Alright Macheads, lets talk real deal here

[Aloone_Jonez]

quote:
Ues you did!

http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=002564&p=3

Not in this thread.

This is information is out of date, I have changed my opinion since then, this was my first experience with Linux, and this sort of experience has also put many people of using Linux.

http://forum.microsuck.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=12&t=000082

Again not in this thread.

Out of date again, I have already apologised about the WINE argument before, it was more about the interpretation of the word emulator than anything technical.

Linspire is relevant to this thread, it is like your posts - a classic example of Linux FUD.

Nowadays MS gives out too much information, not only about APIs but exploits too. How do you think people are able to write viruses without this?

Like I have said before Linux doesn't have these problems as like UNIX, the security is built at the kernel level. Windows was originally designed at a time when most people weren't connected to the Internet, so security wasn't a prime concern. Things have changed since then and MS has fucked up by patching instead of rewriting.

I say Windows driver support is good and I give a reason.

You say (or words to the effect of)"not in my experience"

No proof.

I give technical reasons as to why NT is better than Win9x/ME.

You say (or words to the effect of)"not that I've noticed"

No proof.

I give up, you obviously don't know enough about computers to understand the technical explanations I have given as to why NT is better than Win9x/ME.

I've said Linux divers are often poor as lots of hardware manufacturers don't release enough information.

You say (or words to the effect of) "This is very rare and as they're open source it makes them better as they can be improved easily"

Open source doesn't make bad drivers better, if its because the developers don't know about the hardware.

True if the manufactures do provide them with information being open source is a big advantage and will result in better drivers.

Windows of any flavor will work well as long as you don't connect it to the Internet. As I have said before Drivers aren't the problem security is!

We use Win2k at work and the only problems we get are on the Internet machines.

Oh and I don't believe your misquoting was a genuine mistake, I have seen you do a similar thing before.

Oh sorry this irrelevant to this thread, no its not as you misquoted me in this thread.

Never mind, I forgive you.    

I have not tried to quote you literally in this post that would be a waste of time.

! You fucked up your previous post too, at least you edited it before anyone noticed it, at least you're learning from your mistakes.

[ August 07, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]

[Aloone_Jonez]

I can't be botherd any more your're right Linux roolz, it's perfect there is no problem with Linux driver support.

Thats why everyone uses it!

Windows drulez, the driver support is shit, Windows has got worse and not better, MS keep on thinking about ways to make it more unstable and bugey, and SP2 will only make it worse.

This is also why people don't buy it anymore.

!
!
!

                                                           

[ August 06, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]

[hm_murdock]

sure. whatever.

I've never had any problems with drivers on Windows or Linux on my own machine. I had one problem with a driver on OS X.

However, I've seen Windows be flaky because of a shitty driver on someone else's machine. I've seen Windows be flaky for no apparent reason on yet another machine. I've seen Linux be flaky because of a bad driver on another machine. I've seen Linux be flaky for no reason on a machine that was built specifically to run it (all hardware chosen because of built-in Linux drivers in the distro)

[Aloone_Jonez]

quote:Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
sure. whatever.

I was being sarcastic towards Solaris, just humour him.

 

quote:Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:

I've never had any problems with drivers on Windows or Linux on my own machine. I had one problem with a driver on OS X.

I have had one problem with a Windows driver and 3  problems with Linux drivers, none if these have fucked either OS up.

 

quote:Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
However, I've seen Windows be flaky because of a shitty driver on someone else's machine.

So have I.

 

quote:Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
I've seen Windows be flaky for no apparent reason on yet another machine.

So have I, maybe it was due to a virus, or a bad installation.

 

quote:Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
I've seen Linux be flaky because of a bad driver on another machine.

A bad driver on any OS will fuck it up.

 

quote:Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
I've seen Linux be flaky for no reason on a machine that was built specifically to run it (all hardware chosen because of built-in Linux drivers in the distro)

Was it an OEM install?

Any OS can get fucked up by a bad installation. I badly fucked up my first installation of RedHat 9, there was often a kernel panic (Linux version of a BSOD?) on boot up.

[hm_murdock]

no, it wasn't. the guy ordered all the parts, put it all together himself, and installed Linux (SuSE).

it was crash-tastic. He never got it working right. tried everything, including RAM!

[Zombie9920]

quote:Originally posted by kn0wn:
Lets see. Win2k, 2k3 and XP is less usable, slow as shit, has just a mount of viruses, trojans and spyware pluse idiotic 'anti-piracy' shit so that you have to by another license if you install a new card. Pluse all the usual hunting around for shitty drivers. Not to mention XP is just as stable as the rest of the M$ family. With really realy really powerful hardware and 'proper' drivers ME CAn be more stable than XP!

I don't know what system(s) you have tried XP on. If you have 128MB or less ram it may be slow. If you try to install it on a Pentium 1/II it will be slow. It runs just fine on 500mhz+ PIII/Athlons w/192MB+ ram. It also helps to have a hard drive that isn't running in PIO mode 4 and it helps to have a video card that actually offers 3D acceleration ;P.

XP flies on my [email protected] on 1066mhz FSB w/HT box(it flies when the CPU is running at stock 2.4ghz too) and it flies on my Athlon 64 3200+ box. It even runs well on my old 1ghz PIII and 1.4ghz Athlon T-bird boxes. Every one of the systems have at least 256MB of ram.

Now Linux on the other hand I can't say the same about. KDE is slow as shit even on the Athlon 64. Out of all of the distros I have used KDE performs the best in Suse 9.1. IT still isn't as snappy as 2K/XP. I do not like Gnome at all even though it performs a little better(still not as fast as 2K/XP's explorer). Every distro of Linux I have tired take a lot longer to boot up than 2K/XP as well.

Now where in the hell do you get the 2K/XP is less usable crap? They do everything that Win9x can do and more(except run DOS apps good..but who uses DOS apps anymore?).

[ August 11, 2004: Message edited by: Viper ]

[Aloone_Jonez]

Don't use KDE it's slow and bloated and it gives Linux a bad name.

I've found XP a lot faster but this could be due to the crappy unaccelerated Linux driver.

Have you tried GNOME?

It's not faster than KDE for me, but other people have told me that it's faster than KDE for them.

Also you could try; Fluxbox, Xfce or ICEwm. I have used them all before and they are all a lot faster than KDE.

Try Vector Linux, it's the fastest and most fully functional distro I've seen.

[ August 15, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]

[hm_murdock]

Finder

[insomnia]

quote:Originally posted by JimmyJames: GenSTEP Founder:
Finder

?