All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software
Microsoft sucks? ok then...
insomnia:
start burning
Canadian Lover:
quote:Originally posted by insomnia:
start burning
--- End quote ---
Is there anyway I can download all images at once? (For a single distro, of cource) I just dislike having to download 4 different files! :mad:
[ August 13, 2004: Message edited by: Canadian Lover ]
Aloone_Jonez:
quote:Originally posted by xeen:
I use Windows 2000 and will never ever switch to XP or beyond.
--- End quote ---
I don't blame you, XP is only a minor upgrade, it's NT 5.1 instead of 5, and it is clearly not worth it.
quote:Originally posted by xeen:
Windows 2000 is the last decent Windows version. XP and beyond is pure crap and always will be
--- End quote ---
You may not be able to see it, but XP is better than Win2k. I personally hate the play school interface, but most of that crap can be turned off.
Why is XP better than Win2k?
[*] pre-emptive booting makes it boot a lot faster than Win2k.[*] Built in USD driver for digital cameras.[*] Journalled configuration makes it easier to unfuck the registry, if you or some other shit program up.[*] Built in support for ZIP archives.[*] If you run a program an then close it, the second time you run it, it is a lot quicker to start. This is because (providing you have plenty of free physical memory) it keeps some of the code in memory.[*] Better multi-user support.[*] A little bit more secure than Win2k, hopefully SP 2 will help this.
[/list]
The following things are worse in XP:
[*] The user interface, especially that fucking annoying find files dialogue box.[*] The active desktop that enables you to set animated GIFs and html files as your wall paper can't be disabled and it slows your system down.[*] Compulsory registration.[*] runs less old Win9x/ME software (not that I care).
[/list]
I wouldn't upgrade to XP for these features, but if I was offerd XP for not much more than Win2k I would take it.
quote:Originally posted by xeen:
until MS rewrites it from scratch and starts doing what consumers and computer literate people actually want.
--- End quote ---
First of all MS didn't write the NT kernel. NT was written by Dave Cutler along with the rest of the VMS team. VMS was a good OS, it even beat UNIX in some ways. Although NT is not VMS, it was not written by MS but for MS, they did fuck it up a bit by including Win32 code and some other shit.
NT doesn't need a compleate rewrite, it just needs to be stripped back down to the kernel and all the other shit needs a rewrite.
quote:Originally posted by xeen:
However, even though I use Win2000, I do not use any other MS software with it. I do not use Internet Explorer, no outlook, no office, no media player...none of that shit. There are lots of other alternatives that are much more better and sophisticated. I recommend you do the same.
--- End quote ---
Good for you!
PS: sorry for my bad spelling and grammar, it's getting late and I've had a few drinks.
WMD:
quote: If you run a program an then close it, the second time you run it, it is a lot quicker to start. This is because (providing you have plenty of free physical memory) it keeps some of the code in memory.
--- End quote ---
Windows 95/98/ME/2k does that as well...that isn't new at all.
Aloone_Jonez:
quote:Originally posted by WMD:
Windows 95/98/ME/2k does that as well...that isn't new at all.
--- End quote ---
Oh yes, I think everything else I listed is new though.
Does Linux do this too, I notice a similar thing in Vector Linux.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version