Stop Microsoft
Operating Systems => Linux and UNIX => Topic started by: Zombie9920 on 24 June 2004, 22:20
-
Or in other words it is getting more and more bloated. Don't you guys criticize MS for bloat?
Myself, I don't think bloat is a big deal because drive space is less than $1 per gig nowadays. Modern CPU's can run the bloat without any trouble. Bloat = more features(even with MS software). Bloat is only a problem on ancient computers.
http://osnews.com/story.php?news_id=7324 (http://osnews.com/story.php?news_id=7324)
[ June 24, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]
-
Yes, Red Hat is quite amazing at boosting the minimum system requirements.
-
1. Screw FC2, it's a lousy release.
2. My FC1 with XFce 4.0.3 boots up into 107MB RAM. Not great, but ok for a Redhat release.
3. I'd say Slackware could really help in this case. All that's hard about it is setting it up - actually using it is fine.
[ June 27, 2004: Message edited by: WMD ]
-
quote:
WMD: I'd say Slackware could really help in this case. All that's hard about it is setting it up - actually using it is fine.
I agree. XFCE, Gnome or KDE make Slackware real easy to use.
-
Yeah, I wonder if your koan 'bloat = new features' is the whole story. I kinda think bloat is bigger file size with no added features. Occasionally the file will be bigger, and you have less features. I haven't kept track of the changing size of core Linux packages, but I would guess that they haven't changed much at all - there's just more of them. No comment on how Windows has changed from release to release.
-
quote:
Refalm: I agree. XFCE, Gnome or KDE make Slackware real easy to use.
Uhm, I kinda take that back though... if anyone get's the wrong idea about Slackware, I just wanted to say Slackware is not meant for beginners ;)
-
quote:
Originally posted by worker201:
Yeah, I wonder if your koan 'bloat = new features' is the whole story. I kinda think bloat is bigger file size with no added features. Occasionally the file will be bigger, and you have less features. I haven't kept track of the changing size of core Linux packages, but I would guess that they haven't changed much at all - there's just more of them. No comment on how Windows has changed from release to release.
Did you know that a XP install is less than 600 MB? The reason why it topples over a GB after being installe is because of the 700MB+ paging file. Having a paging file is no different than having to create a swap partation for Linux.
Less than 600MB for the OS isn't really that big at all considering drive space is less than $1 per GB these days. It costed me $1 to store Windows. Big whoopidity doo. lol
-
quote:
Originally posted by Viper:
Did you know that a XP install is less than 600 MB?
Did you know that Linux fits on an old floppy?
;)
-
quote:
Originally posted by Viper:
Or in other words it is getting more and more bloated. Don't you guys criticize MS for bloat?
Myself, I don't think bloat is a big deal because drive space is less than $1 per gig nowadays. Modern CPU's can run the bloat without any trouble. Bloat = more features(even with MS software). Bloat is only a problem on ancient computers.
http://osnews.com/story.php?news_id=7324 (http://osnews.com/story.php?news_id=7324)
[ June 24, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]
Because most normal people can't just go out and buy a $5000 machine off the shelf!
The most common PC is a PII! with around 64mb of ram!
because Linux can do all of M$ without all the constant upgrading and without all that 'powerful' hardware just to do the same job!
Pluse the gain of security, stability and ease of use not to mention no need for extra 'required' software and or big ass updates!
P.S.
I'm running FC1 on 24mb ram/pII 233hz USING KDE3.1!
my laptop: a PII266 runing 96mbram using SuSE 8.1!
old machines rock!!!
(http://graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
[ July 06, 2004: Message edited by: -=Solaris.M.K.A=- ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Viper:
Did you know that a XP install is less than 600 MB? The reason why it topples over a GB after being installe is because of the 700MB+ paging file. Having a paging file is no different than having to create a swap partation for Linux.
Less than 600MB for the OS isn't really that big at all considering drive space is less than $1 per GB these days. It costed me $1 to store Windows. Big whoopidity doo. lol
Your forgetting all the 'l33t' software that windows does not come with, all the service pack patches, all the 'required' software (anti-virus, firewall, anti-spyware etc..) All the patches an updates for those 'required' software and all the trojans, spyware, viruses etc....
:D (http://tongue.gif)
-
quote:
Originally posted by Viper:
Did you know that a XP install is less than 600 MB? The reason why it topples over a GB after being installed is because of the 700MB+ paging file.
Incorrect. My Win2k directory is 1.07GB, and the page file is on another drive. Similar situation for my brother's XP machine (I can't go check it now for exactness). Windows hasn't placed the page file in /windows since 98, I think.
-
quote:
Originally posted by -=Solaris.M.K.A=-:
Your forgetting all the 'l33t' software that windows does not come with, all the service pack patches, all the 'required' software (anti-virus, firewall, anti-spyware etc..) All the patches an updates for those 'required' software and all the trojans, spyware, viruses etc....
:D (http://tongue.gif)
Isn't that called "freeware" these days?
::: gets assaulted with a barrage of "free AOL" CDs:::
-
quote:
Originally posted by -=Solaris.M.K.A=-:
I'm running FC1 on 24mb ram/pII 233hz USING KDE3.1!
Really? How'd you get the usage down so low?
I ran Slack 9.1 on a P166 with 32MB, and I could use KDE but it required full RAM usage plus 35MB swap. (It was slow but usable.)
-
quote:
Originally posted by WMD:
Really? How'd you get the usage down so low?
I ran Slack 9.1 on a P166 with 32MB, and I could use KDE but it required full RAM usage plus 35MB swap. (It was slow but usable.)
Thats an intresting question. It is slow here too but then I find I have patients and it really isn't that slow. Like it wouldn't take a full minute or two for the menu to pop up or something. I find windows XP doing that even at 512 mb of ram!
It just takes a few 15 or so seconds for an application like Netscape to come up. Pritty worked right from the install. So I really don't know why exactly. I just know that after the install on 24 mb's it was fine (http://smile.gif)
-
This is so true, Linsux and Winbloze are both bloatware.
It's stupid you shouldn't have to buy a new PC every three years to run the latest software, you don't with any other appliance. I've not up graded my CD player for over 14 years, and it still plays the latest CDs.
A history of my past upgrades:
1993
386 33MHz 4MB RAM, 43MD disk, 640x480 16 colours, DOS 6 & Win 3.1
Soon upgraded to 8MB RAM, 800x600 64K colours (slow) sound card CD-ROM drive.
1994
New mother bored upgraded to 486 100MHz, 100MB disk.
1997
P200 32MB RAM, 4GB disk, Win 95.
2004
1800MHz, 256MB RAM, Xpee, 40GB disk, DVD ROM CD Burner.
I was excited I thought no more swap files surly 256MB is more than enough, disapointed with Xpee, 336MB swap file (http://graemlins/fu.gif) .
Soon bought another 80GB disk to run, Redhat 9, disapointed with Linux, it guzzels just as much if not even more memory.
Notice a pattern. - My upgrades are becoming less an less frequent. I have never bothered with the latest hardware. I only upgrade when I have to.
The only thing I do with my new PC that I couldn't do with my old one is burn CDs & watch DVDs.
Fuck this for a lark, time to hop of the tread mill, I will not upgrade for another 10 years or maybe even never. By then I hope that Windows is on it's death bed and Linux has got it's act together, or some better OS has replaced it.
-
Oh and another thing, what percentage of system memory do you think an operating system shroud use by default?
I would say as little as possible, 10% would be acceptable.
A swap file should only be used when memory is running low.
Memory usage has grown disproportionally to hard disk space usage, this is clearly unacceptable.
When I mean Linux I mean the kernel, and all the other crap needed for a reasonable user interface. (X window manager, KDE or other desktop)
How would you define "Bloat"? I would say it's extra resources wasted with no extra features or crappy retarded features that no one REALLY NEEDS.
I can give examples of this in both Linux and Windows:
WinXP:
The fucking annoying search character.
Bitmaps an other shit on the folder displays.
You can turn all this shit off.
Even when you disable the animated search character you still have to put up with the search wizard for retards.
Red Hat 9:
The skins on the windows and GUI widgets. At least with windows you can turn these off, I gained some speed by changing the theme to Windows.
The X window manager seems to be the culprit, it's native theme even has skins. This is the sort of feature that some people of course love, it should be contained within another module and only loaded when the user requests it.
I would guess that the code for the crappy effects (menu animations and other eye candy) gets loaded even though I never use these "features".
-
quote:
I would say as little as possible, 10% would be acceptable.
So what's the point of having the other 90%? Linux uses utilises most of your memory because it can, not because it has to.
quote:
The X window manager seems to be the culprit, it's native theme even has skins. This is the sort of feature that some people of course love, it should be contained within another module and only loaded when the user requests it.
You can turn all of that off; just don't use KDE/GNOME.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
This is so true, Linsux and Winbloze are both bloatware.
It's stupid you shouldn't have to buy a new PC every three years to run the latest software, you don't with any other appliance. I've not up graded my CD player for over 14 years, and it still plays the latest CDs.
A history of my past upgrades:
1993
386 33MHz 4MB RAM, 43MD disk, 640x480 16 colours, DOS 6 & Win 3.1
Soon upgraded to 8MB RAM, 800x600 64K colours (slow) sound card CD-ROM drive.
1994
New mother bored upgraded to 486 100MHz, 100MB disk.
1997
P200 32MB RAM, 4GB disk, Win 95.
2004
1800MHz, 256MB RAM, Xpee, 40GB disk, DVD ROM CD Burner.
I was excited I thought no more swap files surly 256MB is more than enough, disapointed with Xpee, 336MB swap file (http://graemlins/fu.gif) .
Soon bought another 80GB disk to run, Redhat 9, disapointed with Linux, it guzzels just as much if not even more memory.
Notice a pattern. - My upgrades are becoming less an less frequent. I have never bothered with the latest hardware. I only upgrade when I have to.
The only thing I do with my new PC that I couldn't do with my old one is burn CDs & watch DVDs.
Fuck this for a lark, time to hop of the tread mill, I will not upgrade for another 10 years or maybe even never. By then I hope that Windows is on it's death bed and Linux has got it's act together, or some better OS has replaced it.
It is a good thing that our computers are so fast and high-tech these days. If they weren't we would still be playing shitty looking(pixelated) FPS games like doom, pixelated TPS like the original tomb raider, 2D side scrollers, etc. Nowadays our games look beautiful(damn near lifelike) due to having such powerful hardware. Hardware that wouldn't be so powerful if it wan't for OS makers(namely MS) upping the minimum sys requirements each time they released a new OS.
Nowadays a person who does professional Audio/Video/image work can get alot more done in less time thanks to the speed of modern computers(not to mention the better hardware gives them better quality work as well).
Come to think of it. Any real work people use a computer for gets done alot faster now than it ever did back in the day due to our hardware being so powerful.
I also will add that prices are for the better now.
