I'm sick of this "just get more ram!" bullshit. My 286 did almost as much functionality-wise as my current multi-ghz machine. Yeah, really. Sure, there was no multi-tasking, but I did the mostly the same things as I do today.
Hello, fuckers, just because you can eat ram doesn't mean you should. It costs money and also reduces the number of programs you can run.
I can see it now: in another ten years programs will have minimum footprint of 1GB, but they'll just do more of the same.
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-19 5:07 ID:WNZWSwJw
please please please please don't go to www.linux.com
Linux is faster but you
can get applications such as XGL
and beryl which adds more functionallity
to the Desktop Environment than vista's areo
and eats up less ram, but ubuntu's minimum
requirements is 256 MB of ram, would your old
computer be good enough to keep up with
development. stop viewing this page if the answer
is yes because your old computer couldn't do this
running procedural languages (unless you would
like to browse this site in lynx/links)
fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT fazed IS A GIGANTIC FAGGOT
missing out post 17,
im gonna skip to post 16.
ok so you love vista, did you have an
affair with it whilst still with your
old DOS computer or something?
well dude what im trying to say
is that XGL and beryl make linux better, the
post title is linux vs. windows, if you hadden't
noticed I mentioned the fact that using these
products on linux the system would still run
faster than windows. ah well at least you
know what HTML is I guess..
Name:
Anonymous2007-09-27 6:15 ID:zNlA/7Kz
>>18
Hey, I think you would be welcome in /prog/, we love namefags there -- and it is clear you are one of us EXPERT PROGRAMMERs.
>>18
Hahaha, oh wow. It is now clear to me that you are not only a namefag and incapable of proper capitalization but you are also underaged.
I don't love Vista, I don't even use Windows these days. But that doesn't stop me from disagreeing with and pointing out the idiocy in your posts. Basically all you said is "Linux is faster and it has Beryl". Just... wow.
I've been a loyal MS Windows user since the days of IBM XT's were barely able to run Windows 3.1...
I've used every version of Windows since then, including the abomination that is MS Windows Millennium Edition.
I was running Windows XP up until about a month ago.
I am the "go-to guy" for my family, friends, relatives, neighbors, friends-of-friends, coworkers, etc.
I know how to repair Windows, clean it, keep it clean, & generally all the things you need to do/know in order to make a Windows computer function at it's potential.
I have purchased *every* copy of Windows I have ever used, and refused to deal with anyone's system unless/until they had a legit copy on theirs, too.
(Because it's not worth the jail time & criminal record as far as I am concerned.)
I decided to give VISTA a try, and purchase a copy of Vista Ultimate.
As I always do, I simply remove the primary hard drive from my system, plug in a test hard drive, and install Vista to it.
Thus there's no risk of my primary HD becoming corrupted (it's not attached, it's not even in the case), and I get to find out if it works on the hardware I use every day.
(Otherwise I'd have a duplicate box with a blank HD to install it to, but I don't have that kind of spare cash.)
So in all my tests of Vista, it tells me that my system is "Barely Adequate" for the job.
It's a P4 3GHz system with 2Gigs of RAM, an ATI X600 Pro (512Megs VRAM, PCIe) video card, Intel Gb LAN, and 80Gb SATA HD.
If that's "barely adeqquate", then there is no way in heck it'll be able to cope with all the things I have to run on a daily basis.
Antivirus, Firewall, Spybot S&D, Firefox, Thunderbird, WinAmp, and Explorer are effectively "always on" because I bounce between them too frequently to want to launch/close them that often.
Sure enough, I install Vista and my system slows to a crawl.
I can watch it refresh window boxes.
I can sit & tap my fingers waiting for it to launch my common applications, listening to the drive thrash as it tries to load.
Constantly bugged by the UAC panel wanting me to authorize everything from twitching the mouse to editing the Registry.
(Ok, that's a lie, but it FELT like it was popping up every ten seconds to demand I authorize something or other.)
I know you can turn the UAC off, but that defeats a security layer of the OS, and that's almost NEVER a good thing to do.
I turn off all the eye candy, tweak the system so it runs as fast as possible, and generally do everything I can to make it do what I need in a reasonable amount of time.
In the end, it just wasn't possible.
Vista is so bloated, such a resource hog, that my system felt like I was back on an old 486DX2/100 running Windows 3.11...
So, fast forward to two weeks ago.
Exact same system, now running Ubuntu 7.04.
I can't believe how much faster this thing runs, even compared to my Windows XP!
Same hardware, but when I launch Firefox, it appears.
Not two minutes later, *NOW*.
Launch Thunderbird, and it's *BAM* there.
