Windows at fault - again

[cahult]

I

[rvazquez]

please do not try and compare a MAC with anything. they suck.. yeah, I know what your thinking. linux is a much better OS. but if you want all the cool software you have to use winX machine.

[psyjax]

quote:Originally posted by what:
please do not try and compare a MAC with anything. they suck.. yeah, I know what your thinking. linux is a much better OS. but if you want all the cool software you have to use winX machine.

Another dildo. Beat OSX woith a Wintel Borg dip-monkey. But I guess your happy with your o so COOL software.

Jeez.. I log on tonight and it's like attack of the trolls. First it was SPot and now it's what. WTF?

Personaly, I have been using Mac's since they premierd in 84. I have never felt a lack of support for the system.

but then again... Im not going to dignify your fucked up little statement one bit, so on to the topic at hand:

One irritating windows 98 thing I remember was the way it pretended not to crash.

I would be in a program and say an error occurd and the program would quit out on me, ok, anoying, but at least the system is still up right?

wrong!

Bloody thing would just slowly lose functinality the more I used it till it became a cripled shell of an OS (pun intended).

Eventualy you would have to force restart it and have to wait for windows to realize that it's fucked up and needs a re-install.

I allways loved windows version of stability. It was more like the OS was saying "if I don't see the error, it's not really there"

[cahult]

quote:Originally posted by what:
please do not try and compare a MAC with anything. they suck.. yeah, I know what your thinking. linux is a much better OS. but if you want all the cool software you have to use winX machine.

Did you read and fully understand what I was aiming at with this post at all? I was looking for quirks in windows to compare with other operating systems but since I only had a Mac comparison I politely pointed out that those who don

[Gooseberry Clock]

quote:Originally posted by cahult:
What I least like with it is those damn flying papers in the copy window. I don

[dbl221]

I think the most significant OS type problem....ie not application.....is Windows lack of good memory and process management....thats the reason why a Windows box has to be rebooted every week or so(every 2 days for Win95-98).

Also the lack of scripting support built in to the OS.....WSH is not not up to the Unix standard...perl was ported to NT to solve this but thats not part of the OS.

The crappy memory management and process management is the reason why your application dies it kills the OS as well

[psyjax]

quote:Originally posted by Gooseberry Clock:


And that's what the blue progress bar underneath is for.

That progress bar is near usleess. The thing fills in with uniform blocks so you never actually get an acurate readout. On the MAC and other OS's the bar actually grows incrementaly (not uniformly) to indicate the precise state of progress.

[joe_mojo]

im using redhat 7.1 and i have caused the OS to lock up a few times. Redhat isnt perfect but its free.

[voidmain]

Although it is not impossible to lock RedHat up completely, it usually is X that is locked up and not the OS. I've found that when this happens (hasn't happened in a long time) I can just ssh into the problem machine from one of my others and restart Xwindows (init 3;init 5) and be on my way without actually rebooting the machine.  Again, I don't think I've had this happen with the 7.x releases.

[cahult]

quote:Originally posted by psyjax:


That progress bar is near usleess. The thing fills in with uniform blocks so you never actually get an acurate readout. On the MAC and other OS's the bar actually grows incrementaly (not uniformly) to indicate the precise state of progress.

Those blocks are filling up rather strangely in that Scan Disk app. It

[voidmain]

With M$, nothing can be written to disk during a defrag/scandisk or it has to start over. Close everything in your systray before running scandisk/defrag and if that doesn't do it look for things in your task list that may write to disk. See, I don't "always" give bogus Win* info.

[dbl221]

The reason defrag seems to pause at 10% is that it is arranging the startup programs to lead faster( ie moving them around on the disk).  You told it to do this in the defrag options....yes you did.

The only "program" that can be running when you defrag is windows explorer...nothing else....even the systray prgram must be shut down.

If you defrag correctly it does not reset to zero and start again.

[Gooseberry Clock]

quote:Originally posted by psyjax:


That progress bar is near usleess. The thing fills in with uniform blocks so you never actually get an acurate readout. On the MAC and other OS's the bar actually grows incrementaly (not uniformly) to indicate the precise state of progress.

Unless you're copying onto a floppy.

[Gooseberry Clock]

quote:Originally posted by cahult:


Those blocks are filling up rather strangely in that Scan Disk app. It

[voidmain]

If you do not run a brain dead file system, fragmentation isn't nearly as much of an issue.