Back in the late 80's a complete 386 system w/8MB of Ram, less than 200MB hard drive, shitty video subsystem, etc. could've been as expensive as $5,000. The scenario was the same with the 486 when it was 1st introduced. The prices started getting a little better when in the Pentium age.
Nowadays though we can get/build a complete system that will simply run rings around that old stuff thousands of times in a minute for less than $700.
I remember back in the day a 16MB stick of 66mhz 72-pin EDO memory went for over $130.
Nowadays a high quality name-brand 512MB stick of 200mhz Double Data Rate(effectively 400mhz) ram(PC3200) can be had for less than $100. Obviously the modern, cheaper memory is infinitley better than what could be had for more back then.
The same thing goes for hard drives. Back in the day a 2GB hard drive could cost over $200. Now $200 will buy you a hard drive over 200GB. The old 2GB hard drives ran in PIO mode(mode 4 went no faster than 12MB per sec. and PIO mode used alot of CPU cycles). The modern 200GB+ hard drives are capable of doing 133MB per sec(PATA/133) or 150MB per sec(SATA) plus drive work/transfers do not use many CPU cycles at all because the IDE/SATA bus is doing all of the work kind of like how a GPU/APU takes the load off of the CPU because the GPU(Graphics Processing Unit/APU(Audio Processing Unit) is a little CPU on the Sound/Video card that is there to do all of the work of the card that the CPU used to do on old video/sound cards.
The evolution of technology is by no means bad and kudos to MS, game makers and professional work software makers for driving technology to be so fast and cheap these days. Back in the day you had to be rich to own a computer because of how much the damn thngs costed. Nowadays 90% of households hae a computer because they are very affordable now.
Back in the day the Internet was something rare and special. Nowadyas the Internet is a nessecisty.
Ok, I'll quit rambling because it is all going the same place. Evolution is not bad at all. (http://smile.gif)
[ July 07, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]
-
quote:
old machines rock!!!
DAMN RIGHT! ::high five::
quote:
This is so true, Linsux and Winbloze are both bloatware.
The stupid names... WITH THEM... STOP!
quote:
It's stupid you shouldn't have to buy a new PC every three years to run the latest software, you don't with any other appliance. I've not up graded my CD player for over 14 years, and it still plays the latest CDs.
I have an iMac 500, and a 1GHz P3. Neither of them are so far gone that they're useless. The iMac is getting there, thanks to Apple's greed and ever-upward-spiralling reqs.
If there's any OS that has absurdly climbing reqs, it's OS X. When it was announced, it was going to be "for all PowerPC Macs", then it was for 604s and up, then it was for G3s and up, then it was for G4s, and they threw G3 users a bone and didn't lock them out. Now they're already starting to DROP INSTALLER SUPPORT for the early G3s.
Oh, and ever release of OS X gets more bloated with "features" and less stable.
Those are the reasons I snagged this 1GHz P3. XP still runs better than OS X on comparable hardware. Linux runs even better still.
quote:
A history of my past upgrades:
1993
386 33MHz 4MB RAM, 43MD disk, 640x480 16 colours, DOS 6 & Win 3.1
Soon upgraded to 8MB RAM, 800x600 64K colours (slow) sound card CD-ROM drive.
Ow. I was running a 486-33 with 8MB, upgraded to 24 in 94.
quote:
1994
New mother bored upgraded to 486 100MHz, 100MB disk.
Motherboard, not "mother bored".
quote:
1997
P200 32MB RAM, 4GB disk, Win 95.
Your bad for not running NT
quote:
2004
1800MHz, 256MB RAM, Xpee, 40GB disk, DVD ROM CD Burner.
Get more memory.
quote:
I was excited I thought no more swap files surly 256MB is more than enough, disapointed with Xpee, 336MB swap file [FU] .
You could have a full GB and you'll still have a swap file. It has nothing to do with OS efficiency, but instead with the PC memory model. Protected mode uses flat, paged memory. To make as much room as possible for other apps, OSes page unused parts of themselves and idle apps off to disk. Every application thinks that it has 4GB of memory, and the OS does its best to keep up that illusion.
BTW, I run 512MB and don't have disk thrashing in XP or Linux
quote:
Soon bought another 80GB disk to run, Redhat 9, disapointed with Linux, it guzzels just as much if not even more memory.
More. Memory. Get. 512MB. At. Least.
Why the fuck would you run 256MB? That's shitty.
quote:
Notice a pattern. - My upgrades are becoming less an less frequent. I have never bothered with the latest hardware. I only upgrade when I have to.
The only thing I do with my new PC that I couldn't do with my old one is burn CDs & watch DVDs.
Fuck this for a lark, time to hop of the tread mill, I will not upgrade for another 10 years or maybe even never. By then I hope that Windows is on it's death bed and Linux has got it's act together, or some better OS has replaced it.
Doubtful either way. Windows isn't going anywhere. It's improved greatly over the last few releases, but we'll see how Longhorn goes.
As for Linux, its rate of improvement is phenomenal. Within a year or two, it'll surpass Windows for ease of install and usage.
quote:
Oh and another thing, what percentage of system memory do you think an operating system shroud use by default?
By default? Wait... there's a setting that lets you choose? lol
There is no "default setting"
quote:
I would say as little as possible, 10% would be acceptable.
That'd be nice. Now go install Slack or Debian sarge and run an OS that uses 10% of your memory. It happens all the time.
quote:
A swap file should only be used when memory is running low.
You mean, the way they've always been used?
quote:
Memory usage has grown disproportionally to hard disk space usage, this is clearly unacceptable.
But you can buy 512MB of RAM for $50, so it's not really that big of a deal.
quote:
When I mean Linux I mean the kernel, and all the other crap needed for a reasonable user interface. (X window manager, KDE or other desktop)
X11 is not a window manager.
quote:
How would you define "Bloat"? I would say it's extra resources wasted with no extra features or crappy retarded features that no one REALLY NEEDS.
If you don't need something, remove it.
quote:
I can give examples of this in both Linux and Windows:
WinXP:
The fucking annoying search character.
Bitmaps an other shit on the folder displays.
You can turn all this shit off.
Even when you disable the animated search character you still have to put up with the search wizard for retards.
Search wizard for retards? What's wrong with the serach pane? it's certainly quite nice IMHO to have your search controls over there, out of the way, and that lovely large folder view that you can set to any available view.
quote:
Red Hat 9:
The skins on the windows and GUI widgets. At least with windows you can turn these off, I gained some speed by changing the theme to Windows.
I assume you're referring to Bluecurve? Or do you mean the native gtk theme support? This doesn't slow it down at all. It's not a "skin". gtk themes are full libaries that define how gtk draws GUI elements. No theme is any faster or slower than any other.
If you want fast, then run twm and don't run any "nice looking" apps.
quote:
The X window manager seems to be the culprit, it's native theme even has skins. This is the sort of feature that some people of course love, it should be contained within another module and only loaded when the user requests it.
X11 has no "native theme". X11 does not support skins. X11 simply handles screen drawing. It's quite possible you're running a generic, unaccelerated X server. I don't think you ever told us what your vid card was.
quote:
I would guess that the code for the crappy effects (menu animations and other eye candy) gets loaded even though I never use these "features".
You're a dipshit.
-
quote:
That'd be nice. Now go install Slack or Debian sarge and run an OS that uses 10% of your memory. It happens all the time.
No distribution uses only 10% of your memory. What would be the point of wasting available memory by leaving 90% of it unused? The system utilises all available memory because there's no reason not to.
-
quote:
Originally posted by flap:
So what's the point of having the other 90%?
To run your applications, the OS shouldn't be the main strain on system resources.
quote:
Hardware that wouldn't be so powerful if it wan't for OS makers(namely MS) upping the minimum sys requirements each time they released a new OS.
Partly true I admit but hardware wouldn't need to be so powerful if the OS handled the resources efficiently.
quote:
Nowadays a person who does professional Audio/Video/image work can get alot more done in less time thanks to the speed of modern computers(not to mention the better hardware gives them better quality work as well).
Come to think of it. Any real work people use a computer for gets done alot faster now than it ever did back in the day due to our hardware being so powerful
And they would get a lot more done if it wasn't for the OS hogging way too much memory.
quote:
I also will add that prices are for the better now.
Back in the late 80's a complete 386 system w/8MB of Ram, less than 200MB hard drive, shitty video subsystem, etc. could've been as expensive as $5,000. The scenario was the same with the 486 when it was 1st introduced. The prices started getting a little better when in the Pentium age.
Nowadays though we can get/build a complete system that will simply run rings around that old stuff thousands of times in a minute for less than $700.
I remember back in the day a 16MB stick of 66mhz 72-pin EDO memory went for over $130.
Nowadays a 512MB stick of 200mhz Double Data Rate(effectively 400mhz) ram(PC3200) can be had for less than $100. Obviously the modern, cheaper memory is infinitley better than what could be had for more back then.
The same thing goes for hard drives. Back in the day a 2GB hard drive could cost over $200. Now $200 will buy you a hard drive over 200GB. The old 2GB hard drives ran in PIO mode(mode 4 went no faster than 12MB per sec. and PIO mode used alot of CPU cycles). The modern 200GB+ hard drives are capable of doing 133MB per sec(PATA/133) or 150MB per sec(SATA) plus drive work/transfers do not use many CPU cycles at all because the IDE/SATA bus is doing all of the work kind of like how a GPU/APU takes the load off of the CPU because the GPU(Graphics Processing Unit/APU(Audio Processing Unit) is a little CPU on the Sound/Video card that is there to do all of the work of the card that the CPU used to do on old video/sound cards.
All too true, but you would get even better value for money and a lot more performance if the OS could handle these resources more efficiently.
Oh and by the way I was wrong earlier when I said quote:
you don't with any other appliance.
Well you do need to upgrade your games console every now and again to play the latest games, but no where near as often as your PC when you want to play the latest PC games.
That's another thing the Xbox isn't very powerful, when you compare it to the PC you would need to run the same game.
Do you know why?
Because the OS on an Xbox is compact, I bet there's no swap file either, it probably only uses 10% of the system resources.
Also the Xbox rules, and do you know why?
Competition, is the answer, and lots of it too.
Windows blows, M$ don't even need to bother to make it good and people will buy it, because they feel that they have no choice.
On the other hand the Xbox has had to compete with the Game Cube and PS2.
Evolution is definitely a good thing, but why should I have to upgrade when all I really want to do is surf the net and word-processing, plus burn a few CDs.
I could do all of this quite comfortably on an old P500 with 64MB RAM.
I don't do "professional Audio/Video/image work"
I might play the odd game on my PC, but certainly not the latest game, to do that I would buy a console.
With Wronghorn I would need a new PC just to do word-processing and burn CDs.
Why should I bother upgrading when the OS will ultimately gobble up my investment?
I can do all of the above with my current PC.
I really hope the day will never come when I need a realy powerful PC just to run openoffice.org.
