Where to get XP?

[Megalomaniac 5,000+ posts]

I'll stick with my Apple //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif very easy

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

I'll stick with my Apple //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif very easy

Of couse it is. When only 20 titls run on he am nthing, how can it be hard //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif
Oh steve jobs can we please develop for you OS, oh pretty please with sugar on top. Blow me. Apple has one good product. I put it on my ears to listen to music.

 

[Hundreth 10+ year member]

That's retarded logic. The general mass likes Windowz because it is easy.

If Windows is so easy, then why is it that people f*ck up their installs daily? I'd say about 80% of people who aren't computer savvy have computers that are filled with spyware, slow as hell, and generally messed up. Windows is easy alright, easy to screw up.

Not for the general population.

I installed Ubuntu Linux for my grandma who has never used a computer in her life. All she uses it for is to go on the internet, check her e-mail, and manage her photos. Guess what, she loves it. She has no problems and she picked it up quickly. Linux is great for experts and total newbs, Windows power users don't like it because they vested so much time in learning to do things the Windows way.

Better how?

Linux is simply more stable, thats why. Less crashes and unpredictable behavior. But thats neither here nor there...

Yea, but how many computer illiterate people do you work with? How many of them will you let touch the Linux server?

I work with no computer illiterate people, but why does that matter? We are talking about Windows SERVER, meaning its not meant for computer illiterates you dumb illiterate. The fact is that the Debian machine is 10x more stable, and for the record I administrate the Linux server DAILY.

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

If Windows is so easy, then why is it that people f*ck up their installs daily? I'd say about 80% of people who aren't computer savvy have computers that are filled with spyware, slow as hell, and generally messed up. Windows is easy alright, easy to screw up.


I installed Ubuntu Linux for my grandma who has never used a computer in her life. All she uses it for is to go on the internet, check her e-mail, and manage her photos. Guess what, she loves it. She has no problems and she picked it up quickly. Linux is great for experts and total newbs, Windows power users don't like it because they vested so much time in learning to do things the Windows way.

Linux is simply more stable, thats why. Less crashes and unpredictable behavior. But thats neither here nor there...

I work with no computer illiterate people, but why does that matter? We are talking about Windows SERVER, meaning its not meant for computer illiterates you dumb illiterate. The fact is that the Debian machine is 10x more stable, and for the record I administrate the Linux server DAILY.

With a Linux holy than thou attitude like yours, I'd fire you as IT in a heartbeat. Each has its merit. To say linux is simply more stable is moronic. The real reason Windows is seemingly so unstable is because there is so much developed that runs on it. You get more crapware made than good apps. It is also a target for malicious intent due to its market share. If Linux gains any credible market share, you will see it's voids exposed in a hurry as well. Not to mention you will have every crappy coder and developer making apps for it that make it look even worse. Windows isn't bad, it is the people who use windows that make it bad. installing crap ware and everything else under the sun. You think this wouldn't happen to Linux if every Tom Dick and Harry was using Linux? If you think that, then you are truly blind and is the reason you fail as a true IT person. Go shake your pitchfork and carry your torch elsewhere, cause I ain't buying your cause. My windows installs since XP have worked flawlesly. I am a lot more vigilant over what my boxes do than the normal user out there though. I know the benefits of both platforms. NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING in the world is perfect.

 

[MikeofTulsa Moderator]

With a Linux holy than thou attitude like yours, I'd fire you as IT in a heartbeat. Each has its merit. To say linux is simply more stable is moronic. The real reason Windows is seemingly so unstable is because there is so much developed that runs on it. You get more crapware made than good apps. It is also a target for malicious intent due to its market share. If Linux gains any credible market share, you will see it's voids exposed in a hurry as well. Not to mention you will have every crappy coder and developer making apps for it that make it look even worse. Windows isn't bad, it is the people who use windows that make it bad. installing crap ware and everything else under the sun. You think this wouldn't happen to Linux if every Tom Dick and Harry was using Linux? If you think that, then you are truly blind and is the reason you fail as a true IT person. Go shake your pitchfork and carry your torch elsewhere, cause I ain't buying your cause. My windows installs since XP have worked flawlesly. I am a lot more vigilant over what my boxes do than the normal user out there though. I know the benefits of both platforms. NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING in the world is perfect.

except me

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

[/b]
except me

I can pull up a few threads that contradict that. What do those assholes know though //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[Hundreth 10+ year member]