Launch Gnome Commander (a Norton Commander clone) and it's there, ready & waiting for me.
I click a button to have it do something, and 9 times out of 10, it's open, ready, & waiting for my input before I can move the mouse to where the app will open to.
Watching FLV files from YouTube?
It auto downloads the files to my temp directory, and they launch as soon as it's done getting the file.
No hesitation, just "...97%...98%...99%...100 Perc-" window opens, file begins playing.
Opening twenty tabs in Firefox because I'm surfing for current events?
Not a peep, not a hitch, no slow down what-so-ever.
I currently have my media player, Thunderbird, Gnome Commander, Firefox, a firewall, and a document open in Open Office, and the Pricess Manager says I'm using *FOUR* percent of my CPU and *36%* of my RAM.
Windows Vista vs Ubuntu?
Ubuntu FTW.
=)
So when MS pulled their latest "stealth update" BS & then told me my copy of XP wasn't legal, that was it.
The last straw, the one that broke the camel's back, the icing on the cake, the final kick to the crotch.
I love Windows, but then, I'm an IT support analyst so I find it dead simple to maintain. If my system looked like some of the client machines I've seen literally soaked in spyware, my outlook wouldn't be so rosy - the stuff never takes to my system though - hell, I don't even have close calls anymore... Also, if you pirate, the server version of any Windows makes a better desktop than the desktop ver - you'll just find a lot of pigheaded programs do an OS check and refuse to run. They can be tricked with wildly varying efficacy.
I've tried many Linux distros over many years, and essentially... hated them. Ubuntu has the most promise I found, but there was so little I could do in it that I was accustomed to, and it was so damn hard to fix when little things would happen like - it'd just forget it had a network card and never configure properly again. Very good initial hardware detection though. I swear it seems more closely related to BeOS than Linux!
Posting this from a Macbook I'm playing with for work so I can learn and support them... It's not bad at all and I don't feel I need to install WinXP just as a backup to "do real work" on it. Then again I'm not really sold that it's superior either. The OS has a bad habit of ignoring input and giving no feedback, then erupting in a flood of backed-up commands. It also has a bunch of things that simply can't be configured and work WRONG, but that's in another thread...
Bullshit (often bowdlerized to BS), also Bullcrap, is a common English expletive. It can also be shortened to just "Bull".
Most commonly, it describes incorrect, misleading, false language and statements. Literally, it describes the feces of a bull. As with many expletives, it can be used as an interjection (or in many other parts of speech) and can carry a wide variety of meanings.
Bullshitting is usually when one makes statements that are false, or made-up. Usually people describe other people's action of making a lot of statements as bullshitting in arguments, when one is making up rules or making examples that are not anything to do with what they are discussing or when one is making statements by using examples that need different rules to be applied, so this person is bullshitting
As it contains the word "shit", the term is sometimes considered foul language, hence the use of the euphemistic abbreviations "bull" and "BS". Nonetheless, the term is prevalent in American English and, as with many words, the term is used in a variety of countries, some dating back to approximately the same era World War I. In British English, bollocks is a comparable expletive, although bullshit is now a commonly used expletive in British English also.
Name:
HST2007-10-07 9:35
There is no anwser to this question..... If you want to surf the net and shit, then Linix is cool. If you want to play games then if sucks, cuz you really can't
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-07 9:57
Bullshit (often bowdlerized to BS), also Bullcrap, is a common English expletive. It can also be shortened to just "Bull".
Most commonly, it describes incorrect, misleading, false language and statements. Literally, it describes the feces of a bull. As with many expletives, it can be used as an interjection (or in many other parts of speech) and can carry a wide variety of meanings.
Bullshitting is usually when one makes statements that are false, or made-up. Usually people describe other people's action of making a lot of statements as bullshitting in arguments, when one is making up rules or making examples that are not anything to do with what they are discussing or when one is making statements by using examples that need different rules to be applied, so this person is bullshitting
As it contains the word "shit", the term is sometimes considered foul language, hence the use of the euphemistic abbreviations "bull" and "BS". Nonetheless, the term is prevalent in American English and, as with many words, the term is used in a variety of countries, some dating back to approximately the same era World War I. In British English, bollocks is a comparable expletive, although bullshit is now a commonly used expletive in British English also.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-07 10:01
I like Windows because I don't know shit about computers. So yeah....
>>43
I can play all Windows games I have in Linux using Wine.
FPS is better than in Windows too.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-08 8:29
THIS IS NOW A SEAKING THREAD!!!!!!!!!!1
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-08 10:20
Bullshit (often bowdlerized to BS), also Bullcrap, is a common English expletive. It can also be shortened to just "Bull".
