 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
| 0 user currently in Hardware/Software. |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - Hardware/Software - Whistler? |
 |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 3 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| User | Post | ||
FreeDOS Lava Lotus Wannabe-Mod :< Level: 59 Posts: 394/1657 EXP: 1648646 For next: 24482 Since: 03-15-04 From: Seattle Since last post: 6 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by Yiffy Kitten Why? Because I don't consider it to be a downgrade to use the original Windows 95 shell. I'd say it would be better. For one, Windows 95's shell did not rely on IE. In fact, Windows 95 included an option in Add/Remove Programs to remove it, no loopholes required. Windows 95's shell is fast, simple, and it works! |
|||
Error Red Paragoomba Level: 13  Posts: 30/54 EXP: 9430 For next: 837 Since: 04-16-04 Since last post: 540 days Last activity: 339 days |
| ||
| A script run on a web page cant damage a linux system as a normal user simply cant alter core files.. Hell the CORE files like grub and shit cant even be READ by a normal user.. |
|||
|
Kasumi-Astra Administrator Level: 62  Posts: 313/1867 EXP: 1971846 For next: 12840 Since: 03-15-04 From: Reading, UK Uni: Sheffield, UK Since last post: 1 day Last activity: 12 hours |
| ||
| Hmmm... Very interesting topic. I'm not looking forward to Longhorn at all. Unless it's plugged all the problems with XP, then it's not really going to be worth buying. The first thing that struck me about Longhorn, about six months ago, was the god awful skin that adorns it. A ten year old with Win Blinds can do better than that. MS seems to be going the wrong way about GUIs... They have to be simple, functional and easy to ues. XP's standard one makes me want to tear my eyes out, and Longhorn is only marginally better. The GUI in XP is far too distracting, and the information bar clutters the desktop. To a certain extent, XP made progress by keeping the desktop clean and customisable. "Fair use rights" is anything but. Any users of Sony's Net Minidisc software will know that it only lets you write songs three times, even though you are entitled to as many backups as you like. If anything stops me from playing, copying and writing my 600+ MP3s, all legally ripped, then there'll be hell to pay. I think it's sick that record companies are shipping albums that you can't rip, nor back up. If I knew that the CD I wanted to buy had this software on it, I'd demand a lower price because they have removed your rights to making a backup. If anyone is interested, I like to run a clean XP system, with a nice Window Blinds skin (OS X at the moment... The finest GUI available). I also run up-to-date antivirus software to protect my system. I usually re-install Windows every month or two, because after a few months of trying out new cool programs, like I like to do, Windows starts to become lippy. Take the file associations box... It won't recognise rich text files, and when I select Word Pad, it won't let me select the "Use this program every time" check box. Also, when I came to installing a modem a while back, it randomly disabled options that should be enabled. XP is a shambles, but if you're gentle with it, it's the best OS out there. |
|||
|
kitty Come on babe, pet the pussy ;) Level: 70 Posts: 838/2449 EXP: 2962406 For next: 53405 Since: 03-15-04 From: Scranton, PA, USA Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 3 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by FreeDOSI suppose if you have like a 466 or some really shitty machine with like 16MB of RAM that you turn off every night and don't play any games at all on, yeah, 95 isn't too bad. XP is the most stable, secure, fastest (on modern machines) and most compatible Windows OS choice right now. |
|||
|
FreeDOS Lava Lotus Wannabe-Mod :< Level: 59 Posts: 396/1657 EXP: 1648646 For next: 24482 Since: 03-15-04 From: Seattle Since last post: 6 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
| I wasn't talking about Windows 95 itself, I was talking about the shell it came with, explorer.exe. It's not bloated at all, unlike WinXP's. Windows XP isn't faster at all. That's just a bunch of bologna from Microsoft. It's amazing to watch WinXP take three minutes to boot, and Win95 takes less amount of time than the monitor itself can switch resolutions. On the same machine. | |||
|
