Operating Systems > macOS
Hey Windows XP User, click here
psyjax:
The most popular PDA currently on the market is the Palm, which runs no version of windoze but PalmOS. Technology licenced from Apple's revolutionary, albeit, ill fated Newton.
And where the hell did you get the idea that mainframes were slow? Those sorts of machines are what is allowing you to browse the web right now. Industral strenghth equpment dealing in the transfer of millions of terabytes every second. Slow? I think not. Windoze? No, UNIX.
And as for bloat, here are some system requirements:
Windoze XP:
* PC with 300 megahertz or higher processor clock speed recommended; 233 MHz minimum required (single or dual processor system);* Intel Pentium/Celeron family, or AMD K6/Athlon/Duron family, or compatible processor recommended
* 128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)
* 1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available hard disk space*
* Super VGA (800
voidmain:
XPee user would make love to his XPee CD if it were not for the fact that it's just a little too loose for him...
Calum:
quote:Originally posted by Windows XP User #5225982375:
Yes I have, and fortunately Windows XP makes it easy to restore the damage done with its system restore function.
--- End quote ---
be suspicious of an OS one of whose main features is a program to try and salvage it when it fucks up. Read: it fucks up so often we have spent time and money on making a program to recover from the damage.
quote:Even in Windows 98 it was easy to make complete backups of Windows's configuration settings, a feat which is quite hard under Linux due to the fact that the config files are scattered everywhere under the most dubious sounding names I have ever seen.
--- End quote ---
rubbish. You rename the original of whatever you change to <originalfilename>.backup. Simple
quote:While tweaking Linux, on the other hand, I have often run into trouble and in once instance found myself unable to log into my system just because I made one tiny change to the X config file, which, believe me, needs much tweaking to get a Linux system even remotely up to par. Another time Konqueror crashed every single time I started it, and do you know what had been done to offend it? It took me forever to figure this out but it was due to a corrupt thumbnail preview created in my home directory.
--- End quote ---
that's 'cos you're a fucking dumbassed cunt who should go into butchery or something with a similar level of involvement with computers.
quote:Linux is consumed by bugs; don't believe me? Have a look at the buglists of most Linux projects. Name 10, even 5 bugs present in XP off the top of your head. Hard isn't it?
--- End quote ---
That might be because all XP's bugs are being kept a secret, so that nobody can ever fix them.
quote:
Furthermore, it is not mandatory to even touch the registry when you use Windows. Windows XP requires almost no tweaking because it works fine to begin with, unlike Linux, where one has to edit 8 config files just to get the fonts to not look like shit.
--- End quote ---
Sounds like bullshit to me, unless you mean no editing is required so long as you want it to fuck up mysteriously with no hope of finding out what the problem is due to the closed source nature of the product.
quote:
Windows works best for most jobs;
--- End quote ---
No, it doesn't.
quote:it may be a little inflexible but it WORKS damn it and without a lot of tweaking, it is easy to write for and easy to use.
--- End quote ---
Keep deluding yrself, prepube-boy
quote:Windows XP is a stable, robust system, and is much better than previous consumer versions of Windows such as 9x.
--- End quote ---
you got one half of that right, know which half?
quote:I don't ever want to hear about Windows being bloated
--- End quote ---
And i don't want to hear dumbasses spouting shit, but it's not a perfect world is it?
quote:because it isn't when compared to Linux and Mac OS X. Mac OS X requires a minimum of 64 megs of ram to run, and on my machine the X Window System consumes an appalling 270 megs of RAM! Sure, a stripped down, text-only version of Linux may run on a 486, but MS-DOS can run on a 286, so your argument is a charade. Besides, which OS boots up the quickest? XP. Which OS has a lightweight display manager that has direct access to the computer's hardware? XP. Which OS is the most responsive? XP. (KDE and GNOME are slow, admit it)
--- End quote ---
ho hum, ever occur to you, maybe the reason a lot of your RAM is used up is because linux is putting it to good use? what's the point in having a lot of RAM if you don't use it? It may well be that it does not require all that RAM, just that it will use it if it can get it. Or is that over your head?
quote:Which OS is based on the monolithic UNIX operating system that was originally designed for big, slow mainframes? Mac OS X and Linux.
--- End quote ---
don't think so, dumbass, UNIX was originally developed for the PDP10, and then ported to the VAX. Plus, there are many distinct advantages of a monolithic kernel over a microkernel, which i will not go into here. Let me just add that BSD may be based on unix but it has no unix code in it. Linux is not based on anything, pillock, which just goes to show how much you know.
quote:Windows can be embedded in PDAs, can Mac OS do that?
--- End quote ---
i have heard that windows is shit on a PDA. Also, why should macOS fit on a PDA when PalmOS does the job fine? And PalmOS makes the effort to synchronise with other OSs, unlike some OSs I could mention...
quote:This "bloat" you see in XP is functionality.
--- End quote ---
No, it's wasted diskspace, but i suppose a dumbass like you can't tell the difference.
quote:Besides, all OS's, Linux and Mac included, have gotten much bigger over the years, with the possible exception of the Amiga OS, which is still very lightweight. (albeit obsolete)
--- End quote ---
Linux comes with literally hundreds of apps and tools, and it still clocks in smaller than winXP. What does it have, wordpad and solitaire? wow.
quote:You have been deceived by the Linux zealots if you truly believe that the GIMP can compare to Photoshop, that OpenOffice even comes close to MS Office, that KDE or GNOME can compare to the Windows GUI, or that all the other sleezy open-source imitations written by kids during their spare time can compare to the hundreds of thousands of quality software titles available on Windows XP.
--- End quote ---
yeah? and you're a cunt.
[ May 28, 2002: Message edited by: Calum ]
hoojchoons:
Thank God there will always be cunts like Windows XPiss user 00000000000 to keep us entertained :D . nice arguments fool. How hard did you try to come up with them?
Ctrl Alt Del 123:
Oh shit this is funny. "WHO GIVES A FUCK ABOUT WORLD PIECE, LINUX RULES!" Is what my friend said to me when he read some of these posts.
Both sides have good arguements. I'm surprised Windows XP user #somebignumber is still at it. You have to give him credit, he's persistant.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version