I'm not saying that we should all use 386s of course, but 300-600MHz with 64-128MB RAM would be ok for basic stuff.
[ July 07, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]
-
quote:
No distribution uses only 10% of your memory. What would be the point of wasting available memory by leaving 90% of it unused? The system utilises all available memory because there's no reason not to.
I meant to say, they can run in 10% of his installed memory. I ran a Slack server in 24MB of RAM back in 1999.
Aloone:
I do anything I'll ever want to do on a 1GHz and a 500MHz machine, and I'm running the newest versions of stuff. I've got far from the best hardware, but I still run the best software.
If I can do it, so can you. You're bitching about something that's not going to change.
If you don't like how "bloated" Red Hat is, then install Debian or Slack... if you dare. These "bloated" OSes exist because so many people need to do so many varied things that they have to have the ability to do it all. If you don't need some part of Linux, get rid of it. I say get Debian or Slackware if you're up to installing them. They'll make you much happier once their up and running.
[ July 07, 2004: Message edited by: JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder ]
-
quote:
It is a good thing that our computers are so fast and high-tech these days. If they weren't we would still be playing shitty looking(pixelated) FPS games like doom, pixelated TPS like the original tomb raider, 2D side scrollers, etc. Nowadays our games look beautiful(damn near lifelike) due to having such powerful hardware. Hardware that wouldn't be so powerful if it wan't for OS makers(namely MS) upping the minimum sys requirements each time they released a new OS.
Or rather than spending HUGE amount of cash just tp play games. One can go out and get a concole and have those amazing graphics and such for a far cheaper price, no BSOD's, spyware or other stability/security issues!
quote:
Nowadays a person who does professional Audio/Video/image work can get alot more done in less time thanks to the speed of modern computers(not to mention the better hardware gives them better quality work as well).
A person that does professional work usualy don't run out to buy the most expensive machine just to do the same tasks he/she could do before. Expecualy when those tasks get completed by the same time.
WindowsXP does everything and in the same time as older machines, yet XP needs huge amount of memory.
KDE3.2 and above can now work fater than its older versions and on the same old machine!
quote:
Come to think of it. Any real work people use a computer for gets done alot faster now than it ever did back in the day due to our hardware being so powerful.
I see it differnetly. My p4 with a 256 mb ram is basicaly the same speed as my P2 with 96mb of ram.
A p3 with 128 mb of ram running Linux usualy runs faster with the same mahcine running XP.
hardware isn't important to get things done these days. The OS is.
quote:
I also will add that prices are for the better now.
Back in the late 80's a complete 386 system w/8MB of Ram, less than 200MB hard drive, shitty video subsystem, etc. could've been as expensive as $5,000. The scenario was the same with the 486 when it was 1st introduced. The prices started getting a little better when in the Pentium age.
hmmmm. A standard XP machine STIll costs arount $3000 dollars. or you can get a laptop that costs around $3-to 5000 dollars. I wouldn't call that 'cheep.' Expecialy when you factor in the monthly repair costs.
quote:
Nowadays though we can get/build a complete system that will simply run rings around that old stuff thousands of times in a minute for less than $700.
Well yes. But comparing an old 486 with a p4 makes a huge difference. What I am saying is even if you use a p3 with a 128 mb of ram and a 40gig hard drive using the latest M$ OS compared with the same machine using Linux or something there is quite a difference in speed and usability!
quote:
I remember back in the day a 16MB stick of 66mhz 72-pin EDO memory went for over $130.
128 SD mb ram still fetches in $110 bucks. Not that much difference from then and now.
quote:
Nowadays a high quality name-brand 512MB stick of 200mhz Double Data Rate(effectively 400mhz) ram(PC3200) can be had for less than $100.
My local bestbuy and staples state otherwize
quote:
Obviously the modern, cheaper memory is infinitley better than what could be had for more back then.
Yes. So why does the same quality of work takes so much more?
quote:
The same thing goes for hard drives. Back in the day a 2GB hard drive could cost over $200. Now $200 will buy you a hard drive over 200GB.
Well thats because then 2gigs was the biggest now 200 is. And you see the price has not changed.
quote:
The old 2GB hard drives ran in PIO mode(mode 4 went no faster than 12MB per sec. and PIO mode used alot of CPU cycles). The modern 200GB+ hard drives are capable of doing 133MB per sec(PATA/133) or 150MB per sec(SATA) plus drive work/transfers do not use many CPU cycles at all because the IDE/SATA bus is doing all of the work kind of like how a GPU/APU takes the load off of the CPU because the GPU(Graphics Processing Unit/APU(Audio Processing Unit) is a little CPU on the Sound/Video card that is there to do all of the work of the card that the CPU used to do on old video/sound cards.
Thats fine, as that is the evolution of hardware. It still doesn't make sence to see XP slow to a crawl or you have to have all of that just to do the same thing in the same amount of time.
quote:
The evolution of technology is by no means bad and kudos to MS,
Well if we are going to congratulate them. Thanks for making your newest OS so easy to f*ck with!
But by no means does M$ have anything to do with hardware.
quote:
game makers
Not realy -> see concole.
quote:
and professional work software makers for driving technology to be so fast and cheap these days.
fast yes, cheap no.
quote:
Back in the day you had to be rich to own a computer because of how much the damn thngs costed.
You still do now. There are people that takle loans out to cover the cost. Or arange some other financial support.
quote:
Nowadays 90% of households hae a computer because they are very affordable now.
Over 90% of people have TV's. Does that mean that they are cheap? Nope!
A plasma TV can cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars!
quote:
Back in the day the Internet was something rare and special.
Still is in most countries. Only canada and Finland are the two most wired countries in the world!
quote:
Nowadyas the Internet is a nessecisty.
That depends what country you live in. The U.K. seems to be getting along without it.
Meaning that its is there but not like it is dependent on like it is here in Canada.
[ July 07, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ][/QB][/QUOTE]
-
That's just your opinion.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
This is so true, Linsux and Winbloze are both bloatware.
I use linux and not linsux. So your non-existing Linsux OS is bloated. Try Linux (I never used Linsux)
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
It's stupid you shouldn't have to buy a new PC every three years to run the latest software, you don't with any other appliance. I've not up graded my CD player for over 14 years, and it still plays the latest CDs.
I still have my first 386 running still the same Linux(still fully working).
Even better: Using linux I now can use some older 286 systems (using only floppies) .
My CD players never lasted more than 4 years.
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
The only thing I do with my new PC that I couldn't do with my old one is burn CDs & watch DVDs.
You can run all new applications on your 'old' 386?
It's mostly games that make people buy new CPU's.
PS: Try this:
1. Install slackware.(only install what you need)
http://www.slackware.com/ (http://www.slackware.com/)
2. Build your own kernel(this really isn't that hard)
http://kernel.org/ (http://kernel.org/)
3. Be very happy with your very powerfull 'slackbox'. (http://smile.gif)
[ July 07, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]
-
quote:
My CD players never lasted more than 4 years.
VERY true! Sometimes they last even less
-
quote:
Originally posted by -=Solaris.M.K.A=-:
One can go out and get a concole and have those amazing graphics and such for a far cheaper price, no BSOD's, spyware or other stability/security issues!
You seem to be forgetting the fact that the Xbox crashes a lot. :D
But seriously, even my PS2 locks up quite a bit, at least in True Crime.
-
quote:
Originally posted by WMD:
You seem to be forgetting the fact that the Xbox crashes a lot. :D
But seriously, even my PS2 locks up quite a bit, at least in True Crime.
LOL Very true! Forgot one. :D (http://tongue.gif)
-
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I remember back in the day a 16MB stick of 66mhz 72-pin EDO memory went for over $130.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
128 SD mb ram still fetches in $110 bucks. Not that much difference from then and now.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nowadays a high quality name-brand 512MB stick of 200mhz Double Data Rate(effectively 400mhz) ram(PC3200) can be had for less than $100.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My local bestbuy and staples state otherwize
Well then your local staples and bestbuy are ripping you guys off. (http://tongue.gif)
Crucial 512MB PC3200 DDR Ram - $81
http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductdesc.asp?description=20-146-541&DEPA=0 (http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductdesc.asp?description=20-146-541&DEPA=0)
Now where in the hell do you find a $3000 XP machine(unless you are buying from rip-offs like alienware). I never see comps go for more than $1000 at the most(alot of the machines you can get are $700 and less). I built this machine for way less than $1000.
P4 2.4C GHZ,800mhz FSB, HT o/ced to 3.2ghz at the moment on stock cooling
Abit IS7 motherboard
2 x 256MB Crucial PC3200 DDR Ram(Configured in Dual Channel DDR mode)
100GB Western Digital IDE Hard drive
80GB Maxtor SATA Hard drive
52x24x52 CD-RW
16x DVD-Rom(getting ready to add a DVD burner to the comp)
ATI Radeon 9800XT video card
SB Audigy 2(fuck that built in audio crap)
built in Ethernet/network controller
3x Firewire ports built into the board(2 6-pin 1 4-pin)
Sony floppy drive(meh, who uses floppies nowadays?)
8x USB 2.0 ports built in
Antec 460w Truepower PSU
It is a fast mother too. :D
[ July 08, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]
-
Firstly anyone who says that Linux isn't bloated because they can run it on a 386 off floppys, is clearly retarded. I could say that Windows isn't bloated because you can run it of a floppy disk. (well in DOS mode at least)
When I mean 10% of the total memory I mean the OS should, only consume, or boots up into, or only need 10% of the total system memory to store it's code in. Leaving the rest free, for you, the user to run your software in.
Can Linux run on 286s?
Forgive me if I'm wrong as I'm still new to linux but aren't 286s 16bit processors, and Linux is a 32bit OS?
quote:
You're a dipshit.
No I'm just new to linux, you shouln't have to fuck around with loads of settings and recompile shit, just to tweak the system, install software or device drivers.
I know there's no "default setting" but you can alter what gets loaded. When I mean by default, I mean the configuration the installer chooses for you.
quote:
No theme is any faster or slower than any other.
Why?
Surly a theme consisting of purely solid colours and primitive shapes takes far less clock cycles, and hogs far less memory than a more fancy theme with the pretty textures and curves of Bluecurve.
The reason why I was blaming X11, is because I have set KDE to use a simple Windows theme, I don't care what you say but my system run faster. The highlight on the menu text is just a plain blue colour, when I use some of the graphical X11 configuration utility's, the highlight reverts back to the textured one, used in the Bluecurve theme.
quote:
I don't think you ever told us what your vid card was.
http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=000887&p=2 (http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=000887&p=2)
I'm not going to say it again as this post is already long enough.
And you JimmyJames, call me immature for saying Linsux and Winbloze, your no better for being overly critical of my spelling. I can't help suffering from dyslexia, I do my best by spell checking all my posts in openoffice.