With a Linux holy than thou attitude like yours, I'd fire you as IT in a heartbeat. Each has its merit. To say linux is simply more stable is moronic. The real reason Windows is seemingly so unstable is because there is so much developed that runs on it. You get more crapware made than good apps. It is also a target for malicious intent due to its market share. If Linux gains any credible market share, you will see it's voids exposed in a hurry as well. Not to mention you will have every crappy coder and developer making apps for it that make it look even worse. Windows isn't bad, it is the people who use windows that make it bad. installing crap ware and everything else under the sun. You think this wouldn't happen to Linux if every Tom Dick and Harry was using Linux? If you think that, then you are truly blind and is the reason you fail as a true IT person. Go shake your pitchfork and carry your torch elsewhere, cause I ain't buying your cause. My windows installs since XP have worked flawlesly. I am a lot more vigilant over what my boxes do than the normal user out there though. I know the benefits of both platforms. NOTHING, I repeat NOTHING in the world is perfect.

What are you talking about? Windows seems unstable because there is so much developed for it? That doesn't even make sense. First of all we are talking about Windows Server that has no crapware installed on it, only industrial strength software that is meant to be stable. Secondly, did you ever look through the Linux repositories? There is a crap TON of software developed for it.

Sure Linux would suffer from some issues if everyone moved over, but it still doesn't save Windows from the fact that its SIMPLY NOT AS STABLE all things being equal. I never said Linux is perfect.. but when it comes to getting real work done, it kicks ***. If you fire me for literally EXPERIENCING the differences between platforms and making an educated decision over what the better platform is for our application, then you would make a horrible business man.

Why don't you tell me what Window's merits are? All they have is more big title software.

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

What are you talking about? Windows seems unstable because there is so much developed for it? That doesn't even make sense. First of all we are talking about Windows Server that has no crapware installed on it, only industrial strength software that is meant to be stable. Secondly, did you ever look through the Linux repositories? There is a crap TON of software developed for it.
Sure Linux would suffer from some issues if everyone moved over, but it still doesn't save Windows from the fact that its SIMPLY NOT AS STABLE all things being equal. I never said Linux is perfect.. but when it comes to getting real work done, it kicks ***. If you fire me for literally EXPERIENCING the differences between platforms and making an educated decision over what the better platform is for our application, then you would make a horrible business man.

Why don't you tell me what Window's merits are? All they have is more big title software.

LMAO you don't understand me becuse you refuse to. Linux doesn't have nearly the availabe software as windows. Everyone and their mother programs/develops for it EVEN the server editions. Most of it is crap. poorly written and 9/10 times this is what make windows unstable. If everyone had their sights on linux to the same extent, whether malicious or not, these same issues would arise. Because you have to reboot windows after an update, it is unstable? that is the only time mine is down. if Linux had the same market share, it would be targeted maliciously like Windows and it would get updates that would also require reboots from time to time. The simple fact remains that it isn't a target due to its popularity in use. Their is nothing unstable about XP or the Windows Server OS if maintained properly. THAT GOES FOR ANY OS. Perhaps I am just the lucky one, or perhaps people you know don't know how to maintain a windows box. Or maybe better yet, you are using Win98 as a server OS, who knows. What I do know is that only Linux Fanbois have these giant security problems with Windows Server.

 

[newusername 10+ year member]

I kind of agree with both sides. I prefer Ubuntu, but I can understand why a lot of people don't. We're still in an age where the majority of computer users have no idea how to do anything other than double click a mouse and type 10 words per minute. 10, maybe 20 years down the road, platforms like Linux will be more popular. Also, if you're the type that follows the Linux development crowd, you'll notice that they are constantly working on making things simpler and easier for users. To me, that reads that they are acknowledging there are challenges in the OS for many people.

Also, there is no doubt that Windows has a lot more difficulty because there are a lot more developers for it. For example, when I fix people's computers for them, the cause is almost always a weird combination of 8 different very obscure programs that are published on the internet. The sheer volume of programs available makes it very challenging to write a code base that will be so transparent that anything willl work with anything else. Even Linux has it's challenges there.

 

[CaliforniabOY5 10+ year member]

I like just started working with RedHat, it's not bad, i kinda like it.....i've been using Ubuntu for years, no complaints here.