kitty Come on babe, pet the pussy ;) Level: 70 Posts: 855/2449 EXP: 2962406 For next: 53405 Since: 03-15-04 From: Scranton, PA, USA Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 3 hours |
| ||
| 1) I don't care about boot time, I never restart anyway 2) Even if I did, it takes my PC 20 seconds to boot 3) I like WinXP's explorer's features like thumbnail views, showing icons in groups, showing encrypted or compressed NTFS files in color, and sometimes I even like the media previews. Boot time isn't the same as speed. Play Battlefield 1942 on 95 and then on XP, XP will do MUCH better. XP doesn't get slow as it's on a few days/weeks/months unlike 95, and if it does, you can kill Explorer and restart it - XP's explorer, unlike 95, allocates RAM from poorly written programs with memory leaks to itself rather than it falling into a "Black hole" and becoming unrecoverable, so restarting Explorer regains most of your RAM that was lost in 90% of the cases. Windows XP has infinetly better crash recovery options, in the RARE event of a crash in XP, whereas 95 bluescreens if you take the floppy out too early. |
|||
|
HyperLamer <||bass> and this was the soloution i thought of that was guarinteed to piss off the greatest amount of people Sesshomaru Tamaranian Level: 118 Posts: 539/8210 EXP: 18171887 For next: 211027 Since: 03-15-04 From: Canada, w00t! LOL FAD Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Stability isn't everything. If you do it right, Win95 can be plenty stable as well. It's hardly fair to compare speeds unless you've installed them both on the same system; of course a top of the line system with XP will perform better than a crappy school system with 95. Also I agree with the GUI thing. 3D, WTF? A GUI should be simple and functional. Win98 had it right. You don't need 24-bit images or 3D models to make a good GUI, a few simple lines will do. XP's default themes also make me want to hurl. Originally posted by Kasumi-Astra Not to mention the dozens of public domain MP3s I've downloaded. Not everything ending with .mp3 is illegal.
Not that I buy CDs (just don't want 'em, PD/video game music is better and you can only get that online) but if I did, on the VERY odd chance they made such a thing that actually worked (which would surprise me, the majority of those are crappy; a good CD-ROM that plays the same as a normal CD player and disabling autorun will kill most if not all of them) I would take it back right there and NEVER buy from them again. The hell if I'm going to buy a CD if I can't copy the songs I want to my MP3 player in the order I want and not have to bugger around with switching discs.
I never got that. Software like Windoze seems to literally 'fall apart'. Mine worked at first (after reinstalling IE; the install CD didn't bur... er, was scratched) but now Winkey+M (minimize all) doesn't work, the Quick Launch icons refuse to go small, the whole thing goes NUTS when I play fullscreen games, dropdown boxes in IE (I don't use IE, but HTML files as desktop BGs do) don't respond to the first 8 clicks or so, it takes about a minute for the right-click menu to appear on the desktop, reading CDs is uber-slow, and often it won't show a preview of a file or will claim it's in use when I try to delete it. Trillian's the same way; it works at first but after a while the graphics start screwing up, things stop working, and everything just goes down the toilet until you reinstall.  [edit] Oh yeah, and on an interesting side note, if you poke around XP's explorer.exe in ResHack, you'll find some images with "Codename Whistler Server" written on them. Very interesting... (edited by HyperHacker on 05-03-04 04:38 PM) |
|||
Pegasus Bit Level: 26  Posts: 191/251 EXP: 97188 For next: 5087 Since: 03-15-04 Since last post: 337 days Last activity: 320 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Yiffy Kitten *bursts out laughing*  You thought I would want to actually replace the web integrated XP shell with an old out of date 95/NT4 shell?  For nostalgia purposes yes, but for everyday use no way. How would I be able to update windows without the integrated windows update? Simple, you can't, at least not without IE.  I scan for updates at least once an week every sunday, but like you said, XP's shell is more current and stable. Not to put you down or anything, but that's just my opinion.  |
|||
|
