Haha... XP Praisers... nice try...
I don't think its worth for me to talk about XP..., you know my opinion... but I just want to say... if you need a new OS and have a fast CPU, why not better to install Windows SRV 2003? and then to convert it to workstation?
How is 2003 better than XP?
Exactly :-P
Of course, it's much faster and reliable. In Russia 50% of home users use 2003 as their primary OS, not XP...
Haha... XP Praisers... nice try...
I don't think its worth for me to talk about XP..., you know my opinion... but I just want to say... if you need a new OS and have a fast CPU, why not better to install Windows SRV 2003? and then to convert it to workstation?
How is 2003 better than XP?
Exactly :-P
Of course, it's much faster and reliable. In Russia 50% of home users use 2003 as their primary OS, not XP...
Its only faster because themes is disabled, pretty simple to do in XP :P
But why XP hangs a lot, most of hackers' attacks are to WinXP users, there are more viruses for WinXP, the whole interface is much slower and explorer eats very much RAM, even Themes service is disabled.
I wouldnt class my self as a n00b as I run a computer repair company and have many happy clients and with its new popup blocker i like IE and dont see my self changing.
My explorer is only using 11MB of RAM, to me, thats NOTHING. Thats like 6% of my total of 640MB. There are FAR more 9.x viruses than NT based viruses, and XP NEVER hangs if your computer can support it. 2003's interface IS XP's, but the services that you arent going to use are turned off. I have anything I dont use completely disabled, therefore, my XP is incredibly fast. Also, there IS NO WINDOWS 2003 WORKSTATION. Its just changing some settings to CALL it a workstation, but tis STILL SERVER 2003!
Slash - Don't be a bullshitter. This is no way in gods green earth that Explorer.exe can use 30Mb of RAM. Stop fucking around you buttmonkey, your just too blind to see that XP is better. Youre just making up gay lies becuase your afraid to loose a fight :-P
Slash - Don't be a bullshitter. This is no way in gods green earth that Explorer.exe can use 30Mb of RAM. Stop fucking around you buttmonkey, your just too blind to see that XP is better. Youre just making up gay lies becuase your afraid to loose a fight :-P
I'm NOT afraid cuz I can prove that in our city no one except some stupid bullshitters use WinXP... And you say they all are stupid and blind?? It's no! Maybe you believe that OS is reliable cuz it's beautiful??? (and new?)
Generally, newer is better, OS-wise. No company is going to manufacture an OS thats not as stable as the previous one, therefore, the 9.x line has been dropped.
The reason yours hangs is becase you dont have near enough cooling. You said that your 1.1GHz has the cooling from like a 300MHz or something. THerefore, your CPU will reach incredible temperatures, and windows will lock up.
Generally, newer is better, OS-wise. No company is going to manufacture an OS thats not as stable as the previous one, therefore, the 9.x line has been dropped.
The reason yours hangs is becase you dont have near enough cooling. You said that your 1.1GHz has the cooling from like a 300MHz or something. THerefore, your CPU will reach incredible temperatures, and windows will lock up.
Ok, Fish, I agree with that... But why no one uses Windows XP in my community? Why no russian computer companies install Windows XP on teir PC's???
They most likely dont have the kind of system to run it on. I would say XP should only be on something with at least 384MB of RAM. The more RAM, the better... always. I have 640MB, so even 384MB is barely anything to me.
Russian OEM companies sell P4s with HT technology... with 1024Mb of RAM... and install there Linux, 2000, or 2003 Server tuned into Workstation....
No one trusts XP here...
I consider myself a Universal User, that is, I will certainly dislike an OS for valid reasons (Windes is buggy and poorly designed, created, and supported) but not descend into pointless bigotries.
I consider myself a Universal User, that is, I will certainly dislike an OS for valid reasons (Windes is buggy and poorly designed, created, and supported) but not descend into pointless bigotries.
-Q
All that can describe Windows XP too, except for "support"...
Well again, each person has their own reasons for disliking things, for me XP and 2000 are equal, but different. Each has some things (both + and -) that the other doesn't. So depending on my mood and motives, I will pic 1 or the other (Or Linux, or ROS, or etc, etc).
Calling someone a "fucking n00b" just because they have different reasons is not going to help anything, at best. Remember, we all once used IE with WMP.
Ok, Q, well said... I apologise to IBM for calling him that and I'm really tired of explaining why XP is crap. Maybe they will soon understand it and remember my words then...
I consider myself a Universal User, that is, I will certainly dislike an OS for valid reasons (Windes is buggy and poorly designed, created, and supported) but not descend into pointless bigotries.
-Q
All that can describe Windows XP too, except for "support"...