Most commonly, it describes incorrect, misleading, false language and statements. Literally, it describes the feces of a bull. As with many expletives, it can be used as an interjection (or in many other parts of speech) and can carry a wide variety of meanings.
Bullshitting is usually when one makes statements that are false, or made-up. Usually people describe other people's action of making a lot of statements as bullshitting in arguments, when one is making up rules or making examples that are not anything to do with what they are discussing or when one is making statements by using examples that need different rules to be applied, so this person is bullshitting
As it contains the word "shit", the term is sometimes considered foul language, hence the use of the euphemistic abbreviations "bull" and "BS". Nonetheless, the term is prevalent in American English and, as with many words, the term is used in a variety of countries, some dating back to approximately the same era World War I. In British English, bollocks is a comparable expletive, although bullshit is now a commonly used expletive in British English also.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-09 13:00
MAC FTW! FAGGING NIGGAS! ALL OF YO!!!!
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-09 18:55
Lol OP here, lets keep this threaD going!! 1000 responses!!!!
If they'd only get up to at least DirectX 9.0c then I could dump Windows and end the faggotry.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-15 21:27
>>40
You're an IT support analyst who finds it hard to work in Linux? Where can I send you my resume, I have no qualifications but it evidently didn't stop you.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-15 21:40
>>57
Its >>40 here, and how dare you insult my qualifications!! Linux is really hard to use because I can't find the start menu to get to My Computer so I can do stuff. You just can't do anything in Linux like you can with Windows.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-15 21:48
>>58
Dude, I sympathise. I tried to get into command line (Because I'm an EXPERT FUQIN PROGRAMMER), and I couldn't find run. Seriously, why build an OS where you can only use the difficult GUI tools? I'm off to do real work, like reboot.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-15 22:00
>>59
Exactly!! I am also an [o][u]EXPERT PROGRAMMER[u][o] but even I do not see the point in an OS that doesn't support Microsoft applications, I mean considering they are such a well respected and global OS and software company you would think it should be mandatory to be Microsoft compatible!
>>> Ubuntu is Swahili for "too retarded to compile my own kernel".
>> I actually use a custom kernel on Ubuntu. Congratulations. Do you want a cookie?
Haha, oh wow, you can't read.
I can play all my Gameboy Advance Games on linux (just upgraded my computer from a athlon xp with an agp geforce 6600 to a Athlon x2 with integrated 6100 Geforce because of it having PCIexpress and (obviously) not agp so I can't really run any games because I refuse to play at 800x600 with less than 30fps, once I get a 8600GT or something I will install vista just for the sake of dx10.)
>>97
Installing Vista for the sake of DX10 is fucking retarded. There isn't a single game on the market that requires it, and there won't be until Microsoft ports it to XP.
And even then, the Wine project is already working on DX10 support, so you don't even need Windows.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-14 22:48
>>98
It's going to take time for that to happen. Maybe ten years time.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-15 22:48
>>96
Dipshit. These days compiling a kernel is almost one of the easiest things you can do under Linux.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-16 2:20
You can't even give linux away, its fucking free and nobody wants it.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-16 2:46
>>100
Yeah, easy for nerds with lots of time on their hands.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-16 10:04
>>102
It does take time to understand how a system works. But for most things in the world it's a lot better to understand how shit works. Basically there's nothing wrong with giving a shit about how it works, but then one should probably stick to simpler devices that are made with that in mind. So maybe you people should throw away your computer and go back to TV.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-16 12:30
Linux sure can be better in terms of memory use. Currently supported distro's like Deli can run on reasonably 486/100 with 16 megabytes of ram. A bloated Gnome desktop struggles to page 500 megs, even with many applications open.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-16 14:38
Why use Linux when there's OpenBSD???
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-16 15:03
>>104
Does this mean DOS is better than Linux b/c it can run on old crap too?
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-16 17:43
"What Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away."
At least Linux takes advantage of new hardware and actually becomes faster, rather than just becoming more and more bloated like Windows, meaning that new PC you bought won't feel any faster than your old one...
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-16 17:44
"What Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away."
At least Linux takes advantage of new hardware and actually becomes faster, rather than just becoming more and more bloated like Windows, meaning that new PC you bought won't feel any faster than your old one...
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-16 17:45
Anon apologises for accidentally hitting the back button..
Soon everyone will be using Linux or Mac OS. Windows will die out someday. Microsoft should stay making there unix os that they did back then, but the scraped it. What fucking retards.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-18 11:16
To users of Windows: How many anti-user features (DRM, WGA with monitoring, activation etc) do Microsoft have to put into Windows before you say "Enough is enough."?