kitty Come on babe, pet the pussy ;) Level: 70 Posts: 859/2449 EXP: 2962406 For next: 53405 Since: 03-15-04 From: Scranton, PA, USA Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 3 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by HyperHackerWin95 might be "plenty stable" if you restart at least 1x a week or turn your PC off every night, but if you leave it on 24/7/365, 95 will slow to a crawl while XP won't have any problems you didn't cause. As for the GUI, that's why XP still has old-fashioned windows and other options. The style of XP's default schemes isn't to my liking but the idea of nice rounded schemes is. And I really would like to know what the hell you guys do to your computers to have issues like the ones HH is describing. Seriously, I've never had this shit happen to me, the worst that happens is I overclock too far and Windows hangs or bluescreens on boot... |
|||
|
FreeDOS Lava Lotus Wannabe-Mod :< Level: 59 Posts: 397/1657 EXP: 1648646 For next: 24482 Since: 03-15-04 From: Seattle Since last post: 6 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
Pegasus: You can use Windows Update with any browser you want. You need IE however if you want the ActiveX version that prods around your system.Originally posted by Yiffy KittenI've yet to see Windows XP stay on for more than four days without noticable deteriation. Windows is not perfect. It's far from it. Hell, Windows NT was just a rip from Microsoft's uncomplete OS/2 kernel they had before IBM wanted OS/2 to be 100% IBM. They updated it a bit, change the text, slapped the number 3.1 on it, called it Windows NT, and here we are today. (Although NTFS is a huge improvement over the filesystem it was based on, HPFS) It seems that Microsoft can never get it right. Not that they made the software entirely by themselves (*cough*), but they never ship out good, solid, stable software. Windows XP forces me to reboot every two days. Not to mention that it recently corrupted its own NTFS partition. I'm lucky I had unpartitioned space to put another copy of XP in to recover the files. ._. |
|||
|
Pegasus Bit Level: 26 Posts: 192/251 EXP: 97188 For next: 5087 Since: 03-15-04 Since last post: 337 days Last activity: 320 days |
| ||
Originally posted by FreeDOS Then that means I'm one of them because I never shut off my computer except incase of thunderstorm or computer relocation and such, but I'll occansionally restart windows when it asks me to after installing/uninstalling software though.  I have windows XP by the way, as all may have noticed. |
|||
|
Legion banning people for no reason sure is fun Level: 101  Posts: 637/5657 EXP: 10399737 For next: 317938 Since: 03-15-04 From: The Crossroads is under attack! Since last post: 5 days Last activity: 5 days |
| ||
| "I've yet to see Windows XP stay on for more than four days without noticable deteriation." *raises hands* I have. 6 and a half weeks. Running smooth as a fresh reboot. Did many a things and ran many applications during the time too. Why did it end? A freshly installed WinMX crashed my system. And for all the people who are claiming that Longhorn is going to be the end of all filesharing as we know it? Well, it reminds me of three letters. Y...2...K. Thank you, and goodnight. |
|||
|
kitty Come on babe, pet the pussy ;) Level: 70 Posts: 864/2449 EXP: 2962406 For next: 53405 Since: 03-15-04 From: Scranton, PA, USA Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 3 hours |
| ||
| Record uptime on this machine is 2wks 1day 17hrs 5mins, the install is only ~2 months old and in that time I've moved it to home, to school, to home, and back to school. The most recent restart was for some new patches that came out and I felt like grabbing and, out of boredom, restarting. Once again, I'd like to know how you people fuck up Windows so much that it slows down after only 4 days. Intel system with onboard GFX and/or Celeron and/or Rambus? Shitty apps? Using 95's Explorer? Really, you have serious hardware or software issues if 4 days slows your PC down... |
|||
Kitten Yiffer Purple wand Furry moderator Vivent l'exp����¯�¿�½������©rience de signalisation d'amusement, ou bien ! Level: 135 Posts: 1393/11162 EXP: 28824106 For next: 510899 Since: 03-15-04 From: Sweden Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 4 min. |
| ||