256MB RAM isn't too bad, Xpee dosn't run slowly, it's more than usable, it only runs slowly when the shit arse Xpee theme together with all the other crap skins and effects are enabled.
I only bought this computer a few months ago, I know it wasn't top of the range then, but already people are telling me to upgrade.
NOOOO!
I DON'T SEE WHY I SHOULD SPEND ANOTHER FUCKING PENNY!
This pc is more than fast enough to suit my needs Xpee isn't that slow and unresponsive. It runs Firefox and openoffice fairly well, It can burn CDs well too.
I was happy with my P200, the only reason why I upgraded the whole unit because I fucked the old one up!
I originally just wanted to add a CD burner, when the cover was off I spilt my drink.
If it wasn't for that I would still be stuck with a P200 running Win95 and M$ office!
Back in the day used to be a bit of a computer geek, I liked seeing what I could run on the shitteyest hardware.
I remember, and I know this sound's unbelievable.
One rainy day I was bored (correct spelling I hope)
I decided to install Win3.1 on a 4MB RAM drive on a 8MB 486.
It worked too! lol
I didn't have good internet access. (it cost 1p per min)
I didn't even know that Linux existed.
About 5 years ago I totally lost interest in computers when I did a computing A level, what was a hobby had became hard work, I hated it.
Until very recently I didn't know how much computers had evolved, as I wasn't using them for work.
The only PC I used was my P200.
We switched telecommunications provider to get unmetered Internet access, bought this new PC, then I discovered this website along with Linux.
I was happy enough with my old P200.
I'm sure at least some of you people must be able to remember the old 16 bit way, where you had just 640K for your programs to run in, you had to swap your code in and out of extended memory if you wanted more than that.
I still haven't regained any interest, bloatware has put me off even more.
Now we have lot's of memory and what do we do with it?
Waste it on running bloat.
It's just disgusting.
By the way Viper, just a few questions:
What do you use your computer for?
I know your an MS suporter, I respect you for showing your face here, after all everyone's entitled to their own opinion;
How do you support MS?
And why?
Please don't be afraid to answer these questions.
[ July 08, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Viper:
Well then your local staples and bestbuy are ripping you guys off. (http://tongue.gif)
Crucial 512MB PC3200 DDR Ram - $81
http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductdesc.asp?description=20-146-541&DEPA=0 (http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductdesc.asp?description=20-146-541&DEPA=0)
Now where in the hell do you find a $3000 XP machine(unless you are buying from rip-offs like alienware). I never see comps go for more than $1000 at the most(alot of the machines you can get are $700 and less). I built this machine for way less than $1000.
P4 2.4C GHZ,800mhz FSB, HT o/ced to 3.2ghz at the moment on stock cooling
Abit IS7 motherboard
2 x 256MB Crucial PC3200 DDR Ram(Configured in Dual Channel DDR mode)
100GB Western Digital IDE Hard drive
80GB Maxtor SATA Hard drive
52x24x52 CD-RW
16x DVD-Rom(getting ready to add a DVD burner to the comp)
ATI Radeon 9800XT video card
SB Audigy 2(fuck that built in audio crap)
built in Ethernet/network controller
3x Firewire ports built into the board(2 6-pin 1 4-pin)
Sony floppy drive(meh, who uses floppies nowadays?)
8x USB 2.0 ports built in
Antec 460w Truepower PSU
It is a fast mother too. :D
[ July 08, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]
Thats an average price for a machine here in canada. Most people who go out and buy a machine do it the same way thay' buy a car. The finance it and add warrenties and stuff.
-
Solaris - Viper is confused over currency exchange.
CAN$3000 = US$2250
US$700 = CAN$933
US$81 = CAN$108
So now Solaris is right.
-
Linux isn't bloated. You can choose to install just a bare bones system, and a few apps, and you will ony be using a few hundred MBs. Debian sarge was only like 100mbs, then I installed xfree86, and Xfce4, which put it at what, like 300mb. If you go with Fedora, and install everything, yeah, it will seem bloated, but you also just installed an ass load of applications and services. Do you really need to install 37 text editors, KDE & Gnome, Koffice & OpenOffice, plus all the server apps and tools? Not really.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
[QB]Firstly anyone who says that Linux isn't bloated because they can run it on a 386 off floppys, is clearly retarded.
Why?
If a 386 has 28mb of ram you could run a Linux box with a whole UI
quote:
Can Linux run on 286s?
Forgive me if I'm wrong as I'm still new to linux but aren't 286s 16bit processors, and Linux is a 32bit OS?
They can run on 386 and 486 etc. Linux is a 64bit OS.
quote:
you shouln't have to fuck around with loads of settings and recompile shit, just to tweak the system, install software or device drivers.
? You don't every driver is built into the kernel unlike windows where you need an install file and even then it might not work! You don't need to 'tweek' anything. Everything is setup right from the install! Including any software you would like. You do not need to compile anything. It is as simple as installing an RPM through APT-Get and synaptic. Its just a couple of clicks thats it. It will put it ion the menu and everything for you!
quote:
I know there's no "default setting" but you can alter what gets loaded. When I mean by default, I mean the configuration the installer chooses for you.
That depends on the distro. You can choose a 'default' desktop or you can choose what packages you want installed etc... It also partitians for you.
quote:
And you JimmyJames, call me immature for saying Linsux and Winbloze, your no better for being overly critical of my spelling. I can't help suffering from dyslexia, I do my best by spell checking all my posts in openoffice.
Just ignore Jimbo over there. He's a famous troll that only he is alowed opinions and only he thinks he is right all those with opposing opinions, thoughts and facts are idiots to him.
quote:
256MB RAM isn't too bad, Xpee dosn't run slowly, it's more than usable,
I've used XP at the University with 512mb ram. I couldn't even get the start button to pop up. That is with the Themes turned off!
quote:
it only runs slowly when the shit arse Xpee theme together with all the other crap skins and effects are enabled.
So why with 512 mb of ram and the themes turned off it still runs slow. If it runs at all?
quote:
I only bought this computer a few months ago, I know it wasn't top of the range then, but already people are telling me to upgrade.
NOOOO!
Then don't listen to them. There is not reason to 'upgrade' if you do not want to!
quote:
I DON'T SEE WHY I SHOULD SPEND ANOTHER FUCKING PENNY!
I agree with you. You shouldn't!
quote:
This pc is more than fast enough to suit my needs Xpee isn't that slow and unresponsive. It runs Firefox and openoffice fairly well, It can burn CDs well too.
Good for you. But even with a new PC XP is very unstable, insecure and hard to use! With the new SP2 I can see why many people upgrade just to keep the M$ OS fed! I also see no reason WHY XP needs a mionimum 1gig of ram just to do normal work when my machine running Linux can do it in half that!
quote:
I was happy with my P200, the only reason why I upgraded the whole unit because I fucked the old one up!
So am I./ I have a couple of p2's and they run great!
quote:
I originally just wanted to add a CD burner, when the cover was off I spilt my drink.
Ohhh that had to be frustrating.
quote:
If it wasn't for that I would still be stuck with a P200 running Win95 and M$ office!
Or you could have run Linux with KDE and all the latest software. No upgrades to hardware!
quote:
Back in the day used to be a bit of a computer geek, I liked seeing what I could run on the shitteyest hardware.
So was I then I met Linux! No more configuring the registry and .dll files!
quote:
I remember, and I know this sound's unbelievable.
Why would it. I believe alot of what you have said and have no reason not to.
quote:
One rainy day I was bored (correct spelling I hope)
I decided to install Win3.1 on a 4MB RAM drive on a 8MB 486.
It worked too! lol
Hehe. ah 3.1 those were the days!
quote:
I didn't have good internet access. (it cost 1p per min)
Wow that sux!
quote:
I didn't even know that Linux existed.
Neather did I untill I got into the server buisness way back when.
quote:
About 5 years ago I totally lost interest in computers when I did a computing A level, what was a hobby had became hard work, I hated it.
I used to feel the same way when I became an admin. It sucked to look after a machnine night and day just to keep the viruses and spyware out etc....
quote:
Until very recently I didn't know how much computers had evolved, as I wasn't using them for work.
Neather did I. I love how far Linux has come!
quote:
The only PC I used was my P200.
A commador 64 was my first one!
quote:
We switched telecommunications provider to get unmetered Internet access, bought this new PC, then I discovered this website along with Linux.
cool, hope you have fun!
quote:
I was happy enough with my old P200.
No doubt you were!
quote:
I'm sure at least some of you people must be able to remember the old 16 bit way, where you had just 640K for your programs to run in, you had to swap your code in and out of extended memory if you wanted more than that.
yep I do! LOL good times!
quote:
I still haven't regained any interest, bloatware has put me off even more.
No doubt it has for me too. I find it all too common with M$ software!
quote:
Now we have lot's of memory and what do we do with it?
Waste it on running bloat.
It's just disgusting.
I agree!
-
quote:
Originally posted by WMD:
Solaris - Viper is confused over currency exchange.
CAN$3000 = US$2250
US$700 = CAN$933
US$81 = CAN$108
So now Solaris is right.
Ah! oh ok...
-
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
Firstly anyone who says that Linux isn't bloated because they can run it on a 386 off floppys, is clearly retarded. I could say that Windows isn't bloated because you can run it of a floppy disk. (well in DOS mode at least)
So now I am retarted?
Their are more retarted people like me.
These are all floppy distros:
http://www.linuxlinks.com/Distributions/Floppy/ (http://www.linuxlinks.com/Distributions/Floppy/)
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
When I mean 10% of the total memory I mean the OS should, only consume, or boots up into, or only need 10% of the total system memory to store it's code in. Leaving the rest free, for you, the user to run your software in.
That's insane.
Booting is one of the processes that takes the most memory.
Even Minix took more memory when it was still usefull.
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
Can Linux run on 286s?
Forgive me if I'm wrong as I'm still new to linux but aren't 286s 16bit processors, and Linux is a 32bit OS?
It can.
You could compile it on top of Minix(best done with old kernels) or just use an existing distro:
http://elks.sourceforge.net/ (http://elks.sourceforge.net/)
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
And you JimmyJames, call me immature for saying Linsux and Winbloze, your no better for being overly critical of my spelling. I can't help suffering from dyslexia, I do my best by spell checking all my posts in openoffice.
This "linsux" thing does sound immature.
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
256MB RAM isn't too bad, Xpee dosn't run slowly, it's more than usable, it only runs sowly when the shit arse Xpee theme together with all the other crap skins and effects are enabled.
That's more than I have and more than enough for Linux.
Ps. Try Damn Small Linux:
http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/dsl-hd-install.html (http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/dsl-hd-install.html)
[ July 08, 2004: Message edited by: insomnia ]
-
quote:
I can't help suffering from dyslexia
My apologies for that, but the "Linsux" thing is still getting very old very quick.
Also, Aloone, don't listen to Solaris. He's a troll and will try to steal your identity and use your account.
