« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Down

Author Topic: The Vandalisation of Windows  (Read 7059 times)

MarathoN

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 405
  • Kudos: 168
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #30 on: 13 December 2005, 21:37 »
Quote from: dmcfarland
Windows could be a good OS, but it isnt. Microshaft bloats it up with stupid needless bells and whistles. It also manages memory like shit. I wouldnt run Windows with less than 512 Megs. You might as well suck eggs with anything below that. Windows isnt going to get until there is some competition to Microshaft.

Hmm odd, because I ran Windows 2000 fine on 128mb and 256mb of memory. :rolleyes:
Logged

Refalm

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,183
  • Kudos: 704
  • Sjembek!
    • RADIOKNOP
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #31 on: 13 December 2005, 22:04 »
Quote from: MarathoN
Hmm odd, because I ran Windows 2000 fine on 128mb and 256mb of memory. :rolleyes:

dmcfarland did not mention which Windows version he meant. Windows 95 runs decent on less than 512 MB RAM, but Windows XP is slow as hell on 256 MB RAM.
Logged

MarathoN

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 405
  • Kudos: 168
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #32 on: 13 December 2005, 23:51 »
Hmm, it seemed a like a general comment to me, so I decided to put my point of view in. :P
Logged

hm_murdock

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,629
  • Kudos: 378
  • The Lord of Thyme
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #33 on: 14 December 2005, 00:11 »
Actually, XP's memory management is identical to 2000.
Logged
Go the fuck ~

Aloone_Jonez

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,090
  • Kudos: 954
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #34 on: 14 December 2005, 00:22 »
Exactly ,
Windows XP's memory managemant is the same as Windows 2000's. I run XP on 248MB and it works perfectly, I've used briefly at a computer auction on a machine with 128MB and it wasn't that bad. Anti-virus is the main problem, followed closely by Windows update, then luna and lastly the other unecasary services added in XP. The shit thing about Windows memory management is that minimised tasks are alwasys swapped to disk.
Logged
This is not a Windows help forum, however please do feel free to sign up and agree or disagree with our views on Microsoft.

Oh and FUCKMicrosoft! :fu:

piratePenguin

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,027
  • Kudos: 775
    • http://piratepenguin.is-a-geek.com/~declan/
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #35 on: 14 December 2005, 00:27 »
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Exactly ,
Windows XP's memory managemant is the same as Windows 2000's. I run XP on 248MB and it works perfectly, I've used briefly at a computer auction on a machine with 128MB and it wasn't that bad. Anti-virus is the main problem, followed closely by Windows update, then luna and lastly the other unecasary services added in XP. The shit thing about Windows memory management is that minimised tasks are alwasys swapped to disk.
Try running close to the same amount of shit that I had running and see how responsive wonderful-Windows is. Try starting up more programs then, and more programs and more programs, and see how things go.

And if minimizing in Windows is shit, then that's another reason Windows is shit.
Logged
"What you share with the world is what it keeps of you."
 - Noah And The Whale: Give a little love



a poem by my computer, Macintosh Vigilante
Macintosh amends a damned around the requested typewriter. Macintosh urges a scarce design. Macintosh postulates an autobiography. Macintosh tolls the solo variant. Why does a winter audience delay macintosh? The maker tosses macintosh. Beneath female suffers a double scum. How will a rat cube the heavier cricket? Macintosh calls a method. Can macintosh nest opposite the headache? Macintosh ties the wrong fairy. When can macintosh stem the land gang? Female aborts underneath macintosh. Inside macintosh waffles female. Next to macintosh worries a well.

WMD

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,525
  • Kudos: 391
    • http://www.dognoodle99.cjb.net
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #36 on: 14 December 2005, 02:27 »
Quote from: Refalm
Windows 95 runs decent on less than 512 MB RAM,

Sounds funny when you put it that way.  When Windows 95 came out desktops didn't even support that much RAM.  Hell, 95 itself didn't support that much. :D

For the record, 95 runs decent on 32MB, better with 64MB.
Logged
My BSOD gallery
"Yes there's nothing wrong with going around being rude and selfish, killing people and fucking married women, but being childish is a cardinal sin around these parts." -Aloone_Jonez

Aloone_Jonez

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,090
  • Kudos: 954
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #37 on: 14 December 2005, 13:53 »
LOL I installed Windows 95 on a Laptop with 4MB of RAM once andit was very very slow.
Logged
This is not a Windows help forum, however please do feel free to sign up and agree or disagree with our views on Microsoft.

Oh and FUCKMicrosoft! :fu:

MarathoN

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 405
  • Kudos: 168
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #38 on: 14 December 2005, 15:33 »
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Exactly ,
Windows XP's memory managemant is the same as Windows 2000's. I run XP on 248MB and it works perfectly, I've used briefly at a computer auction on a machine with 128MB and it wasn't that bad. Anti-virus is the main problem, followed closely by Windows update, then luna and lastly the other unecasary services added in XP. The shit thing about Windows memory management is that minimised tasks are alwasys swapped to disk.

That's my point, all that extra "shit" slows it down horribly... :rolleyes:

Hence why I run Windows 2000, I shouldn't have to spend time tweaking the system just so it runs fast, Windows 2000 has always ran very fast for me. :)
Logged

Aloone_Jonez

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,090
  • Kudos: 954
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #39 on: 14 December 2005, 17:37 »
Quote from: MarathoN
That's my point, all that extra "shit" slows it down horribly... :rolleyes:

I agree and it's got fuck all to do with memory management.
Logged
This is not a Windows help forum, however please do feel free to sign up and agree or disagree with our views on Microsoft.