I do hope that the Longhorn shell is faster.  The old one in Win95 was fast, but it have memory problems yes (thought I maybe would get around using the Win95 shell on my computer who have Win98 someday... ). Usually I can have my computer running for days, until the firewall starts blocking some of the ports for no reason. Like the HTTP port.  And the user switching feature brings some problems (for me), not many people uses that feature thought. And the problems dosen't happen that often. Thought an restart usually fixes that. End of Filesharing with Longhorn would be suicide. Microsoft is feeling threatned by Linux, and they are very careful about making decisions like stopping file-sharing. (edited by Kitten Yiffer on 05-04-04 02:45 AM) |
|||
|
kitty Come on babe, pet the pussy ;) Level: 70 Posts: 865/2449 EXP: 2962406 For next: 53405 Since: 03-15-04 From: Scranton, PA, USA Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 3 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by Kitten YifferNot on the desktop. MS knows Linux has no shot in hell at the desktop as long as people still need to type shit in on a terminal, as long as programs and drivers don't install by double-clicking an app, etc. MS feels threatened in the server environment yes, but not the slightest bit in the desktop environment. They know their market share isn't likely to change - the people buying Windows now are going to continue to do so no matter what restrictions MS uses. People who use Linux now, pirate Windows, or dual-boot (with a pirated Windows version) don't matter to MS, they don't buy Windows, so they don't give a shit what those people think! |
|||
|
FreeDOS Lava Lotus Wannabe-Mod :< Level: 59 Posts: 398/1657 EXP: 1648646 For next: 24482 Since: 03-15-04 From: Seattle Since last post: 6 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
| Are you so sure about the desktop environment, Yiffy Kitten? According the the so-called "Halloween Docs", Microsoft feels threated by Linux -- in all departments. Installing apps and drivers via a single-click has been part of Linux since at least 1997 (my Red Hat distro from then does it). The need to use the terminal has been greatly reduced. I find GUIs repulsive, and go back to the Bash shell quite often, but others feel differently. I hate Windows by all the restrictions it gives you in the so-called "Administrator" account. |
|||
|
kitty Come on babe, pet the pussy ;) Level: 70 Posts: 873/2449 EXP: 2962406 For next: 53405 Since: 03-15-04 From: Scranton, PA, USA Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 3 hours |
| ||
| I don't feel restricted in the Administrator account - please, by all means, tell me what you mean And last I checked, you still had to go into a terminal to install stuff - according to Error recently, even And maybe MS felt threatened in the past but, the company realizes, as more and more Joe Sixpacks get PCs and don't want to get more involved than opening AOL, typing "porn" in the address bar and getting pictures of beastiality, that the average PC user isn't a geek anymore and that people won't put up with inconveniences to do shit that should be easy Joe Sixpack likes the XP GUI and easy to read Start Menu, and doesn't want to get involved in selecting which GUI to boot into |
|||
|
FreeDOS Lava Lotus Wannabe-Mod :< Level: 59 Posts: 400/1657 EXP: 1648646 For next: 24482 Since: 03-15-04 From: Seattle Since last post: 6 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
I have the following problems with Windows' restrictions on the Administrator account:
|
|||
|
Error Red Paragoomba Level: 13 Posts: 33/54 EXP: 9430 For next: 837 Since: 04-16-04 Since last post: 540 days Last activity: 339 days |
| ||
| Yiffy Kitten is officially ignorant to the world in my book... How is "open IE;; mozilla.org;; download;; next;; next;; next;; next;; finish;;" easier than.. "open terminal;; apt-get install mozilla" Seems to be a quick and effecient to me and many others. And don't give me that bullshit about command line being hard to use; call any ISP for help with router and stuff and they'll ask you to open command prompt atleast twice. (edited by Error on 05-04-04 06:31 PM) |
|||
|
kitty Come on babe, pet the pussy ;) Level: 70 Posts: 883/2449 EXP: 2962406 For next: 53405 Since: 03-15-04 From: Scranton, PA, USA Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 3 hours |
| ||
| Error: I don't care if you think it's easy or even if I do (and yes, it does sound easy) but 95% of current XP users will NOT tolerate opening a terminal to install something. That's all I'm saying. FreeDOS: I don't really see the need to uninstall Windows components unless you have like a 20GB HD or less |
| Pages: 1 2 3 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - Hardware/Software - Whistler? |
| | |