That can in NO way describe XP. Just because you have a bad computer that has problems with XP doesnt mean the rest of the world does. Right now Im on my brothers XP system, and its uptime is 20 hours, but I know why it was restarted, he installed the stuff for his Palm Vx and it needed to reboot. Now MY computers uptime is: 4 days, 20 hours, 48 minutes and 2 seconds
And its still running just as fast as when I rebooted, EVEN with the resource hungry theme I have running.
Therefore, XP must be a stable OS, especially since I use my computer most of the day, and play games, use FireFox, use appz like Word, Thunderbird, and AIM / Trillian daily.
If XP were NOT stable, it would have crashed DAYS ago like 98 would have done, and has done in the past when I was on a 400MHz with 98. That thing never passed about 19 hours of 98 SE running.
Fish, I think you tuned your XP pretty good, that's the fact, but maybe it is easier to install 2000 and not to do that tuning work?
Windows 2000 was made back when people were using Windows 98 on P1/2s. Therefore, Windows 2000 doesnt support modern processors NEAR as well as XP. XP has built in support for SSE/SSE2, which greatly increse OS speed.... Windows 2000 doesnt get that. XP also has FAR better PnP. And much more user friendly things in the advanced sections like the services management thing.
Alright Fish, your an Administ, you should know better. It's PERSONAL opinion. And besides, Slash is Russian, his culture may have different views on what makes something crap. Or how he reacts to derogation. Have some free tolerance.
And don't give me that "He's jealous" crap. I too have some issues with XP, and you don't think that BlacII.1 can't take it.
I never did, I only said that hes admitted to having only 1/3 of the cooling his CPU needs. When windows starts doing things, his CPU overheats, causing windows to freeze.
I too have some issues with XP, and you don't think that BlacII.1 can't take it.
You always get issues with it because you try to delete things / edit things that your not supposed to. I bet that if you installed XP, disabled unused services and left it that way, it would run perfectly fine for you, like it does for me.
Comments
Maybe you're a n00b, so you find it easier to use IE.
Of course, it's much faster and reliable. In Russia 50% of home users use 2003 as their primary OS, not XP...
Its only faster because themes is disabled, pretty simple to do in XP :P
Why don't you like 2003?
Richard
If you're using Internet Explorer.... just use the start menu as your tabs.
I think that function was just better in Mozilla...
I'm NOT afraid cuz I can prove that in our city no one except some stupid bullshitters use WinXP... And you say they all are stupid and blind?? It's no! Maybe you believe that OS is reliable cuz it's beautiful??? (and new?)
The reason yours hangs is becase you dont have near enough cooling. You said that your 1.1GHz has the cooling from like a 300MHz or something. THerefore, your CPU will reach incredible temperatures, and windows will lock up.
Ok, Fish, I agree with that... But why no one uses Windows XP in my community? Why no russian computer companies install Windows XP on teir PC's???
No one trusts XP here...
-Q
Calling someone a "fucking n00b" just because they have different reasons is not going to help anything, at best. Remember, we all once used IE with WMP.
-Q
That can in NO way describe XP. Just because you have a bad computer that has problems with XP doesnt mean the rest of the world does. Right now Im on my brothers XP system, and its uptime is 20 hours, but I know why it was restarted, he installed the stuff for his Palm Vx and it needed to reboot.
Now MY computers uptime is: 4 days, 20 hours, 48 minutes and 2 seconds
And its still running just as fast as when I rebooted, EVEN with the resource hungry theme I have running.
Therefore, XP must be a stable OS, especially since I use my computer most of the day, and play games, use FireFox, use appz like Word, Thunderbird, and AIM / Trillian daily.
If XP were NOT stable, it would have crashed DAYS ago like 98 would have done, and has done in the past when I was on a 400MHz with 98. That thing never passed about 19 hours of 98 SE running.
Windows 2000 was made back when people were using Windows 98 on P1/2s. Therefore, Windows 2000 doesnt support modern processors NEAR as well as XP. XP has built in support for SSE/SSE2, which greatly increse OS speed.... Windows 2000 doesnt get that. XP also has FAR better PnP. And much more user friendly things in the advanced sections like the services management thing.
And don't give me that "He's jealous" crap. I too have some issues with XP, and you don't think that BlacII.1 can't take it.
-Q
I keep telling people that Admins are no different form normal users.
I never did, I only said that hes admitted to having only 1/3 of the cooling his CPU needs. When windows starts doing things, his CPU overheats, causing windows to freeze.
You always get issues with it because you try to delete things / edit things that your not supposed to. I bet that if you installed XP, disabled unused services and left it that way, it would run perfectly fine for you, like it does for me.
-Q
But lets face it, once XP x86-64 is out, youll want it, especially since they took the crap out like WMP, NetMeeting, Outlook, etc, AND WPA!!!1