W2000 VS XP

[mobrien_12]

quote:Originally posted by Zombie9920:


Tell that to the fools who will be using Lindows in the future. IT is to my understanding that everything in Lindows is done when logged in as root.

Who here would even consider Lindows as a real linux distro?

[ekalman]

s

[Refalm]

quote:Ghost: s

Wow, really huh? That's cool, I'll try to hit the "S" button now.

S

Cool, a "S" just displayed on the screen! These things called computers are really amazing  

[voidmain]

quote:Originally posted by Ex Eleven / b0b:
because if palladium goes through then there will be no more P2P apps, and stuff like that.

Only if you are using M$ software. Another example of M$ shooting themselves in the foot. I am beginning to think that Palladium might be the best thing that could happen to Linux. It will give people more reason to ditch M$ and go Linux. When they figure out they can no longer play music files or use P2P apps it will be the last straw for many more windoids. Go Palladium!

[lazygamer]

Lol that is a good argument, suddenly im less troubled by Palladium. Maybe Palladium will just work itself out, and too many things will go wrong, causing an MS meltdown.  

[lazygamer]

Ok so after having XP re-installed a couple of months ago, it seems to perform wonderfully. It hasn't crashed in quite some time, and it handles well when you have alot of programs open.

I would be willing to go to W2000 just because you guys say it's XP with less bullshit. Question is, are  you guys 100% POSITIVE that speed and performance wise it is as good as XP?

[Calum]

quote:Originally posted by void main:


Only if you are using M$ software. Another example of M$ shooting themselves in the foot. I am beginning to think that Palladium might be the best thing that could happen to Linux. It will give people more reason to ditch M$ and go Linux. When they figure out they can no longer play music files or use P2P apps it will be the last straw for many more windoids. Go Palladium!

M$ are not stupid, nor are they static. at the first hint of some exodus to linux happening, M$ will change the rules temporarily just long enough not to frighten people away.

don't count yer chickens...

[Lloydr]

quote:Originally posted by Zombie9920:



You know why the Windows machine got hit by viruses? It is because Windows is so popular and so widely used that people make viruses for Windows to cause mass destruction. If Linux was used by nearly as many people as Windows there would be alot of Linux virii. Why would anyone write a mass destruction program(virus) for an OS that only has .025% of the desktop OS share? That would be pointless if you ask me. If people would get a good AV program for Windows it wouldn't be a problem. Knowing an Open Source freak though, he probably chose to use some freeware AV program and didn't bother to update virus definitions(which is why the machine got infected).

hmmmm i've got some numbers that might put ur ass back in ur place.....

Linux: 47,100,000
Winblows: 43,800,000
Unix: 12,200,000
Open Source: 2,740,000
Free Software: 1,760,000

those are the OS and software numbers coming from a variety of resources....one of which i'm looking at right now and have been for a while, Linux Journal magazine - August 2002 issue page 70.  under the topic - scoring 100.  read it, you might find some interesting shit about really how popular linux is compared to winbloze....l8r

[lazygamer]

BUMP TIME! Ok I need a question answered.

Does Windows 2000 have superior legacy compatibility to Windows XP?

[Calum]

surely it would depend entirely on the actual programs you were trying to run.

Zombie467284623846 and the XP users will probably be able to answer this better than i ever could.

[lazygamer]

No offense to zombie, but I would trust MES more then him. Spyware? Gotcha. W2K=XP but less ghey. Whatever you say. Windows sucks use Linux. Working on it.  

Sure Zombie said XP has better legacy compatibility, but you think im going to believe him? I'd rather here it from MES.  

Of course it may not matter in the end, getting an OS is not so easy, don't know how the fuck my brother does it. Maybe I'll just master XP(and supra tweak it) and learn Linux... and Wine.

What programs do I run? Games. Programs that normally run on Windows 98(Native win or dos box) but decide not to run on XP. What, you think im all concerened about legacy productivity applications?  

[Calum]

true, there's the bullshit factor, but how can people comment if they actively try not to use windows?

i've never used windows XP for any 'legacy' things, from what little i have used it, it seemed to have scant support for running its OWN programs. Internet explorer seemed to give it a bit of a hard time with multiple windows open, and so on. not the best.