I don't doubt that Vista CAN be a decent OS, but it's all this bullshit that made me switch to Linux for good.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-18 12:01
>>115
Most Windows users don't even know there are alternatives.
The statement 'reduces the number of programs you can run' is not true, Vista will make space if you need to run more programs.
And even then, there is still the swap file!
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-18 14:30
The reason for Vista to run slower on your PC is because it's got better applications, and yes... Those need more performance.
Vista runs way slow on my 3,2 gHz pc, but on my new Dual Core 2,2 gHz laptop it runs great, I don't even notice anything that is slowed down.
The great thing is that if I open up word it loads 'normal', but when I close and open it again, it loads in an awesome fast time. (Same for Photoshop, ...)
Examples? What runs on Vista that doesn't run on XP? What is it about Vista that is supposed to increase productivity? It's just a bloated OS as far as I'm concerned, and a way for MS to continue to rake in the money from people who don't realise that upgrading isn't necessary.
I've tried Vista, and every five minutes I'm reminded, in a bad way, that I'm running Vista.
Those things got added because of rules not made by Microsoft, if Linux violates rules, they'll change it too.
Okay, Linux got a 'free' sound format, what slows you down from using it on Windows?
And Activation... If you write a commercial Operating System, and it took you for example 4 years to do it, do you want to see it spread like a Torrent with a crack?
Use Google, make yourself a notepad/vim with all the features Vista has more than XP... You'll be amazed.
One example:
Press Windows Key and
1. Type 'adobe', it will list all Adobe products you have.
2. Type 'live m' followed by enter, Windows Live Messenger will start! (Same for e-mails, favorites, history, indexed locations, ...)
>>121 I've tryed out some Vista Distributions including Ubuntu, Mandriva and Fedora, but after all my opinion is that Vista is better. If you don't know how it all works and didn't think trough about it, then don't even care about placing a statement about it.
Take your own advice, dipshit.
Okay, Linux got a 'free' sound format, what slows you down from using it on Windows?
You can't opt out of Vista's DRM bullshit, so your argument falls flat.
And Activation... If you write a commercial Operating System, and it took you for example 4 years to do it, do you want to see it spread like a Torrent with a crack?
Broken business model is broken.
Even Apple knows better.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-18 14:45
Second example:
The whole aero thing, alt-tab, 3d desktop view, hover over your taskbar items, 3d wallpaper, ...
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-18 14:47
>>122
I don't run XP. I'm comparing Vista to Ubuntu, and Ubuntu is winning for me by a long way, everything considered. There's also no DRM/activation bullshit to worry about (and pay for, which you're FORCED to do if you buy Windows)
>>126
Wow, you're so ignorant you don't even know enough about Vista's DRM scheme or its activation niggerdom to correctly interpret the complaint.
I (>>123) told you to take your own advice because you clearly haven't ever tried running Linux. Nor, apparently, Vista itself.
GTFO.
>>130
The fact that it's written by a third party is completely meaningless in the context of open source software.
If you don't like its features, you can turn them off individually.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-18 17:23
>>129
Actually no. This is the whole point. The people who do thing ILLEGALLY have the DRM stripped. Legitimate customers have to put up with DRM restrictions and nagging.
GTFO.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-18 20:49
vista is shite
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-21 19:38
Vista is actually just Microsoft trolling us, in about a year they will release the real Vista and laugh at us for being dumb enough to think that the current vista was actually an OS and not the worlds biggest virus
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-22 2:13
>>134
Yeah. Too bad it will be a server operating system. Might as well use some flavor of Unix.
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-22 5:50
>>114
All those programmers and yet your UI still blows.
You insist they have a legit copy incase of jailtime?
IT'S NOT ON YOU IF THEY GO DOWN YOU PUSSY
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-28 20:35
linux bizath
Name:
Anonymous2007-11-28 21:27
Vista works fine for me as long as you have enough ram. i mean even one 1gb is fine. but when it is idling on my pc with no programs running, ram is being used at about 25 or 30%.
so i dont know why all you fucking idiots say VISTA sucks! GO CHOKE ON YOUR FUCKING COCK!
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-01 21:17
You need to spend a day running around the town in stealth mode killing people before you can really decide which OS is for you
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-03 12:53
>>155
"so i dont know why all you fucking idiots say VISTA sucks!"
Because it's made by an abusive monopolistic company who only cares about their revenue, and doesn't give a flying shit about the users?
Microsoft have already admitted that Vista is there to keep their revenue flowing, XP is more than good enough for the vast majority of people and it's even better with SP3. In any case, I'm now using Linux and haven't looked back, as it's developing faster than any Windows OS. Fuck Vista.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-03 17:25
Lamest excuse I've herd from a vista owner: Vista eat waste RAM, it uses RAM that would otherwise by unused and not utilized.
