Yoshi......
i h8 windows, but havnt gotten around 2 try linux yet..........
im usin win98SE......... sucks though....... cant run KaZaA 4 more than 4 ours if i surf and chat...... and no more than 20 if i only download........ then i have 2 reboot....... cause my system is "2 slow"
i liked winME also, i found it alot better than 98se. i got me just when it came out also, so i think me and cosmok were the lucky ones wi winME. im running xp the now, alot better stability wise. i got alll the fancy bits turned off though. B) :P
Windows XP, cause I like being able to change the skins using programs. With anything under XP it's still skinnable but not to the point that XP is.
ME for me, never had any issues and it dont eat my system resources
Longhorn .. :lol: :lol:
Me too Cosmok!Quote:
Originally posted by CosmoK@27 May 2003 - 16:35
I know alot would disagree,but i liked ME guess i'm one of the lucky
ones who got to appreciate it.I installed it when it was released,hadly had a single prob, and only recently upgraded to xp pro. :D
It works for ME! Hhaha! On this pc it does.. i have two systems, but on the other one it doesn't!
XP has so much problems i just don't have the balls to install it because ME works like a charm!
So ME it is!
I don't need much after installing it, just my Video Card Soft and the Creative software.. the rest works like a charm!
Windows XP Pro
BOT
For the most part I'm happy with 98, but I still think I liked 95 a little better. It seemed fasted and more stable to me. Still scared to try XP, though. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. :P
DOS 3.3 was the best OS that Microsoft have created - or will ever create, did everything i needed, i could run a word processor etc :P
I was using Win98se for years it was an old friend I new it's limitations and was happy.
I think I stuck with it because I was so used to it.
Then a few weeks ago I upgraded to XP pro Corporate with sp1 and I havent a clue why I didn't upgrade earlier
XP is the BEST thing I've done in ages it ABSOLUTELY is the BEST operating system available with any sort of software base.
and there is a case for best ever.
Fantastic i never would go back now
If you have any worries about game compatability then install on a FAT32 format as some games don't like NTFS
Luca SnipesQuote:
Originally posted by Luca_Snipes@29 May 2003 - 21:58
DOS 3.3 was the best OS that Microsoft have created - or will ever create, did everything i needed, i could run a word processor etc :P
can you get Vice City on 5 1/4 inch floppies?
LOL.
XSpikeXQuote:
Originally posted by XSpikeX@29 May 2003 - 01:29
Windows XP, cause I like being able to change the skins using programs. With anything under XP it's still skinnable but not to the point that XP is.
Can you advise me at My Post about software for skinning XP
...lol the answer you are looking for is NO!Quote:
can you get Vice City on 5 1/4 inch floppies?
i have windows me.. should i change to XP ??? will my computer work faster??
what about the drives do i have to change all of them ??
sound
video
tv capture
modem
cdroom
etc ????
Yeah, I liked good ol' Windows 95! :D
LOL...at least 95 was stable. I would say SusE Linux...or really any incarnation of Linux for that matter...but...Linux is missing too much software support for me to feel comfterable with it. So Im going to say Xp...its not really that stable...but its the best Windows incarnation yet, and cosmetically...all the skinning abilities and the 128bit icons are a big plus.
Duties are not performed for duty's sake, but because their neglect would make the man uncomfortable. A man performs but one duty - the duty of contenting his spirit, the duty of making himself agreeable to himself.
Mark Twain
LOL...actually balaamm Ive been running Longhorn...Id say its more stable than my copy of WinXp Pro...lol
What do you expect? Just because MS have made XP doesn't mean to say they shouldn't develop another OS.Quote:
Originally posted by balamm@30 May 2003 - 07:39
If it is as "rock solid and reliable" as some people claim, then why did they start a year after it's release to build a replacement for it?
Duties are not performed for duty's sake, but because their neglect would make the man uncomfortable. A man performs but one duty - the duty of contenting his spirit, the duty of making himself agreeable to himself.
Mark Twain
I think I see why.Quote:
Originally posted by tommy1987@29 May 2003 - 23:14
...lol the answer you are looking for is NO!Quote:
can you get Vice City on 5 1/4 inch floppies?
Could you imagine how pissed off you would feel when you find out that disk No.761 is corrupted.
Install Aborted,
Rolling Back Changes.
To reinstall insert Disk No.1 and type vicecity.bat at the command prompt.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"FUCK THIS DOS SHIT... I Gotta get Windows XP"
I think I see why.Quote:
Originally posted by Neil__+30 May 2003 - 10:45--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Neil__ @ 30 May 2003 - 10:45)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--tommy1987@29 May 2003 - 23:14
...lol the answer you are looking for is NO!Quote:
can you get Vice City on 5 1/4 inch floppies?
Could you imagine how pissed off you would feel when you find out that disk No.761 is corrupted.
Install Aborted,
Rolling Back Changes.
To reinstall insert Disk No.1 and type vicecity.bat at the command prompt.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"FUCK THIS DOS SHIT... I Gotta get Windows XP" [/b][/quote]
IIRC DOS never had Direct X... No DX.. No VC ... :P
I didn't say the dos version of vice city had decent graphics.
12 colour, 256 x 480, 7fps
And spudlover
Before you say DOS can't handle this level of detail I am joking.
What do you expect? Just because MS have made XP doesn't mean to say they shouldn't develop another OS. [/b][/quote]Quote:
Originally posted by spudlover+30 May 2003 - 09:30--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (spudlover @ 30 May 2003 - 09:30)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--balamm@30 May 2003 - 07:39
If it is as "rock solid and reliable" as some people claim, then why did they start a year after it's release to build a replacement for it?
they develope a new OS so that they can charge you full price for improvements over XP
if they call it say "Longhorn" then you have to pay say $200
If they call it an upgrade for XP they can only charge you $5o
they develope a new OS so that they can charge you full price for improvements over XPQuote:
Originally posted by Neil__+30 May 2003 - 07:17--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Neil__ @ 30 May 2003 - 07:17)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Quote:
Originally posted by -spudlover@30 May 2003 - 09:30
<!--QuoteBegin--balamm
Quote:
@30 May 2003 - 07:39
If it is as "rock solid and reliable" as some people claim, then why did they start a year after it's release to build a replacement for it?
What do you expect? Just because MS have made XP doesn't mean to say they shouldn't develop another OS.
if they call it say "Longhorn" then you have to pay say $200
If they call it an upgrade for XP they can only charge you $5o[/b][/quote]
If they call it what it is - an XP bug-fix patch - it should be free. B)
With a 90%+ market share Micro$oft doesn't have to make a decent OS. Wait'll they start their software "leasing" program. You'll have to pay for your OS every year. Linux has it's drawbacks but it's FREE.
How many people om this board pay micro$oft for anything?Quote:
Originally posted by Texallen@31 May 2003 - 10:55
With a 90%+ market share Micro$oft doesn't have to make a decent OS. Wait'll they start their software "leasing" program. You'll have to pay for your OS every year. Linux has it's drawbacks but it's FREE.