No, actually, he's just a dude who doesn't know what a "troll" really is, so he goes around calling everybody a "troll", and constantly hounds me about it. He apparently doesn't know that what he does makes him a real troll.
-
[quote[But seriously, even my PS2 locks up quite a bit, at least in True Crime.[/quote]
that's because the PS2 sucks shit.
oh no! saying that the PS2 sucks probably makes me a troll!
-
quote:
eaning that its is there but not like it is dependent on like it is here in Canada.
Solaris is a Canadian?
-
quote:
Originally posted by Canadian Lover:
Solaris is a Canadian?
yepers. Ontario :-D
-
quote:
Originally posted by -=Solaris.M.K.A=-:
yepers. Ontario :-D
I never knew that...
-
quote:
Originally posted by WMD:
Solaris - Viper is confused over currency exchange.
CAN$3000 = US$2250
US$700 = CAN$933
US$81 = CAN$108
So now Solaris is right.
or, of he perfers hi-tech, http://www.oanda.com/convert/classic (http://www.oanda.com/convert/classic)
-
quote:
Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
My apologies for that, but the "Linsux" thing is still getting very old very quick.
Also, Aloone, don't listen to Solaris. He's a troll and will try to steal your identity and use your account.
No, actually, he's just a dude who doesn't know what a "troll" really is, so he goes around calling everybody a "troll", and constantly hounds me about it. He apparently doesn't know that what he does makes him a real troll.
not anybody just you.
Aloone. Instead of believing any of us, use the evedence on the site.
http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=11&t=000586 (http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=11&t=000586)
http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=11&t=000579 (http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=11&t=000579)
I will not call just anyone a troll.
quote:
A troll can be by definniton a fable charecter. One that hides under bridges and only comes out when someone comes to pass on that bridge.
Another troll can be definned by that of an action. Trolling by the side of a river.
The internet definition of a troll is similar to that of the fable. Usualy one who seeks attention, who is grossly misinformend or causes trouble.
Every community has one and there is even more on the real world highways.
A troll would usualy register to a forum and the go against the main topic of the community. The troll usualy sputs off endless rants to ruffle feathers in the community so he can achive the attention that he is looking for. This is why most trolls are found to be misinformed or lacking with any real information
Take MES for exsample. Most trolls that past through here really don't care what OS they use. They pick on users to get them upset by stating obvious fiction and placing them as facts. This goes with that "I know it all attitude." Most of the times trolls will go to posting completly irrelevent facts or divert attention by pointing out grammer. Most trolls are very dull. Thus the term 'troll' fits. They usualy repeat themselves or go down to name calling.
The above is just a given for an average troll.
Its easy not to be a troll. Just stop being one. Post things relevent topics with relevent answers. Not the same old rhetoric that has been disprooven over and over again.
http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=002079&p=3 (http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=002079&p=3)
But were getting off topic and I don't want to keep feeding this one.
Oh yes, #1 rule! don't feed trolls!
I also forgot. If you see bunch of trolls on a news site or something, they are there to make money by spuring hits! People won't respond to people that don't insuly them. I found that out through a member on osnews.com one time. Great way of getting hits thus getting money
[ July 09, 2004: Message edited by: -=Solaris.M.K.A=- ]
[ July 09, 2004: Message edited by: -=Solaris.M.K.A=- ]
[ July 09, 2004: Message edited by: -=Solaris.M.K.A=- ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
Firstly anyone who says that Linux isn't bloated because they can run it on a 386 off floppys, is clearly retarded. I could say that Windows isn't bloated because you can run it of a floppy disk. (well in DOS mode at least)
When I mean 10% of the total memory I mean the OS should, only consume, or boots up into, or only need 10% of the total system memory to store it's code in. Leaving the rest free, for you, the user to run your software in.
Can Linux run on 286s?
Forgive me if I'm wrong as I'm still new to linux but aren't 286s 16bit processors, and Linux is a 32bit OS?
http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=000887&p=2 (http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=000887&p=2)
I'm not going to say it again as this post is already long enough.
And you JimmyJames, call me immature for saying Linsux and Winbloze, your no better for being overly critical of my spelling. I can't help suffering from dyslexia, I do my best by spell checking all my posts in openoffice.
256MB RAM isn't too bad, Xpee dosn't run slowly, it's more than usable, it only runs slowly when the shit arse Xpee theme together with all the other crap skins and effects are enabled.
I only bought this computer a few months ago, I know it wasn't top of the range then, but already people are telling me to upgrade.
NOOOO!
I DON'T SEE WHY I SHOULD SPEND ANOTHER FUCKING PENNY!
This pc is more than fast enough to suit my needs Xpee isn't that slow and unresponsive. It runs Firefox and openoffice fairly well, It can burn CDs well too.
I was happy with my P200, the only reason why I upgraded the whole unit because I fucked the old one up!
I originally just wanted to add a CD burner, when the cover was off I spilt my drink.
If it wasn't for that I would still be stuck with a P200 running Win95 and M$ office!
Back in the day used to be a bit of a computer geek, I liked seeing what I could run on the shitteyest hardware.
I remember, and I know this sound's unbelievable.
One rainy day I was bored (correct spelling I hope)
I decided to install Win3.1 on a 4MB RAM drive on a 8MB 486.
It worked too! lol
I didn't have good internet access. (it cost 1p per min)
I didn't even know that Linux existed.
About 5 years ago I totally lost interest in computers when I did a computing A level, what was a hobby had became hard work, I hated it.
Until very recently I didn't know how much computers had evolved, as I wasn't using them for work.
The only PC I used was my P200.
We switched telecommunications provider to get unmetered Internet access, bought this new PC, then I discovered this website along with Linux.
I was happy enough with my old P200.
I'm sure at least some of you people must be able to remember the old 16 bit way, where you had just 640K for your programs to run in, you had to swap your code in and out of extended memory if you wanted more than that.
I still haven't regained any interest, bloatware has put me off even more.
Now we have lot's of memory and what do we do with it?
Waste it on running bloat.
It's just disgusting.
By the way Viper, just a few questions:
What do you use your computer for?
I know your an MS suporter, I respect you for showing your face here, after all everyone's entitled to their own opinion;
How do you support MS?
And why?
Please don't be afraid to answer these questions.
[ July 08, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]
The main reason why I support MS is because they are the reason why our technology is so advanced nowadays. Thier higher OS requirements naturally forced hardware to get faster and eventually cheaper(to bring computers into more households). Make no mistake about it, MS's monoply is the exact reason why 90% of households has a computer nowadays compared to less than 5% of households having one back in the 80's due to high prices.
Another reason why I support MS is for the same reason why Apple supporters support Apple. I like thier products, and I know that it takes 1 company to control a successful OS. Why in the hell do you think Linux has the lack of drivers, games and professional quality apps? IT is because there are so many different distros of it and no sane company is going to spend all of that development time to make thier stuff compatible with all of the fucking distros.
In my opinion I feel that Linux is more of a toy than a real desktop alternative. Linux is great as a server but I'd take Unix over Linux for server purposes.
I have tried Linux many of times and no matter how much I try to like it or find it useful I just simply cannot because it doesn't support all of the stuff I use on my computer and it is a huge hassle to do what should be simply like getting a Radeon card to work properly or installling a media player(MPlayer). Linux is not practicle. It probably never will be either simply because there is no centeralized control of it.
MacOS is based on a more complex kernel than Linux but it is practicle and very easy to use because you guessed it, a company maintains it...not a community of geeks+hackers. It is centeralized so software makers+driver makers can easily make an app that will work with any install of it because there aren't 4,000 other versions of the same kernel. On top of the easy software vendor support MacOSX also has an easy to use interface and a damn good+easy to use driver+software installation system. A user will never have to get into a command line to get thier shit to work like in Linux.
Linux will never have a real place in the home desktop market just because there are too many distros for any real software makers to keep track of. The real software support will always be for closed source, company owned systems like MacOS and Windows because it saves them alot of time and money(time saved is money saved for software companies).
Linux is useful for a hobbyist who really enjoys tinkering with everything or for a server that will need to be configured once and left running down in a basement, closet, etc.
As for being surprised about showing my face here don't be surprised. I've been a member here for a long time and for the most part I get along with these people(with the exception of a few). I'm not a bad guy becuase I like Windows. I am not one of those ignorant Windows fanboys who sit around and says stupid shit like MS rules the world, Linux sucks, switch to Windows, blah blah. I could care less what any of you use because your preference is just that as is mine. Software isn't a religion. FYI - don't ever say something like don't be afraid to answer your questions to me because you can take it as a given that I will answer any question at any time. (http://tongue.gif)
What do I use my computer for? I use it to play games, listen to music, burn music, transfer music and files to my iPod, surf the net, chat, do work(real work that requires profesional grade apps that are not available to Linux), to shop, etc. I use my computer for alot of different things and I demand an OS that just works and has something available for any possibility of what can be done with the system. I demand having fast, high-end hardware because it makes the experience better(especially with games or working with huge audio/video/picture files)as well as encoding.
I refuse to buy those OEM crap boxes like Dell because they use the cheapest hardware they can to cut costs and increase profits..especially thier crappy motherboards+they give you a crappy PSU which hurts stability big time. I am all for building my own system(s) with all quality parts. I do not skimp on anything(not even a floppy drive which I never use). If you say you had problems with XP on your system it is proably because 1 - it has a shit motherboard and a shit PSU and more than likely a shit intergrated video and sound card+shit ram and
2 - OEMs tend to load the OS to the brim with useless apps that run in the background at all times which hogs Memory and CPU cycles. If you do a restore installlation you will just be back at square 1 with all of the shit software that they felt they needed to have run at the startup of Windows. Do you know how many times Windows XP Professional(Corporate Edition) has crashed on me or locked up on me with this system? 1 time and it wasn't Windows fault. It fucked up because I uninstalled my ATI Catalyst drivers to install the Omega drivers and somehow the Omega driver installation fucked up the video cards' ability to display the desktop at Windows startup. No problem, I booted with F8 and went to the boot with last known good configuration option and boom my probelm was solved. I made the computer freeze once when I tried to take this puppy up to 3.32ghz without upping the voltage. Once again that wasn't Windows fault. It was just me trying to take my CPU to its' absolute limits on the stock Intel air-cooler. I found out that I max out at 3.26ghz but I opt to keep it at 3.2ghz just to be sure it is stable. I got an 800mhz O/C out of this puppy with stock voltage and cooling without any of my buses running out of spec...PCI/AGP is still at 33/66mhz and my Ram is still running at DDR400(200mhz). Not bad at all for a $150 CPU...I know I'm happy with it. :D
The only prebuilt OEM computer I would ever buy or consider buying would be an Apple Macintosh because Apple does not skimp on thier parts(hench why Macs are more expensive than OEM PC's) and Apple doesn't overload thier systems with useless apps that continuosly run in the background hogging the ram and CPU cycles. Apple actually makes a great quality computer.