[Zombie9920]

quote:Originally posted by lazygamer:
No offense to zombie, but I would trust MES more then him. Spyware? Gotcha. W2K=XP but less ghey. Whatever you say. Windows sucks use Linux. Working on it.                  

Sure Zombie said XP has better legacy compatibility, but you think im going to believe him? I'd rather here it from MES.                  

Of course it may not matter in the end, getting an OS is not so easy, don't know how the fuck my brother does it. Maybe I'll just master XP(and supra tweak it) and learn Linux... and Wine.

What programs do I run? Games. Programs that normally run on Windows 98(Native win or dos box) but decide not to run on XP. What, you think im all concerened about legacy productivity applications?                  

Lets see, you have a Win9x only app/game that refuses to run in WinXP(My old Tomb Raider games are like that)..no big deal, you right click on the executable of the app/game(or you can right click on the shortcut to the executable), go to properties, then go to the compatability tab and you set it to Windows 98/ME compatability. Boom it works flawlessly. Try that in Win2K(considering Win2K doesn't have legacy OS compatability layers).

You have a DOS app/game that won't work in WinXP, right click on the executable and go to properties..in the memoery settings crank up the allocation of all the differnt memory settings to the Max(they Max out at what DOS originally offered as the Max for each memory type like EMS, XMS, DPMI and the Conventional Memory). Go to the Screen tab and disable Fast ROM emulation and Dynamic memory allocation and it should work. If not put it in 95 or 98/ME compatability on top of the rest of the settings also and then it will work.

The best way to avoid DOS app/game problems is to physically go to the command prompt( start--programs--accessories--command prompt)and do it the old fashioned way(the problem is alot of people aren't smart enough to use DOS which is simple if you ask me) so they choose the point and click method which I just gave tips for in my last paragraph. Given, Win2K can run some legacy DOS apps, but they usually perform very poorly compared to how they perform in XP.

Anyways, I use the system everyday of my life and when I say that WinXP can do more than Win2K I really mean it, but suite yourself.  If you really think Gates gives a fuck what porn you are looking at(you think it is spying) then go ahead and go back to a primative OS. It isn't like I really care what you use. LoL

BTW, Do you really think the MES members actually use XP? With that in mind, how can they tell you which Windows OS can do more than the other Windows OS? Most of them base thier opinions by thier hate for MS(which isn't always accurate). I know more about WinXP than the MES members do. On the other hand, most of the MES members use Linux everyday, so when it comes to Linux advice they know more than I do(obviously).

 

quote:Originally posted by lazygamer:
but im kinda a dumb-dumb

I hate to say it, but I think I have to agree with that statement. ;P

[ October 18, 2002: Message edited by: Zombie9920 ]

[Calum]

zombie3673186, thanks for answering, you are the poster probably best equipped to do so, however i think you made a couple of little mistakes in your reply. firstly, he doesn't have to use a primitive OS if he chooses not to use XP, secondly, DOS is hard, not because it is difficult to use, but because it is not intuitive. you will probably be able to tell me how to do this, but i have never found a way to display help about a particular command or program, or use any of the microsoft standard programs really. I found scandisk better in DOS than it ever was in windows, but that's not really a program. Anyway i don't really use DOS so no wonder i don't know much about it. Okay, now this bit, which is interesting:  

quote:BTW, Do you really think the MES members actually use XP?

apart from the webmaster, all of us are members as much as each other. I think you are more of a member than me because, even though i registered first, i think you were posting here before i was...  

quote:With that in mind, how can they tell you which Windows OS can do more than the other Windows OS?

my point exactly, as i said above.  

quote:Most of them base thier opinions by thier hate for MS(which isn't always accurate).

    and you seem to base that opinion (which you often voice, along with your idea that we all fear M$) on nothing but your own insecurities! i have a passionate dislike for M$' politics and practices but i would in no way claim that their software is crap simply because of that! i claim it is crap because it sucks!      

quote:I know more about WinXP than the MES members do. On the other hand, most of the MES members use Linux everyday, so when it comes to Linux advice they know more than I do(obviously).

Obviously indeed, this i agree with totally.

[ October 18, 2002: Message edited by: Calum ]

[flap]

quote:Try that in Win2K(considering Win2K doesn't have legacy OS compatability layers).

Yes it does.