Name:
Anonymous2007-12-03 18:28
It hardly "uses" ram, it just intelligently caches it. Linux has been doing that for ages, Windows just finally caught up. If a program needs ram, it takes ram that was previously allocated to the cache. It hardly costs anything and causes your programs to load much more quickly.
Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?
That sounds preposterous to me.
If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.
Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.
Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.
>>186
For the past several months I am trying to get FREE AND I MEAN FREE pics and videos of people either having lesbian or straight sex either underwater or on the waters surface and I have not gotten anywhere.
Even Google will not help me. Does anyone have the pics I am looking for? I thank you for your help.
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-14 21:32
Cmon guys, lets help Chris get his porn!
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-16 0:01
vista is better duh. It should only be like $20 though
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-16 0:51
I like windows better than vista or linux or opera
oh wow I just herd opera is over 9000 times!!!! better than vista or linux
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-18 8:59
I like vista better than linux or opera or windows or ubuntu
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-18 11:32
vista plays more games than linux
otoh, with the price of vista you can buy a console and some games
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-18 13:10
>>197
My ass it does. All the games lost due to compatibility issues makes Linux with all its open-source games and Wine play a lot more.
However, Vista plays all the new games...
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-18 18:50
XP
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-18 19:01
You know, the only reason I bought vista was because I thought "hmm, I want to play games. XP would fulfill all my needs in that area, but I also want it to look good. hmm, xp looks like shit to vista, linux looks even better, but dosn't play the games I want to play." hence, vista. and, provided you get the 32 bit version, everything works fine. its the 64 bit version that sucks
Name:
Anonymous2008-01-19 17:17
>>200
7/10. not bad. you may want to include some more unverifiable assertions to help improve the impact of your comment.
>>200
You know, Linux can play any games Windows can, If you use WINE,
In fact, Linux does everything that Windows can do, and in most cases, do it better than Windows can do.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-24 10:56
Althouth I really like Linux and the free software, I think that we all have to accept the crushing truth.
In these times it really doesn't matter if is launched KDE 35.0 or Gnome Vista, because while both environments (and others with less weight as IceWM) were worrying in confusing the user with a completely different aspect, Microsoft was consolidating his position as leader in the field of the operating systems of office, first with the operating system Windows XP (that have approximately 90% of the client operating system market) and with its advanced successor, the recently Windows Vista, that offers a new form to interact with its PC. Is faster, friendlier, and more secure.
The reality is that Linux has little to offer to the inexperienced user. The same novice that is seen disconcerted by the impossibility to do a simple one copy-paste between QT and GTK applications. Go out and ask to the people how they install a program that does NOT have packages for its distribucción (because each one has its own packege system, completely incompatible with the others and that requires the use of complicated commands). Still the packages of the same format as RPM, they cannot be installed equally in Mandriva or Suse.
Then what we suggest to this user (that is just beginning in the Unix Word) is that he need to download the source code, go to the console, decompress it and compile it. How many they managed to do this? One of each a million, I have to say. We persist in THAT is the normal thing. ..nothing more further from the reality.
Explain him why in his Ubuntu, Kubuntu or Fedora cannot see many web pages: he must download the Flash and the Java plugin, in order then to install them with complicated commands. Also make him know that he won't be able to listen its MP3, WMA and WMV files. Tell to the flaming buyer of a new AMD64 how he can play flash games.A shit.
And the gamers? Obviously they'll return to windows, because even God can't use the hardware acceleration of the most modern graphics cards (besides, the drivers don't come in the distributions. ..becuase of the fucking freedom) and that games...just a few ones. By each Linux videogame we have 500 that run on Windows. And the few ones that run on Linux...Oh! Surprise!...Just Windows binaries on the CD, and you have to download the Linux version from a website. Finally the user return to the best option, the OS most used on home (all we know what OS is).
The proof of the free software failure is seen also in the professional world, either in areas like electronic design (doesn't exist anything similar to Protel), architecture (the standard CAD -all we know wich one-only works on Windows), web design (something similar to Dreamweaver? Don't mention something like NVU, that not only is full of bugs, but also just have the 5% of the Dreamweaver features. Neither Bluefish, Quanta or similars...no one would face a complex project with such a primitive tools). DTP? Scribus is a good try (very immature) but Quark or InDesign are far batter. Flash content creation (A standard, and a flash player installed in the 99% of PCs)? It cannot be done on Linux.