To Solaris - My bad. I didn't notice you were canadian. When I talk about prices I'm always talking about prices in USD. Technically it may cost mroe in Canadian dollars but the canadian dollar value isn't quite as high as the American dollar so in the end the trade is about equal.
[ July 09, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]
-
quote:
Make no mistake about it, MS's monoply is the exact reason why 90% of households has a computer nowadays
I don't think that many people should have a computer. Most are so fucking stupid that they end up causing most of the problems. The technology industry is full of shitty products because companies like Microsoft focused on "usability" so much that all the inner code sucked, so we had to deal with tons of crap.
Usability lets stupid people use computers - why do so many people think this is good? Because it leads to money and power, which Microsoft has (and shouldn't). I'd rather have harder-to-use systems than have stupid people use computers.
-
While you are correct about the stupid people I don't see them as a bad thing. Why? Because I make a living working on thier computers(I work in a computer shop (http://tongue.gif) ). All of the idiots with a computer wanting a new one or just wanting a computer raises the demand for the systems and the hardware for computer systems which in turn drives the hardware prices down which ends up benifiting the non-idiots who know what hardware is and uses it(likes to build systems+likes to upgrade). The idiots also present more and more jobs for the tech/computer savvy(not bad at all for people who value making a good living).
Plus those same idiots helped make it possible to have such easy access to the internet in any household. Remember back in the day when the internet was considered a luxury that only rich people had? Now the internet is becoming more and more of a nessecity and anybody has access to it. Not only rich people.
I for one appreciate the internet being how it is today. I mean even high speed connections are relativetaley dirt cheap these days. If the internet wasn't what it is now because of idiots raisng the demand and lowering the cost of bandwidth you wouldn't be here reading this post as we speak.
[ July 09, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]
-
I'm sorry, but every time I see a stupid person's computer, I feel sorry for all the shit that has been done to it. :(
Also, my family has had internet access since 1990. I wouldn't be in any danger. (http://tongue.gif)
-
quote:
Originally posted by Viper:
While you are correct about the stupid people I don't see them as a bad thing. Why? Because I make a living working on thier computers(I work in a computer shop (http://tongue.gif) ).p
But viruses and spyware is not their fault. Give them linux and guess what. Its all good.
quote:
All of the idiots with a computer wanting a new one or just wanting a computer raises the demand for the systems and the hardware for computer systems which in turn drives the hardware prices down which ends up benifiting the non-idiots who know what hardware is and uses it(likes to build systems+likes to upgrade). The idiots also present more and more jobs for the tech/computer savvy(not bad at all for people who value making a good living).
There is no argument that because M$ is so buggy that its creating an entire economy around it, but as someone who is a sysadmin and has repaired peoples computers I get sick of the same thing day after day with no possible solution.
However thanks to M$ its easy to make viruses, trojans and spyware. So M$ greatest weaknes is also their greatest strength.
As for m$ and hardware. Well they are not related. Hardware would of improved anyways. What would be different under A Linux desktop is that you would be able to do more things even quickly where as M$ its the same thing with the same or even slower speed.
quote:
Plus those same idiots helped make it possible to have such easy access to the internet in any household. Remember back in the day when the internet was considered a luxury that only rich people had?[/qoute]
Its still is in most parts of the world.
Now the internet is becoming more and more of a nessecity and anybody has access to it. Not only rich people.
Not quite anybody. Canada and finland yes but even the U.S. its only 35% and most of those people ARE rich.
quote:
I for one appreciate the internet being how it is today. I mean even high speed connections are relativetaley dirt cheap these days.
Depending on the cuntry. The U.K its bloody expensive! butthen again so is everything else there.
quote:
If the internet wasn't what it is now because of idiots raisng the demand and lowering the cost of bandwidth you wouldn't be here reading this post as we speak.
Welp I would not say the internet evolved because of 'idiots.' The net evoloved because its a great way to communicate and is unrestricted when it comes to information. Even the U.S. has a hard time controling it and the backbone is in that country!
As for hardware, again that would of evolved without 'idiots' and M$.
[ July 09, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ][/b]
-
quote:
I will not call just anyone a troll.
Only people you lose arguments to. It's hilarious. Solaris trolls about me being a troll.
I love it!
Remember everybody, Solaris is Dipshit #1. He goes around and badgers me about "being a troll", which makes him one! He's so stupid that it's cute!
-
quote:
Originally posted by Viper:
[QB]
The main reason why I support MS is because they are the reason why our technology is so advanced nowadays.
Not really. It advanced due to pure sience into technology, reaserch and the understanding to push technology futher. It has nothing to do with marketing or M$ IMO
quote:
Thier higher OS requirements naturally forced hardware to get faster and eventually cheaper(to bring computers into more households).
I agree that in order to run Xp you need a bigger machine just to do the same thing and have the same problems. But knowing that fact is what stops people from upgrading. Why should there if the new M$ os is no different from previous ones other than it may be even harder to use.
quote:
Make no mistake about it, MS's monoply is the exact reason why 90% of households has a computer nowadays compared to less than 5% of households having one back in the 80's due to high prices.
Prices have not changed. Again most can't afford computers let alone computers that can run something the size of XP.
quote:
Another reason why I support MS is for the same reason why Apple supporters support Apple. I like thier products, and I know that it takes 1 company to control a successful OS.
Or make a good add FUD campain. Thank goodness apple never did those tatics and actualy improved their OS.
I love the way OSX looks although i'll stick to Linux.
quote:
Why in the hell do you think Linux has the lack of drivers,
It doesn't.
quote:
games and professional quality apps?
I've used Red Hat and SuSE! There are plenty of games and professional apps for Linux!
quote:
IT is because there are so many different distros of it and no sane company is going to spend all of that development time to make thier stuff compatible with all of the fucking distros.
It doesn't matter what the distro it is. Linux uses standards. What works for Red Hat will work for debian, SuSE, mandrake etc.... With just one app! Thats why professional apps such as OO and the Gimp and run on ALL distros.
Where as if something is built for 2k it might not run on XP like wise a document created in m$ word 97 cannot be opend in m$ office 2k3. This is because each version in Microsoft uses a different version with different files. Thats where dll hell and registry problems com in to.
quote:
In my opinion I feel that Linux is more of a toy than a real desktop alternative.
IMO M$ windows is a pure geek OS because it takes so much work just to run and to do simple stuff. M$ is great if you want to know how much 'maintenence' your local admin has to put up with.
quote:
Linux is great as a server but I'd take Unix over Linux for server purposes.
I see no difference in Unix vs Linux. Other than Linux is easier to install and has ease of use.
Thats it everything else is basically the same.
quote:
I have tried Linux many of times and no matter how much I try to like it or find it useful I just simply cannot because it doesn't support all of the stuff I use on my computer
Hmmm, I found that windows didn't support the stuff I did. Like writing software, doing graphics, testing and p2ping. I needed a strong durable ease of use machine to do those things and not take time off to constantly fix it with patches that would break stuff etc....
quote:
and it is a huge hassle to do what should be simply like getting a Radeon card to work properly or installling a media player(MPlayer).
Welp IMO it has been the opposit. If I want to install an Media player I just fire up synaptic, select the package an done!
Or I can choose it from the CD click on the package and done!
I find it way easier than figuring out why media player doesn't work only to find out that the codec is not supported. Hunting around for it, getting hit by a virus because of that looking and then once installed having to deal with bugs! Why is that image upside down? Why is it blank but I have sound or visa versa.
I have a radeon 7500 with S-Video out. All Linux did was detect it and then it itself located and installed the driver from within the kernel. No need to find that drivers disk. Finding it on the net or getting driver software that currputs the rgistry or needs an obscure dll file.
quote:
Linux is not practicle. It probably never will be either simply because there is no centeralized control of it.
There is or how is it that any package can run on any distro? Even an old distro can support the latest KDE!
quote:
MacOS is based on a more complex kernel than Linux
complex no. Older and under a different license yes.
quote:
but it is practicle and very easy to use because you guessed it, a company maintains it...
No I think its because, Like Linux, they put people first and are not always about massive PR.
quote:
not a community of geeks+hackers.
Nope Linux and Macs arn't made for such things. But window certinly is. You gotta be a geek/hacker to keep it up and tuned!
quote:
It is centeralized so software makers+driver makers can easily make an app that will work with any install
Yep thats Linux!
quote:
of it because there aren't 4,000 other versions of the same kernel.
All distros do is package their distro for their audience. Because of that same kernel all software is standerdized under Linux.
quote:
On top of the easy software vendor support MacOSX also has an easy to use interface and a damn good+easy to use driver+software installation system.
Very true however i find that KDE is the esiest UI I have ever used, Way easier than windows! Looks nicer and more professional too!
quote:
A user will never have to get into a command line to get thier shit to work like in Linux.
Most linux users don't they use the control panal unlike windows users that have to boot into safe mode or into dos and or fix that registry once again. Nobody knows what Value=01X0000000
quote:
Linux will never have a real place in the home desktop market just because there are too many distros
Millions can disagre with you. Corperations are adopting Linux simply because its easier to use and maintain with better security and package managment. My office uses Linux just as I use it here as a desktop. Heck if windows can make it using bad software then Linux definnatly can since its got quality backing it up!
quote:
for any real software makers to keep track of.
Again Linux is standard, windows is not.
quote:
The real software support will always be for closed source, company owned systems like MacOS and Windows because it saves them alot of time and money
Not when they have to determin hidden API's and IE hooks when making their program!
quote:
(time saved is money saved for software companies).
Nope because they don't know what is under the hood. They don't know how to peace their software together. I have 2 deplomas in VB and VC++ Its mush more difficult under windows than it is under Linux! Pluse there is not standard in windows. If I code a program under Xp home it might not even work under XP pro. In fact I have had that happen to me!
quote:
Linux is useful for a hobbyist
Home Users, Software Developers, Corperate Users and even Gamers thanks to WineX!!!
quote:
who really enjoys tinkering with everything
If their a windows user. I cand stand tinkering with everything. I just want to get my work done without the hassle of reboots, viruses and malware.
quote:
or for a server that will need to be configured once and left running down in a basement, closet, etc.
Yep but they can do desktop just as easily.
quote:
As for being surprised about showing my face here don't be surprised. I've been a member here for a long time and for the most part I get along with these people(with the exception of a few). I'm not a bad guy becuase I like Windows.
Nope your not, just someone with an opinion. My view on windows is different since I've worked as an administrator who had to repair Windows and I think they are just too much of a headach.
quote:
I am not one of those ignorant Windows fanboys who sit around and says stupid shit like MS rules the world, Linux sucks, switch to Windows, blah blah.
quote:
I could care less what any of you use because your preference is just that as is mine. Software isn't a religion.