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

I kind of agree with both sides. I prefer Ubuntu, but I can understand why a lot of people don't. We're still in an age where the majority of computer users have no idea how to do anything other than double click a mouse and type 10 words per minute. 10, maybe 20 years down the road, platforms like Linux will be more popular. Also, if you're the type that follows the Linux development crowd, you'll notice that they are constantly working on making things simpler and easier for users. To me, that reads that they are acknowledging there are challenges in the OS for many people.
Also, there is no doubt that Windows has a lot more difficulty because there are a lot more developers for it. For example, when I fix people's computers for them, the cause is almost always a weird combination of 8 different very obscure programs that are published on the internet. The sheer volume of programs available makes it very challenging to write a code base that will be so transparent that anything willl work with anything else. Even Linux has it's challenges there.

thats the point I am trying to make. By far the most common scenario ius something installed on windows causing it to freak. whether it be software conflicts, bad driver, Poorly coded program or malware/spyware/adware. It all points to something outside of M$ control.

IMO Ubuntu is the best distro as far as coaxing people to give Linux a try. I still don't think people will like it until they can bring some piece of crap home they bought at BB though. For some reason people love installing crapware //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wow.gif.23d729408e9177caa2a0ed6a2ba6588e.gif I prefer ubuntu at home for a lot of what I do. I actually enjoying installing and trying out the software available to it. GIMP is nice, but it still isn't Photoshop, but would definitely suit most users just fine. I love Gimp.

I haven't used ANY linux based multimedia OS/Software platform that stacks against the MCE implementation in Vista ultimate. For my newest HTPC that OS was a no brainer. MythTV is making strides, but no where near the capability and ease of use MCE in vista has. Other than that Vista is a big joke to me.

 

[Hundreth 10+ year member]

LMAO you don't understand me becuse you refuse to. Linux doesn't have nearly the availabe software as windows. Everyone and their mother programs/develops for it EVEN the server editions. Most of it is crap. poorly written and 9/10 times this is what make windows unstable. If everyone had their sights on linux to the same extent, whether malicious or not, these same issues would arise. Because you have to reboot windows after an update, it is unstable? that is the only time mine is down. if Linux had the same market share, it would be targeted maliciously like Windows and it would get updates that would also require reboots from time to time. The simple fact remains that it isn't a target due to its popularity in use. Their is nothing unstable about XP or the Windows Server OS if maintained properly. THAT GOES FOR ANY OS. Perhaps I am just the lucky one, or perhaps people you know don't know how to maintain a windows box. Or maybe better yet, you are using Win98 as a server OS, who knows. What I do know is that only Linux Fanbois have these giant security problems with Windows Server.

I understand what you are trying to say, you are trying to blame Window's stability problems on the software developers rather than Microsoft. I've ran both Linux and Windows for years both in and out of the server environment. Linux has always felt stabler to me, and I don't load any of my Windows installs with crap... especially the server version. Because of that, your point is null to me. I simply don't need to consider the developers at fault because I'm using software built specifically for servers, not ITunes.

Not to mention, most Linux software is FREE.. meaning they are developed with LESS RESOURCES than Windows apps. How ironic that the Windows developers are at fault.

I'm sure even you, the almighty Windows user has experienced that slowdown after running Windows for several days. It has nothing to do with third party software, its something inherently crappy about Windows. Go and run Linux for weeks and you won't have that problem. Not trying to be a Linux fanboy, but its the truth.

So to finally express MY OPINION on the matter, yes Windows is easier than Linux, no it is not as stable as Linux. Finally, if people spent as much time using Linux as they did Windows, they wouldn't think Linux was that hard at all... because its really not.

 

[IamDeMan 5,000+ posts]

I'm sure even you, the almighty Windows user has experienced that slowdown after running Windows for several days. It has nothing to do with third party software, its something inherently crappy about Windows. Go and run Linux for weeks and you won't have that problem. Not trying to be a Linux fanboy, but its the truth.

.

Wrong. First I am not an almighty windows user. I am a geek who tries many things. My windows box I am currently typing from has been up for over a month and know slowdown is felt. It currently runs the SMP client for folding 24/7 and doesn't get shut down except for security updates that require the reboot. It feels fine to me. I keep my registry clean and components up to date. Try again.

Further more, my home networks file server is Windows Sewrver 2k3 and it only reboots and restarts when updates call for it. It has been running just fine.