In the software development industry there's not a single decent RAD tool. Gambas seems to promise but for now is shit, Eclipse is a RAM eater (thanks Java) that only can be used with 2GB RAM, Kylix promised give the potential of Delphi to Linux, but it was discontinued because the developers hate to pay for licenses and they prefer to use a primitive tool, like KDevelop. And now that we talk about Borland tools, is not rare that programming gurus like Ian Marteens abandoned Delphi and C++ Builder and now prefer the most powerful system for software development: Microsoft Visual Studio.NET.
A computer game developer would never develop free (as in free spech) games, because they have to eat and there's not a business model compatible with free software. The Linux users don't want free (as in free spech) games, they just want commercial quality without pay a single buck.
Administritive management? In Linux? There's not software in this area. The businessman wants to have something standard, something friendly, something mature. He doesn't want to be fighting with a console, compiling sources for in the end (if he finally get it compile) obtain a half-finished application.
If Linux is free (in both senses)...Why the high computers-makers don't preinstall it (just a 1% make that)? Or at least dual-boot? Others, in other hand, opt for FreeDOS.
The PC Battle is loss...because it never exist. Linux with it's chaotic development (instead of boost existing applications or create new ones to supply the lacks, we have thousand clones of each one but without finish or that directly just make us laugh) just has dug it's own tomb. The user don't want a degree in Computer Science: He wants to insert the Game CD, make a few clicks and have all installed and running. He doesn't want headaches. He wants visit XXX sites and watch the video correctly. He wants to install his webcam without recompiling the kernel.
Keep defending the console. Keep defending LaTeX as if it was something that a secretary or a lawyer have to use with the same simplicity of Microsoft Office. Keep defending Vi as the best tool for software developmnet a web site design.Keep believing that new users need to get close to Debian or Gentoo, taking days to configure a USB modem. Keep insulting distributions like Ubuntu or SuSE because are trying to be friendly. Keep just like this and in the end there will be just three frikis using Linux, while the rest of the world will be using what is already mature and functional: Windows.
>>208
that's cause it's a virus. now i need to install linux because of your virus.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-28 0:26
My only issue with Linux is that it hates my Radeon video card and my Broadcom wireless adapter. Therefore, my laptop is barely functional with Linux on it. Otherwise, it would be my main OS. If I want to play games, I'll just dual-boot XP.
Name:
Anonymous2008-03-28 1:44
>>210
Get Ubanto. The restricted drivers manager deals with Broadcom wireless adapters out of the box since 7.10. Not sure about the video card.
Also, virtualisation > dual-booting.
Ye olde Linux Weariness. It goes away. Maor urxvt.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-02 1:47
Leopard. Oh I went there. If you hate macfaggotry, then a good Linux distro that fully supports your hardware. Kde 4 is amazing if you are an interface whore. It still is a little wonky, but the 4.1 release in July is going to make it real solid.
Any linux will always be better than windows. Yes linux has it downfalls but there are drivers out there for almost all your hardware needs its just you have to go and look for them. And linux isnt build and made for idiots who like things that are all point and click.
Windows good for games, linux good for everything else. Giant truth. And I'm talking XP not Vista. Vista's good for nothing.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-05 2:04
firefox good for flash games, opera for everything else
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-05 16:24
Windows is for lazy cunts who can't bother to learn anything about the overpriced computer they buy every 6 months (replacing the previous one as soon as it has too much malware to function), and for suckers who are stupid enough to pay 5x the price of a console to play less than a dozen of pc-exclusive games (they rationalize it by pretending to themselves and to others that those games are sort of good, which they obviously aren't-can you take seriously a "gamer" who still hasn't grown out of FPS, a genre that has been stale for more than 10 years?)
Linux is for tasteless nerds who could never see a terrible user interface even if it raped them simultaneously in the ass and the mouth (thereby taking their virginity). They love it because everything eventually goes wrong with a Linux install, so it gives them opportunities to recompile their kernel and hunt down for the last versions of their device drivers on the SVN repo. It makes them feel hardcore. They rationalize the shortcomings of their system by saying that it's meant for servers, not desktops, but they conveniently disregard that they only use it as a desktop.
And OS X is nothing more than a badly done BSD with the proprietary Aqua window manager dumped on the top of it. If some people are dumb enough to rent music to sync it to devices they can't even physically open to service that cost 3 times as much as identical models by the competition, then it's no wonder they are also cool with paying 3 times the normal price for a laptop that doesn't even have some motherfucking CD drive in it. I have no idea how these morons rationalize it, they are just addicted to Steve's cock.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-05 19:15
DOS is for clueless fucktards that didn't realize CP/M died in the late 70's and have spent so much time customizing their CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT files that their dick goes limp at the thought of having to learn anything else.
