Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
OS- Your opinions
-
27-10-2001 12:06pm#1
Comments
-
I have run my machine for a complete week ( 5 days ) on a single boot with XP 2600.
its runs everything and even after the week the machine was still useable and very repsonsive.
excellent.
oh yes, and never seen a blue screen in XP after the 25** releases.0 -
Ah Sir, you say you're suffering the Blue Screen of Death (C),
well you need to upgrade to Win95 release 2.
Ah Sir, you say you're suffering the Blue Screen of Death (C),
well you need to upgrade to Win98.
Ah Sir, you say you're suffering the Blue Screen of Death (C),
well you need to upgrade to Win98 SE.
Ah Sir, you say you're suffering the Blue Screen of Death (C),
well you need to upgrade to Windows 2000
Ah Sir, you say you're suffering the Blue Screen of Death (C),
well you need to upgrade to Windows XP
and on 'til the end of time!
Mike.0 -
-
-
Originally posted by chernobyl
BSOD in Windows 2000...never.
Never? It does happen but it is so fricken rare it may as well be never.
I have only managed to BSOD 3 times in W2K.
If you prefer windows I would say upgrade to W2K Professional otherwise go with a linux distro.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Originally posted by 80project
**What are the problems in upgrading an OS. Is it fairly starightforward and importantly safe for my existing data?
Nothing is "safe" for your existing data - neither staying on your current OS, nor upgrading.
If you can, get the really important stuff, and burn onto CD, or borrow a TBU and store it there, then upgrade. Just cause you're paranoid
Realistically, I've only ever once managed to lose data, and thats because when a windows install asked if it shoul duse all available space to create a partition (without telling me how big that space was) and I said yes, it took that to mean the entire disk, whereas I presumed it meant the unpartitioned space.
So...sure...you should be safe. Should, of course, not being much of a guarantee!
jc0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
I've killed win2k pro lots of times! lmao tryin to install an isdn card a few weeks ago, the bluddy thing kept goin blue screen on me!
I don't really have too much trouble with 98se usually does what i tell it to... n another thing win2k is very hard on the resources, i seen it running on a p3 800mhz machine with 64mb ram .. n it was crawling! wouldn't run it on anything less than 256mb ram n 733+ processor0 -
-
-
-
-
Solaris has caused me far fewer problems, personally, than other OS's, in the past.Originally posted by JustHalf
http://redbrick.dcu.ie/~valen/epic.txt
Maybe it just doesn't like you
0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Originally posted by JustHalf
That's not my story - that's one referred to me after our Netsoc was having "troubles" with getting Solaris working. Ask Gerry for a more current one.
I can't stand some of the ways it acts. I much prefer FreeBSD. Mmmh, nice. But if Solaris works for you, and you're comfortable with it, respect.
I'm tempted to play with FreeBSD too, I share my apartment with a FreeBSD evangalist who's pretty much brainwashed me at this stage :rolleyes:
My only problem with non-MSOS's is that the availability of the vast majority of software packages is nil, and dealing with clinets who run MS becomes a serious headache
0 -
I'm tempted to play with FreeBSD too, I share my apartment with a FreeBSD evangalist who's pretty much brainwashed me at this stage
Heh, the Linux/*BSD are a bit like a cult really aren't they? (That's "cult".)
My only problem with non-MSOS's is that the availability of the vast majority of software packages is nil
It depends what kind of software you're talking about really. If you're just talking about office stuff, Linux really is getting quite mature. Gaming is a problem, but that never bothered me.
and dealing with clinets who run MS becomes a serious headache
Again though, if it's just office stuff, it doesn't have to. StarOffice is compatible with Word, and I presume other apps are too. Word bites anyway.
adam0 -
-
When did I mention licensing? I was talking about registration. What with that being the words used previously and all.Originally posted by Typedef
Oh und JustHalf, what distorted train of thought has led you to believe that XP will be the only OS/Large App with a restrictive licence? Not that reading the tarrot is one of my specialities, but seeing as how mß licencing has been becoming ever more restrictive und intrusive, is it not enivatible the harsh licencing will spread to all of their monopolistic softwarez?
Ha! Owned!Originally posted by Typedef
Would you believe that after installing office97 on my mother's new XP machine that the fscker told me it wouldn't start access without a licence for it on that machine?
What?Originally posted by Typedef
Hmm all I know is that I am subjected to having to use windowz all day in work and when I get home I don't know if I could think of a better way to unwind then to fsck around with BSD or Linux for 8-10 hours.
I know Mandrake overwrites the Windows 2000 bootloader with LILO by default, so it's not exclusive to Windows.Originally posted by Typedef
I am holding a 2k disk which may or may not get installed on my system, but seeing as how it would almost never get used I don't see why I should go to the bother of dding my various partitions to make the 2k bootloader work..... ahhh m$ aren't satisfied to monopolies the desktop they need the mbr too muhahaha.
Just make a boot disk for one of your Linux variants, install Windows 2000, boot into Linux, restore LILO.
Well, you already have it it seems, so you don't need to.Originally posted by Typedef
OH and what possible reason would make me want to give microßoft more of my hard earned money to buy yet another os which is meant to have all the bug fixes that last one did not have? No way I might put 2k onto my mother's machine and father's machine in the hope that the blue screens won't be as frequent.
m??r0ß0¢T sux0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
Viola!