ABSOLUTLY AGREE!!!
quote:
FYI - don't ever say something like don't be afraid to answer your questions to me because you can take it as a given that I will answer any question at any time. (http://tongue.gif)
The power of a forum. If you have joind into a conversation, you can go out and come back and still be in it.
quote:
What do I use my computer for? I use it to play games, listen to music, burn music, transfer music and files to my iPod, surf the net, chat, do work(real work that requires profesional grade apps that are not available to Linux), to shop, etc.
Same here. I develop software, test, burn and listen to music, play DVD's, burn DVD's onto VHS or another VCD. Download music movies etc.. I use alot of professional software to develop in. OO and the gimp has to be my favourates as well as the many software and development enviroments in Linux. Thanks to KDE and synaptic/apt-get software is dead easy to install! I also shop surf the net and chat with amsn and xchat. I have more than one computer though because Linux has saved me money. I have my own Web Server. and i use more than one distro. Red Hat 9 and SuSE 8.2 and 9. All can run the same software applications. If I design something for red hat it will work with SuSE too.
Which is great and takes a load off of me! No down time or constant repairs and I don't have to worry about malware or virus updates or huge patches.
quote:
I use my computer for alot of different things and I demand an OS that just works and has something available for any possibility of what can be done with the system.
Same here. I can't take tweeking or repairing all day. Its too much!
quote:
I demand having fast, high-end hardware because it makes the experience better(especially with games or working with huge audio/video/picture files)as well as encoding.
I demand a fast machine without shelling out the bug bucks. If I do then I feel that thinks should improve and not do the same task with the same speed with just more hardware specs.
quote:
I refuse to buy those OEM crap boxes like Dell because they use the cheapest hardware they can to cut costs and increase profits.
That might be the reason I see them crashing at the store. Who knows.
quote:
.especially thier crappy motherboards+they give you a crappy PSU which hurts stability big time.
For hardware Compaq is pritty good. Eather case even a dell seems to run fine on Linux. I've got a dell optiplex that ran Fedora core. I forgot, my server is running FC1. Runs great too!
quote:
I am all for building my own system(s) with all quality parts.
Me too.
quote:
I do not skimp on anything(not even a floppy drive which I never use).
Neather do I.
quote:
If you say you had problems with XP on your system it is proably because 1 - it has a shit motherboard and a shit PSU and more than likely a shit intergrated video and sound card+shit ram
Not really. Those machines work fine under Linux and two didn't you say it was easier for hardware software developers to work with M$? See closed source makes things that much harder. Thats why those same 'shit' hardware works fine under any open source OS.
quote:
and
2 - OEMs tend to load the OS to the brim with useless apps that run in the background at all times which hogs Memory and CPU cycles.
You mean that they come with AV's, spy ware removal one or two or three service packs, a fire wall of some kind, managment maintenence software, a bundled software suit (included in the price) etc...
You need all that stuff anyways for windows.
quote:
If you do a restore installlation you will just be back at square 1
Yep. Nothing no apps exept notpad and paint and also IE.
quote:
with all of the shit software that they felt they needed to have run at the startup of Windows. Do you know how many times Windows XP Professional(Corporate Edition) has crashed on me or locked up on me with this system? 1 time and it wasn't Windows fault. It fucked up because I uninstalled my ATI Catalyst drivers to install the Omega drivers and somehow the Omega driver installation fucked up the video cards' ability to display the desktop at Windows startup.
So much for closed source being easier to program drivers. I've never had that problem under Linux.
quote:
No problem, I booted with F8 and went to the boot with last known good configuration option and boom my probelm was solved.
Never crashed so I have no Idea.
quote:
I made the computer freeze once when I tried to take this puppy up to 3.32ghz without upping the voltage.
I have made XP pro crash in my University. I was just using it. Word prossessing.
quote:
The only prebuilt OEM computer I would ever buy or consider buying would be an Apple Macintosh because Apple does not skimp on thier parts(hench why Macs are more expensive than OEM PC's) and Apple doesn't overload thier systems with useless apps that continuosly run in the background hogging the ram and CPU cycles. Apple actually makes a great quality computer.
I thought to myself that If I get a brand new computer I'd go with OSX. Its just easir to maintain IMO
quote:
To Solaris - My bad. I didn't notice you were canadian. When I talk about prices I'm always talking about prices in USD. Technically it may cost mroe in Canadian dollars but the canadian dollar value isn't quite as high as the American dollar so in the end the trade is about equal.
No problem. I've been shopping for scanners and stuff but most stores are in USD so I have to calculate it pluse add on any taxes. Thats another reason it would cost more here. We have the PST GST. I discovered yesterday that we have the RST!
I always make a joke and make that last one up. I didn't know that was actualy there. Imagine that!
-
I know there are distros out there that will boot from one floppy, you seem to have missed the point, you can't say that Windows is bloated and Linux isn't, you can boot up windows (in DOS mode) of a floppy.
I bet you can't boot Linux of a floppy and get a fully functional desktop!
Nice one -=Solaris.M.K.A=-, your the first person here has posted something I mainly agree with. I don't know about the Tolling bit, though I don't want to go there!
I hope I'm not Trolling, by saying I agree with you am I?
Well I do agree with you, all but for one thing of course:
quote:
? You don't every driver is built into the kernel unlike windows where you need an install file and even then it might not work! You don't need to 'tweek' anything. Everything is setup right from the install! Including any software you would like. You do not need to compile anything. It is as simple as installing an RPM through APT-Get and synaptic. Its just a couple of clicks thats it. It will put it ion the menu and everything for you!
Yes you do!
http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=002568 (http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=002568)
The installer didn't work for me either, it was even worse for me, my leximark printer scanner http://www.linuxprinting.org (http://www.linuxprinting.org) has a driver but it dosn't scan.
The video driver is fucktardly slow, the graphics draw faster on Xppe than on linux.
I had to compile loads of shit to try to get my modem working, I failed.
I would say that having the drivers kept seporate from the kernel is a good thing!
What can you do, if you fuck your kernel up installing shit drivers?
There's no guarantee that you drivers will work at all!
At least in Winbloze they work even if they are buggey.
Viper:
quote:
Another reason why I support MS is for the same reason why Apple supporters support Apple. I like thier products, and I know that it takes 1 company to control a successful OS. Why in the hell do you think Linux has the lack of drivers, games and professional quality apps? IT is because there are so many different distros of it and no sane company is going to spend all of that development time to make thier stuff compatible with all of the fucking distros.
I agree with you, Linux lacks standards.
Standards are great!
M$ standards just happen to sod-arse!
M$ can always alter them, thus tipping the snooker table in their favour!
It's obvious why you support them and there's nothing worng with this, you depend on M$ for you income.
Just so long as you (or the company you work for) don't follow their business practices.
I hope you don't price your competitors out of business!
You don't prey on the the stupid, do you?
M$
"Windows needs to be shut down to protect your computer"
In some computer store:
Stupid customer: What computer do I need for my son to do his school work on? The old one is broken it caught a virus, I spoke to a very helpful technician earlier on today.
She said: "you need a new one I can't let you keep the old one, its contagious and it's against UK law for me to let you keep it!"
She was very nice. She even arranged for a nice man to collect the old one for disposal!
Sales assistant:
Oh yes, she's my wife, and that "nice man" is my brother, it's nice to work with your family.
You need a super duper all singing and dancing;
3GHz dual processor
raid 200GB hard disk
2GB of ram
36" plasma display
460W psu
1024 DPI colour laser printer
All the Microsoft software of your dreams
Stupid customer:
Oh Microsoft software, it must be good then!
Is it turbo charged?
Will he be able to access the Internet?
I hope he doesn't look at porn!
I hope he won't fall ill from any computer viruses!
Sales assistant:
Don't worry it comes with the latest Microsoft anti-virus software along Microsoft Windows XP, this also includes the latest Microsoft parental controls.
Stupid customer:
Wow, how much will it cost?
Sales assistant:
I'm sure that we can come to some arrangement.
Now that would be evil, I have known numerous people who have been sacked form jobs at Computer stores because they disagreed with their sales policy.
They sold far less PCs than their colleges but their returns were far less. So much so, that they actually made the store more money, as the bulk of the Store's budget was squandered on returns.
One day I will visit one of these stores and act dumb, then tell them to "shuv thier hardware up their arse, I've recorded the whole fucking conversation." LOL
I could ramble on for Infinitum!
PS
Sorry for the late editing of this post, it was made in haste, just before I had to leave for a few days.
[ July 11, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Aloone:
I know there are distros out there that will boot from one floppy, you seem to have missed the point, you can't say that Windows is bloated and Linux isn't, you can boot up windows (in DOS mode) of a floppy.
I bet you can't boot Linux of a floppy and get a fully functional desktop!
Some of them are FULL distros.
What does a UI have to do with this.
You don't seem to understand any point.
Don't blame a program for your own stupidity.
Stay with Windows if that's what you want.
-
quote:
Yes you do!
http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=002568 (http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=002568)
The installer didn't work for me either, it was even worse for me, my leximark printer scanner http://www.linuxprinting.org (http://www.linuxprinting.org) has a driver but it dosn't scan.
But just like that person. He has made apost here for help and there is a possible solution. Unlike windows, even though you have the correct driver install it still does not work or does not work correctly. Didn't viper just state that sometimes bad hardware screws up xp? Well considering those driver installs are ment to work with XP and the hardware itself is built for XP so then why do the drivers not work for XP?
Using that same hardware one can get linux working and if not there is help. You don't have to get expensive hardware just to satisfy XP.
quote:
The video driver is fucktardly slow, the graphics draw faster on Xppe than on linux.
I find that quite different. Again I had to wait well over 15 minutes just for the start button to pop open. Forget launching a program!
I've never had that happen with linux.
quote:
I had to compile loads of shit to try to get my modem working, I failed.
Did you check if it was a winmodem? Most winmodems do not work with anything other than windows. All other thinks like printers, graphics, sounds and output devices work great.
quote:
I would say that having the drivers kept seporate from the kernel is a good thing!
As a sys admin and someone who has repaired machines I'd say no. All I want to do is pop the CD in and be done with it. Not look around the net trying to find the correct drivers and after that they still fail.
quote:
What can you do, if you fuck your kernel up installing shit drivers?
Well the drivers are built into the kerenl so how could you fuck it up? if the driver IS separate like nivida then an sh filr does everything for you automatically. The kernel doesn't do anything.
The only way you could fuck it up is by compliling a completely new customised kernel that didn't come with the distro and why would anyone do that unless they are a tester for kernel.org?
quote:
There's no guarantee that you drivers will work at all!
Definnatly not in windows.
quote:
At least in Winbloze they work even if they are buggey.
Well actualy they don't I've seen driver installs mess up the OS so badly that you have to re install everything and that is quite a pain.
quote:
I agree with you, Linux lacks standards.
Standards are great!