Windows 3.1 is for clueless fucktards that didn't realize DOS died in the late 80's and have spent so much time customizing their CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT files that their dick goes limp at the thought of having to learn anything else.
Windows XP is for clueless fucktards that didn't realize Windows 3.1 died in the late 90's and have spent so much time customizing their CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT files that their dick goes limp at the thought of having to learn anything else.
Windows Vista is for clueless fucktards that didn't realize Windows XP died in the late 2000's and have spent so much time customizing their CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT files that their dick goes limp at the thought of having to learn anything else.
>>224
How typical of Vista fanboys to accuse of trolling.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-11 22:04
>>225
How typical of linuxfags to accuse of being a Vista fanboy
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-12 0:03
>>226
You are fucking retarded to assume that this came from someone using an OS just as shitty. I wouldn't post here if I weren't using the de facto only reasonable choice for all the intelligent and educated people who matter in this world, artists or hackers alike. Enjoy your big ghetto where the only two options are both wrong.
(I thought of posting this as is, but I think you are not intelligent enough to figure out from my post that I am using OS X, so I will mention it for the record).
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-12 2:01
>>227
OS X is worse than linux, it has crap compatibility with Windows and like linux, isn't worth what you pay for it
>>232
superior counter-troll is superior (ex. >>230_)
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-15 1:02
But that isn't even fair because you were supposed to be serious so I could do my nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah I trold yuo dance, I mean we all know the best OS is Vista right?
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-15 9:44
If >>222 didn't destroy my efforts we wouldn't be there metadiscussing the mechanics of trolling.
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 3:19
im pretty sure you nee d it to run outlook express snd some other programs but if you go to www.virus_removal/system32/removal_software.on.nimp.org
you can get th progrom to remove it without deleteing you're outlook express folder
stop trolling this board is not for trolls it is for serious computer discussions
Name:
Anonymous2008-04-18 23:27
>>242
You're probably so packed full of fail and lame that you accidentally typed out a fail copypasta when you were trying to be original.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-15 0:28
>>246
why the heck would you say something like that?
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-15 1:28
Hey, you 2, shut up and leave.
Vista has possibilities that we all know hackers are working on, and is good for a default starting point.
Linux is a good alternative, seeing as how you probably needed Windows just to get to the free download site.
You have to thank Vista for allowing the ability to download Linux, and for Linux for trying not to interfere with Microsoft as we all know they can't make a decent game for the death of them.
IF YOU INSTALLED OPERA 9.5 TOMMORROW, I WOULDNT GIVE A FUCK
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-25 17:36
>>255
Idiot. This is exactly why we have to put up with Microsoft's monopoly.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-25 18:35
GNU/Linux Better.
</thread>
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-25 22:24
>>258
Yeah well I'm pretty sure they could only get that big and well known by constantly providing the computing community with quality products and safe, reliable programs and operating systems.
>>260
How about luck (right place/right time), aggressive marketing and competition removal strategies. Microsoft's offerings are rarely original nor reliable.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-27 4:36
Er how about by being honest and trustworthy and making the best quality products
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-27 8:57
>>262
Learn your history. Your assertion has no basis in reality.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-27 9:11
>>260 >>262
Microsoft are where they are because of the stranglehold on OEMs. Why can I not wander into PC World (UK) and buy a laptop without being forced to buy Windows with it? That sort of shit should be ILLEGAL. We should be given the CHOICE of a Windows pre-install when we buy, not have it shoved down our throats.
I, for one, will never be buying another Microsoft product.
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-28 5:09
But I keep trying to tell you that they only got to that point where it is the default OS because they make such a good product, in fact I thought about it and the best idea would be to just get rid of the other companies that make operating systems because they are nowhere near as good and it means everything will be made for the one system and Microsoft will not have to worry about competition so they will not have to spend so much money on ad campaigns so the savings will be passed onto us
Name:
Anonymous2008-06-28 7:53
>>265
No competition at all would make prices go up, as people wouldn't have a choice but to buy Microsoft, which would be fucking shit.
And as for making the best product, bullshit. The only reason people still cling to Windows is because of the third party software available for it. The OS itself is a bloated piece of shit. And just imagine where they'd be with no competition to copy features from...
in b4 yhbt etc
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-08 10:40
I'm sorry, but i am still going to have to insist on using Opera
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-13 3:54
the amount of trolling in this thread is ridiculous man the OP only wants a fair comparison of operating systems ok guys lets give him one for fucks sake
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-13 16:29
>>268
there is no fair comparison
one o/s is suited only to playing games (that's windows slowpoke)
the other is made to run servers for the internets
it's like comparing apples and hubcaps; yes they're both round but that's where the comparison ends
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-14 3:33
>>269
oh yeha? so what o ne is suited for running internet servers then smart guy?