Oh and FUCKMicrosoft! :fu:

piratePenguin

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,027
  • Kudos: 775
    • http://piratepenguin.is-a-geek.com/~declan/
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #40 on: 14 December 2005, 17:53 »
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
I agree and it's got fuck all to do with memory management.
Then do what I said:
Quote
Try running close to the same amount of shit that I had running and see how responsive wonderful-Windows is. Try starting up more programs then, and more programs and more programs, and see how things go.
Hell I might just do this on my brothers XP computer, after he next formats.
Logged
"What you share with the world is what it keeps of you."
 - Noah And The Whale: Give a little love



a poem by my computer, Macintosh Vigilante
Macintosh amends a damned around the requested typewriter. Macintosh urges a scarce design. Macintosh postulates an autobiography. Macintosh tolls the solo variant. Why does a winter audience delay macintosh? The maker tosses macintosh. Beneath female suffers a double scum. How will a rat cube the heavier cricket? Macintosh calls a method. Can macintosh nest opposite the headache? Macintosh ties the wrong fairy. When can macintosh stem the land gang? Female aborts underneath macintosh. Inside macintosh waffles female. Next to macintosh worries a well.

MarathoN

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 405
  • Kudos: 168
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #41 on: 14 December 2005, 19:06 »
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
I agree and it's got fuck all to do with memory management.

It is completely relevant to memory management, since all those extra "services" that slow XP down reside in memory. :rolleyes:

Not to mention switching to the "Classic" theme from Luna does fuck all for speed.
Logged

dmcfarland

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 156
  • Kudos: 123
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #42 on: 14 December 2005, 20:53 »
I was reffering to Windows XP. Win 95, 98 and nt had/have crappy memory management. Its all relative to what the latest/greatest/fastest computer that was on the market at the time.

Memory is definetly the name of the game. Windows manages memory like crap and Ive always had a custom swap file size on my windows installs. I am stating a simple fact that Windows OS's have crap memory management.

I agree you can tweak Windows so it runs better. Most users are not that savy and wouldnt know how to do that unless someone shows them and it still would be iffy at that. The average user just wants to plug it in and make it go.

Windows could be made better, but I dont ever see it happening. Im sure windows will continue to blow on the desktop and on the enterprise systems.
Logged
Whip me, Beat me, Humiliate me, Mistreat me, and Windows XP me.:fu:

Aloone_Jonez

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,090
  • Kudos: 954
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #43 on: 14 December 2005, 21:49 »
Quote from: piratePenguin
Try running close to the same amount of shit that I had running and see how responsive wonderful-Windows is. Try starting up more programs then, and more programs and more programs, and see how things go.

Err, where did I say "Windows' memory management is as good or is better than Linux's"?

Quote from: MarathoN
It is completely relevant to memory management, since all those extra "services" that slow XP down reside in memory. :rolleyes:

Memory management is all about how the kernel controls memory allocation and swapping to disk. Enableing or disabling services will affect the total amount of memory being used but makes no differance to how the kernel manages the memory requests made by applications. If two identical systems, one running XP and the other running Windows 2000 had exactly the same amount of data in memory then the memory would be allocated in exactly the same manner, XP might even be slightly better.

Quote from: MarathoN
Not to mention switching to the "Classic" theme from Luna does fuck all for speed.

Well it does reduce memory usage some what and it depends on your graphics card - if you have a shitty on-board graphics card like mind you'll notice a bigger differance, disabling the active desktop feature also helps a lot too.
Logged
This is not a Windows help forum, however please do feel free to sign up and agree or disagree with our views on Microsoft.

Oh and FUCKMicrosoft! :fu:

piratePenguin

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,027
  • Kudos: 775
    • http://piratepenguin.is-a-geek.com/~declan/
Re: The Vandalisation of Windows
« Reply #44 on: 14 December 2005, 22:08 »
Quote from: Aloone_Jonez
Err, where did I say "Windows' memory management is as good or is better than Linux's"?
I quoted that from way back, and I didn't get a response.

The shit thing about Windows' memory management is not that minimizing things makes things generally slower, it is that it just plain fucking sucks bollox.

Linux, on the other hand, has kick-ass memory management. I always knew it was good, but not as good as I recently realised (loading as much fucking SHITE up as possible and do random stuff, and still very close to as responsive as before. I'm gonna record it some time (using xvidcap, which wouldn't compile just now), and show it off goody. Because that's how damn good it is.).
« Last Edit: 15 December 2005, 00:02 by piratePenguin »
Logged
"What you share with the world is what it keeps of you."
 - Noah And The Whale: Give a little love



a poem by my computer, Macintosh Vigilante
Macintosh amends a damned around the requested typewriter. Macintosh urges a scarce design. Macintosh postulates an autobiography. Macintosh tolls the solo variant. Why does a winter audience delay macintosh? The maker tosses macintosh. Beneath female suffers a double scum. How will a rat cube the heavier cricket? Macintosh calls a method. Can macintosh nest opposite the headache? Macintosh ties the wrong fairy. When can macintosh stem the land gang? Female aborts underneath macintosh. Inside macintosh waffles female. Next to macintosh worries a well.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6   Go Up
« previous next »