I disagree with you on that. Because the kerenl is generic and the way the OS is built a program that works for one distro can easily be used on another, infact different versions of distros. In windows this cannot be done due to the fact that every application in windows uses a different protocal. What would work in XP home might not work in XP pro and definnatly will not work on win 2k and 2k3!
quote:
M$ standards just happen to sod-arse!
If they have standards. If they had then there programs would at least be bacwards compatible and even the applications themselves can be used with the same app but an older version. M$ Office 97 vs M$ Office 2k3.
quote:
M$ can always alter them, thus tipping the snooker table in their favour!
Or not. I know lots of people that are looking to the alternatives simply because One version of M$ office simply does not work with the other and I'm not even talking about the OS here.
just my two cents
EDIT (http://tongue.gif) rotocal -> I ment standard. :D
[ July 09, 2004: Message edited by: -=Solaris.M.K.A=- ]
[ July 09, 2004: Message edited by: -=Solaris.M.K.A=- ]
-
Aloone, shut up. Just go back to using Windows. It's obviously what you want to do. There's no shame in it, and there's nothing wrong with it. I won't say you're a bad person for giving up on Linux. It isn't for everybody.
Stop trying with it, and come back in another year or so when it's improved even more and is even more perfect.
-
(http://smile.gif) Jimmy, that's clearly the most intelligent post you've made so far, I don't really want to use Windows :( but I have no choice, as Linux doesn't support my hardware well enough to make it's adoption worth the effort. I could also bitch on a lot more about my digital camera not working with Linux, and yes I have searched for a driver.
Linux seems to be a good OS, perhaps I'm just unlucky, I've seen it run well on friends computers, they don't seem to be able to help me either.
As for the bloatware argument Linux, can be bloated if not even more so than Winbloze. However the good thing about Linux (and I'm sure I've said this before), is that it's open source. If you find it too bloated, you can shift the shit and recompile, thus numerous compact distributions have appeared.
The reason for my posts in this section is I hate people spreading fud, Windows doesn't have to be bloated. You can install older versions and still use new software. Win95 isn't as bloated as Xpee, and providing you install some library you can still install and use the latest version of openoffice.
I know this is no reason for saying Windows isn't bloated, Win95 can hardly be considered a functional OS if indeed it is functional at all. (LOL you could say this about all forms of Winbloze :D )
I bet the cheap cut down version of Xpee sold in India is far less bloated. I would love to get my hands on this, obliviously I would have to tweak things and add UK keyboard drivers and language packs but I'm sure this can be done. The EU might even rule that M$ will have to sell this in the UK too, and even if they don't there's always file share.
You people are lucky to get Linux working so well, I know you think I'm a thickshit for failing so miserably, I don't give a fuck, I bet you couldn't get Linux to work properly on my hardware, not without writing drivers anyway. I know this is a common problem, a friend of mine had to return to Winbloze (dual boot) just to setup his digital camera.
I know some of you find it hard to believe that Linux runs slower than Xpee on my system, I find it hard to believe that Xpee runs so slow on your system, it's true though some Windrivers suck and some Lindrivers also suck. I suppose it's easer to fix the Lindrivers though, the Windriver for my graphics card just happens to be better.
Linux is defiantly better than Winbloze, and it is improving. I have located a driver for my Cannon LBP-660 printer. I'm not going to bother use it though, maybe one fine day I will return to Linux, that is when it fully supports my hardware.
-
.
quote:
As for the bloatware argument Linux, can be bloated if not even more so than Winbloze.
I don't buy that argument since KDE can run on 24 mb of ram where as XP can't even run at 500mb's of ram.
quote:
The reason for my posts in this section is I hate people spreading fud,
I agree i'm fedup of the FUD also!
quote:
Windows doesn't have to be bloated.
You cannot get rid of IE or the GUI in windows since EVERYTHING is intergrated into everything else
quote:
You can install older versions and still use new software.
Actualy no. If you use Office XP or some buisness app that was made for 2k3 for example. It will not work for windows 95!
quote:
Win95 isn't as bloated as Xpee, and providing you install some library you can still install and use the latest version of openoffice.
True you can use Open Source apps on all windows OS'es but trying to use a normal windows application that was made by M$ deems to be incompatible.
quote:
I know this is no reason for saying Windows isn't bloated, Win95 can hardly be considered a functional OS if indeed it is functional at all.
Even though Win95 is less stable. The security aspect and usability is no different from XP.
quote:
(LOL you could say this about all forms of Winbloze :D )
True!
quote:
I bet the cheap cut down version of Xpee sold in India is far less bloated.
I've heard now that M$ is not going to sell such an OS. I have friends there so maby i'll ask them or something.
-
quote:
Jimmy, that's clearly the most intelligent post you've made so far, I don't really want to use Windows but I have no choice, as Linux doesn't support my hardware well enough to make it's adoption worth the effort. I could also bitch on a lot more about my digital camera not working with Linux, and yes I have searched for a driver.
Digicams seem to be a sticking point, because so many companies cheap out and don't use standard interfaces like USB Mass Storage.
quote:
Linux seems to be a good OS, perhaps I'm just unlucky, I've seen it run well on friends computers, they don't seem to be able to help me either.
Which honestly is a big issue to me... the system needs to be greatly simplified in the respect of hardware troubleshooting.
quote:
As for the bloatware argument Linux, can be bloated if not even more so than Winbloze. However the good thing about Linux (and I'm sure I've said this before), is that it's open source. If you find it too bloated, you can shift the shit and recompile, thus numerous compact distributions have appeared.
You don't even need to recompile. I'm running Red Hat 9 with X11, KDE, Gnome, and all the internet goodies I need to run my website in 700MB of HD space.
quote:
The reason for my posts in this section is I hate people spreading fud, Windows doesn't have to be bloated. You can install older versions and still use new software. Win95 isn't as bloated as Xpee, and providing you install some library you can still install and use the latest version of openoffice.
Which honestly is quite amazing. As different as all the releases of Windows and NT are, they're still fully interoperable. 95 also does an admirable job of supporting hardware as new as about three years ago, since driver publishers were too lazy to update to Windows Driver Model, and kept using Windows 9x drivers.
quote:
I know this is no reason for saying Windows isn't bloated, Win95 can hardly be considered a functional OS if indeed it is functional at all. (LOL you could say this about all forms of Winbloze )
Win95 is quite functional. It was, IMHO the best 9x release of all. It was small (~50-75MB), simple (no shitty Windows 98 web browser), fast, and more stable than its derivatives. 98 was mediocre, and Me was horrid, although, like any OS, they could be made to be great with only a little work.
quote:
I bet the cheap cut down version of Xpee sold in India is far less bloated. I would love to get my hands on this, obliviously I would have to tweak things and add UK keyboard drivers and language packs but I'm sure this can be done. The EU might even rule that M$ will have to sell this in the UK too, and even if they don't there's always file share.
I wonder about language support, though.
quote:
You people are lucky to get Linux working so well, I know you think I'm a thickshit for failing so miserably, I don't give a fuck, I bet you couldn't get Linux to work properly on my hardware, not without writing drivers anyway. I know this is a common problem, a friend of mine had to return to Winbloze (dual boot) just to setup his digital camera.
I'd like to take a stab at it anyway :-D
quote:
I know some of you find it hard to believe that Linux runs slower than Xpee on my system, I find it hard to believe that Xpee runs so slow on your system, it's true though some Windrivers suck and some Lindrivers also suck. I suppose it's easer to fix the Lindrivers though, the Windriver for my graphics card just happens to be better.
Unaccelerated video on any OS sux.
quote:
Linux is defiantly better than Winbloze, and it is improving. I have located a driver for my Cannon LBP-660 printer. I'm not going to bother use it though, maybe one fine day I will return to Linux, that is when it fully supports my hardware.
Good!
[ July 12, 2004: Message edited by: JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder ]
-
You can boot an entire, working linux system off of floppys. There are much more functional than an MS-DOS boot floppy.
Linux can be booted into a working GUI desktop with Knoppix and GNOPPIX.
Linux can run as small as you want because it is modular. You want slim speed instead of lots of features? Instead of KDE or GNOME use blackbox or Windowmaker. Use abiword or LyX instead of OpenOffice. Run firefox or lynx instead of mozilla.
YOU have the choice. MS won't give you the choice.
-
Windows ME w/a GUI installation in 16MB. :D
http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/05/22/000522oplivingston.xml (http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/05/22/000522oplivingston.xml)
-
$25 Fuck that, I don't see why you should have to buy any extra software to run Windows. This should be built into the operating system, along with all the necessary anti-virus and firewall crap.
By the way Windows doesn't cost me a penny to run, my ISP now provides a firewall as part of the service and I use the AVC free anti-virus software.
Now I've got some of you to agree with me on Linux it got me thinking, I don't plan to give up completely. I will still continue to play with Linux a bit, even though I'm not seriously considering it as a viable alternative to Windows. (well not for me at least) I will do this, as I've said before, when Linux supports my hardware well enough.
There is obviously a lot more to learn about Linux, it would be dimwitted to close my mind to Linux. Recently, I have managed to regain at least some interest in computing.
By the way, how do the drivers built into the Linux kernel work?
When you select the options in the setup program is the kernel compiled according to your preferences?
What happens if you need to change anything?
With my winmodem driver the installation script asked me to install the development tools together with the kernel source, is this normal?
Another thing I have to bitch about is what's with all these different desktops, software written for one often doesn't work in a different desktop, isn't this a standards problem?
Sometimes I don't even get any error message, for example I boot into Gnome, and click on Kword, fuck all happens. Does this sound a bit strange to you?
-
quote:
1. By the way, how do the drivers built into the Linux kernel work?
2. When you select the options in the setup program is the kernel compiled according to your preferences?
3. What happens if you need to change anything?
4. With my winmodem driver the installation script asked me to install the development tools together with the kernel source, is this normal?
1. The drivers aren't built into the kernel (at least not usually). They're compiled as modules that can be dynamically loaded and unloaded as required.
2. No.
3. You recompile it, but it's not especially likely you will need to change anything.
4. Yes.
quote:
Another thing I have to bitch about is what's with all these different desktops, software written for one often doesn't work in a different desktop, isn't this a standards problem?
Sometimes I don't even get any error message, for example I boot into Gnome, and click on Kword, fuck all happens. Does this sound a bit strange to you?
All software should run in any desktop. Kword should run in Gnome, or any other desktop/window manager for that matter. Try typing "kword" in a terminal and see what error message you get.
[ July 12, 2004: Message edited by: flap ]
-
quote:
Sometimes I don't even get any error message, for example I boot into Gnome, and click on Kword, fuck all happens. Does this sound a bit strange to you?
That's because Kword sucks. (http://tongue.gif) In Gnome you should use Abiword, it's better than Kword anyway.
Either way, software for different desktops should always work in others, provided that the one it was designed for is installed.
-
quote:
Originally posted by WMD:
In Gnome you should use Abiword.
Not only in gnome.
-
One word: OpenOffice :D