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-14 13:42
Linux is much better. The only reason I stick to Windows at all is for games.
And Vista sucks ass. Stick to XP until Windows 7 fixes things (hopefully).
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-15 0:07
what is windows 7?
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-15 0:33
wikipedia much?
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-15 1:40
obviously not
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-31 4:18
I lold
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-31 4:32
I only hope windows 7 can live up to the quality and excellence of Vista
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-31 5:10
linux > windows @ everything except games
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-31 5:32
>>277
Linux >= Windows at everything including games.
Name:
anon2008-07-31 16:59
get a mac
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-31 17:09
if you want to spend 20x more for 20x less in terms of specs and only care if it looks nice, get a mac. if you care about looks and don't want to pay that much relative to big box retail preconfigured machines but get all the bang for the buck, build your own and dual boot xp pro and linux.
Name:
Anonymous2008-07-31 20:57
Linux is terrible to use
Windows is expensive to use
both are trash
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-01 0:02
>>281
Unfortunately, Plan 9 doesn't have a lot of software written for it at this point.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-01 1:11
@281
How is Linux terrible to use? For me, 95% of the time, everything works right out of the box with Linux assuming you pick a good distro and even if it doesn't work with everything, usually all you have to do is download a few source packages and compile it. It has come a long way in terms of compatibility in terms of hardware and software.
Mac is more expensive than Windows and it also has much less hardware compatibility and a smaller selection of software titles. And if you look at this year's pwn to own competition, you'll see that mac os x got hacked in 2 minutes flat ( http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/pwn-2-own-over-macbook-air-gets-seized-in-2-minutes-flat/ ) thus not very secure. Sure, Windows has more viruses and trojans made for it, but that's why I go with Linux. It couldn't even be compromised at pwn to own.
...so, in general, this is how I see it:
Linux > Windows > Mac
I'm not including any off beat OSes in this like BSD, OS/2, Solaris, etc. because most people don't use them as desktop OSes
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-01 1:35
>>283
``Most people'' only use Windows.
Mac OS X is actually relatively alright in spite of the Mac development team. It's Unix after all.
Linux is just an operating system whereas Vista is a lifestyle
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-23 1:22
Linux. Until Wine can run Vista, and then it's both.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-23 1:23
I'm posting from xpsp3 and lo~ving i~t!
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-23 2:49
They both suck and that is the truth.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-24 1:39
XP is the same as 3.1 but just updated a few of the gfx and effects
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-24 18:08
And Linux is the same as DOS.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-24 22:57
You can't really expect EVERYONE to use linux. Windows is used more frequently because of it's ergonomic traits. You think everyone who uses a computer will automatically know what "find /etc -exec grep '[0-9][0-9]*[.][0-9][0-9]*[.][0-9][0-9]*[.][0-9][0-9]*' {} \;" means? Should they have to? No.
I don't see why people who use linux bash on Windows. Windows can do everything Linux does, plus more. Just like Linux can do many things that Windows can. Yeah, it sucks RAM. Linux can, too.
>>297
That's totally a search string for dates or something.
And you SHOULD know that!
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-27 11:13
>>299
The grep string is a crap rendition of ([0-9]+\.){3}[0-9]+ and might be a complete idiot's idea of something that'll find IPs, but the full command itself is meaningless.
Which doesn't matter anyway, since it's perfectly possible to use Linux without ever touching the command line. My mom does.
>>265
They did not get to this point because of superior product. They got to that point because throughout the 90's most people didn't realize the OS was a separate product from the PC itself. Microsoft purposely tries to blur the lines between the hardware and OS software all the time (why do you think Windows Update always says "updating your computer" instead of what it REALLY should say, "updating your OS.") Most people still don't.
My system is built from the ground up. 100% OEM free (and also 100% Intel free - but it was built before C2Q, etc.) and doesn't afraid of anything.
Name:
Anonymous2008-08-31 1:51
Hi EggZoomin
Name:
Anonymous2008-10-17 1:21
>>302
who or what is an eggzoomin, and how do you use it?
Name:
Anonymous2008-10-19 15:53
you know, this whole question depends on which version of linux? I would go with Ubuntu > Vista
so yeah, by the way, you can just find out for yourself by comparing Ubuntu to WindowsXP(if you own it) and by the way:
VISTA SUCKS BALLS!
Name:
Anonymous2008-10-20 14:13
BALLS OF UBUNTU
Name:
Anonymous2008-10-21 19:22
wasn't ubuntu made primarily to interest blacks in computing?