All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software

XP sucks, but it can be improved...a little (check out the article)

<< < (2/3) > >>

lazygamer:
Question is, can XP be salvaged enough to be almost as good as Windows 2000(at least for home users as opposed to businesses)? Can W98 be setup(by a properly intelligent user!) to be better than Windows XP?

Calum:

quote:Originally posted by lazygamer:
Question is, can XP be salvaged enough to be almost as good as Windows 2000(at least for home users as opposed to businesses)?
--- End quote ---
that good, eh? windows 2000 might be better than the other windowss but how good is that when put head to head in the real world against a proper operating system?  
quote:Can W98 be setup(by a properly intelligent user!) to be better than Windows XP?
--- End quote ---

ha! is it possible to set windows 98 up to be as bad as xp you mean? you'd have to do a lot of work to get all the spyware you need (try installing the newest versions of realplayer, windows mediocre player and kazaa/bonzi buddy to get these "features") and i'd recommend downloading some large corrupted files to fill up your hard drive with rubbish like XP does...

xyle_one:
there is no fixing the atrocity that is windowsXP. i use XP pro at work (architects firm, animator & graphics) and can tell you from horrifying personal experience that is beyond "salvagable". lets start with its piss-poor performance with autocad & 3DStudio VIZ. 2000 could run those decent, but xp freaks out (i guess i should upgrade, right  :rolleyes:  ). When i move a window in viz, my music skips. now, why would that happen? and why should i have to set everything aside when i want to burn a cd so as not to ruin XPs concentration? So much for "multi-tasking". this friday, i am wiping most of the machines here and putting 2000 back on (plus a linux box for me to play with  ;)  ). XP cant even handle ISOs out of the box. At least in Jaguar i can mount or burn ISOs through finder. I used to keep a crash log here at work. I wish i could find it.... I think i managed 15 blue-screens & over 20 freezes in an 8 hour period. 2000 is def better than xp, but 2000 still does not stand next to "REAL" operating systems.

hehe, i kinda liked the way the article started-
 
quote: Megahertz, Gigahertz, Terahertz, the speed of modern machines is unbelievably vast. Streamlined and efficient, these micro-worlds perform more operations in a single nanosecond, then most humans do in the first twenty-five years of their life. These digital athletes are fit, fast, and hungry for a challenge. And what do we do to these purebred machines? We install a Microsoft operating system. (Or we say F it and install something that won

lazygamer:

quote:ha! is it possible to set windows 98 up to be as bad as xp you mean? you'd have to do a lot of work to get all the spyware you need (try installing the newest versions of realplayer, windows mediocre player and kazaa/bonzi buddy to get these "features") and i'd recommend downloading some large corrupted files to fill up your hard drive with rubbish like XP does...
--- End quote ---


Ok the thing is, that article says Windows 98 has artifical limitations, XP doesn't.

 
quote:Resource Meter displays three quantities: System Resources, User Resources, and GDI Resources. It is the limited User Resources and GDI Resources that cause Windows to crash. No matter how much memory you have in your computer, if you use close to the limit of User Resources or GDI Resources, Microsoft Windows 95, 98, or ME will crash. For 16 bit programs, User Resources and GDI Resources are limited to 128 kilobytes each. That's 128,000 bytes (approximately, because of a different scheme of counting memory), no matter how much memory you have installed. For 32 bit programs, User Resources and GDI Resources are limited to 2 Megabytes each. These limitations are known to a few computer professionals, and are sometimes discussed in technical forums. However, very few users know about the limitations, and most don't know why their systems crash.
--- End quote ---


Ok so XP takes more memory, is somewhat slower, somewhat incompatible with older things and needs a damn good tweak job just to be tolerable. Spyware from MS is unavoidable(can a firewall properly setup stop this?). Barring WPA, isn't the stability kinda worth it? Sure XP is not always stable, but cursed hardware configurations and improperly tweaked setups aside, it should be quite stable right?(not as good as Linux of course)

UNLESS these artifical limitations aren't as big a deal if you know how to setup W98 AND you watch those meters.  

Fett101:
Hell. Everything needs a tweak job to be tolerable to different people. The first thing I do whenever I sit at somene elses computer is change the damned refresh rate. And the first thing I did when I installed Mandrake was tweak it to my liking.

but thank god I seemed to have a magical hardware configuration that makes XP like buttah.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page