I've never used KPresenter myself (not into that kind of corporate doodoo), but it has an exellent reputation. As to sending documents, well, I have to admit that I'm a HTML addict - I use it for nearly everything. Granted, the formatting and printing capabilities don't compare, but I'm more comfortable with it, CSS has improved it a hundred-fold, and hell, it doesn't get much more compatible than HTML. If I need security, I use PGP. If my client don't have PGP, they have to get it. (But then I'm weird. ) As to Office apps, well, Star Office isn't the only one out there. In fact, the last time I tried Star Office, it truly sucked, big time. It was bloat, even worse than Office. But that was a long time ago, and there's the new version, or KOffice, or Applixware, and a few more. And if you really can't bring yourself to use one of them, there's Wine and/or VMware and Office.
I'm not saying Linux is the be-all and end-all to everything though, not by any manner of means. I'm writing this on Win2K, because I've found Linux disruptive to my productivity. But on every release of Red Hat, I try it, and it gets closer and closer to being genuinely usable from the GUI. And for me, it doesn't have to be up to perfect standards (Windows has never been anyway), it just needs to be usable, because "hackability" is a huge boon. In Windows, if I don't like the way my desktop works, or the way I dial into the network, or I don't like $blah, I can only change it within the parameters allowed within the OS. In Linux, I can quite literally do anything. And you don't need to be a hacker to do that. Shell scripts are a piece of piddle when you get the hang of it - I do in in PHP - and it's fun to experiment.
Like I said though, on every release I try it out. With Red Hat 7.1, I thought I had it, and I deleted Windows and installed Red Hat as my primary OS. Shortly afterwards, I went running back to Windows with my tail between my legs. Now I have Red Hat 7.2 installed on a new partition, and I absolutely love it. It's absolutely fantastic. The only thing holding me back from making the jump is a problem with IDSN config. As soon as I get that sorted out, I'm gone, never to return. XP isn't on the cards. And on my servers, it isn't even an option.
adam0 -
-
-
D'ohOriginally posted by JustHalf
MacOS probably hasn't been brought up as we almost all use x86 processors!
Still, in a fairly wide debate on OS's, it's curious that MacOS hasn't made an appearence at all, esp. since it's recent fore into UNIX.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
What is mac os like, (possibly someone put up a screenshot?)
I've never actually used it,
In my life i've only ever used an Amiga 600, Atari <insert number> (i forget it was that long ago), Win 3.0, Win 3.1, Win 3.<number> for networks, Win 95, Win 98, Win98 SE, Win NT ,solaris, redhat, suse, and mandrake I've encountered Win ME and Win 2000.
Currently i use Win 98 SE, Mandrake 8 ( i think it is mandrake though very nice to use imo ) and Win NT pretty much daily.
Can Mac OS be compared to any of these????0 -
Originally posted by _CreeD_
One thing guys, after reading through all the different arguments...what do you actually do on your alternative OS'?
I've stuck with Win2k not because I think it's flawless but because I can get software to do everything I want (Games, Graphics and Music creation) very easily, and it runs these very well.
I've thought about putting on Linux and others but can't see the point if there's a limited software range for the things I actually need an OS to run.
Now I may be completely wrong but from every post I've seen about alternative Os' it's always seemed more of a hobby or point proving exercise for the user's (With the exception of web-developers).
Sooo, honestly, enlighten me....:)
To be honest it's exactly that, but you have to remember that a significant proportion of people do not sit at a desk all day 9-5 (8-6?) using Word or making databases or spreadsheets. I prefer it as a hobby - hence why I still keep Amiga stuff around and have a ZX Spectrum emulator.
If you need stuff for work the decision seems to be rarely with you. I guess that would suck to be told what to do but hey some people mix work with play I prefer the two separate 0 -
-
-
-
Originally posted by _CreeD_
Win2k, the first Microsoft OS that actually does what it's supposed to. Put it on and you won't regret it.
Typedef, Question, how does your seeming complete inability to get your Windows-Me working properly make Linux a better alternative Than Win2k?....
Mind you I agree totally on the XP activation sh1te.
Errrm sorry mate, I didn't design windows cause seeing as how I am an uber ha»or I would have done it properly ok?.
Secondly it is not my fault the fscking thing blue screens if I happen to try and for example write outside the constraints of an array ok, how come it is that you write outside an array in windows and if you are lucky you might be able to log-out and back in, but in *BSD & Linux variants you could leave entire megs of unfree malloc'd memory have huge array overwrites without so much as X crashing?
I have to laugh because I used to install drivers in 9x variants professionally for Gateway ie they used to pay me to do that for the masses of windows users as most ppl here seem to be ok so? So I find it a bit funny that people can/have come to me asking me to install this and that and pay me to do it, and then when I venture an opinon on something I might have (some) experience in the same set of people cast doubt on my abilities to fix windows? or when someone dares to venture away from the fold of ms_bolloxology lots of trolls such as yourself start casting aspersions on people and their abilities to fix things ha? Is it that you resent others or that you desire to drag people down to your level of bitchery?
If for example microsoft had not based ME on a 9x kernel it would have undoubtly have been more stable do you agree? If it were possible to supplant windows kernel's as readily as linux kernels do you not think I would have tried? Now seeing as how I was not consulted by Bill and co on this decision just how do you propose I stop 9x variants blue screening, nt variants gui crashes leading to grinding hault and total lack of credible security on all m$ machines? Maybe I should wave the wond of irrationality and muppetery people like you seem so fond of using, and magically fix years of deliberate mis-development?0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
Advertisement