Windows is sax. thats all
Windows is sax. thats all
No nabs, I believe 16 gb is the recommended free space at all times.
Hello everyone, if you are using Win.XP and need a Vista Transformation Pack that is worth something check this one out:
[url]http://www.windowsxlive.net/vista-transformation-pack-9.0.1-its-fixed[/url]...
im broke but no broken, cold but not frozen // lost but not forgotten, b!tch ill crack your skull open - terrorize your whole clique, make you suck on your own tits // i spit the cancer out, grab a glock, call me sir Manson-a-lot
Yes it eats your hard drive,Originally Posted by Perito
Windows 7 Requirements:
Windows installation takes 16 GB !
i got 160 GB and after using w7 for sometime,
i got less then 40GB free with only 2-3 games installed and music on on......
And PC started lagging too much...
Sorry for double posting but i just read this,
someone please just merge it,
@ Keweli,
well they are doing the same now with Vista, if you buy Vista you get legal license for downgrading into XP.
Last edited by KeweLi; 17th May 2009 at 12:36 PM.
nothing lasts forever
If you have something like 4GB of RAM, hd space shouldn't matter.
"Well, they say to enter 'passwd username'"
"You did it?"
"Yes, it shows me the error: user username not found"
Well I got 2GB of RAM and I didn't have any kinds of problem,
but now when hd is almost full, its pain in the neck, lags on every command ;O..
nothing lasts forever
You shouldn't use more than 90% of the diskspace to prevent fragmentation... Oh, its windows, happy defrag :P
"Well, they say to enter 'passwd username'"
"You did it?"
"Yes, it shows me the error: user username not found"
Most people who say "windows sux" or "windows vista sux" doesnt really know how windows works internaly nor any other os.
I saw some people complaining about directx10 being vista mandatory or w/e..
what most of you dont know is that you can actualy run directx10 series and directx9 series on the same windows ( vista only) and run whathever you used to run from windows xp. There is no compatibility issue from windows xp - vista anymore.
Windows vista run all older games on dx9 layer witch in this case is backward compatible).
PS
For a howto read bellow :
Hidden Text click here to show
dx10 is always update since windows update update dx as well however dx9 you must do it manualy.
Basicaly if you know how to use well windows vista = xp with more tools.
Only linux i like using is F core only.
Ubuntu and other models are just toy for gammers and noob comp users.
I do know how a linux works internally, and therefore also some windows components. Ever wondered where the "hosts" file comes from? Windows took the TCP/IP stack directly from BSD (not sure if the've coded their own now).
As I've got no experience with Vista... n/cI saw some people complaining about directx10 being vista mandatory or w/e..
...
Basicaly if you know how to use well windows vista = xp with more tools.
What's that? fedora?Only linux i like using is F core only.
Ubuntu #1 used Linux atm... and it's quite good concerning autoconfig. But it's just damn hard to customize :/Ubuntu and other models are just toy for gammers and noob comp users.
"Well, they say to enter 'passwd username'"
"You did it?"
"Yes, it shows me the error: user username not found"
They say
"When you know Slackware, you know Linux... when you know Red Hat, all you know is Red Hat" Of course Red Hat can be replaced with pretty much any other linux distro out there.
"and other models" considering that linux is open source, can be completely customizable to the point of virtually no difference between them.
what you just claimed was beyond stupid
"and other models" let's say gentoo, slackware, arch linux debian, Suse and many other that exist from when you were still going to kindergarden are just "toy..."
Last edited by 0cton; 17th May 2009 at 05:43 PM.
Mind your wordsim not stupid.
I used to work with red hat for quite long time and i dont have to explain why most of linux are 'toys' because you obviously just proved to me that you dont quite use those models you mentioned and most of what you know are from ebooks or studying.
PS:i jumped kindergarden, and if you read with caution what i wrote i mentioned UBUNTU and related models.
If i use F core i obviously like red hat overall 'style'.
PS2:Take a step out of the virtual word and you will understand that 'toy' mentioned there means they are used to games mostly since TOY is somenthing you play with it however never said they are incomplete or 'sux' (yes.. that would be the perfect word).
Linux has quite an important marketshare in the server world, yes ubuntu made it popular to desktop users but it is still more might even say a lot more prevalent in the server world, and linux sux? it supports more proprietary devices out of the box that windows does, applications rarely crash and if they do it is cause of the proprietary code mostly, and you rarely get a kernel panic, unlike windows whoose presentation screens were full of BSOD.Mind your words
I used to work with red hat for quite long time and i dont have to explain why most of linux are 'toys' because you obviously just proved to me that you dont quite use those models you mentioned and most of what you know are from ebooks or studying.
PS:i jumped kindergarden, and if you read with caution what i wrote i mentioned UBUNTU and related models.
If i use F core i obviously like red hat overall 'style'.
PS2:Take a step out of the virtual word and you will understand that 'toy' mentioned there means they are used to games mostly since TOY is somenthing you play with it however never said they are incomplete or 'sux' (yes.. that would be the perfect word).
No I am not reading or studying any ebooks about linux, i have tried suse, I have tried gentoo even did a compile of it, i tried freebsd and a couple of others,but that is still not the point, just cause lately linux distros are used by a lot of inexperienced users doesn't make it a toy look on the server side linux is even used by NASA so your claim simply doesn't standunless you want to become philosophical and claim that our whole life is a a game and we play with knowledge to diverse ourself from our mortal nature than I may agree
Ignore This:
-
Hello everyone, if you don't mind i'll join this discussion and tell you my opinion about it. Before I start, though, let me say that i'm not Anti-Windows or Anti-Linux as well, because most of the people reading pieces like this always assume something of that. I use both, on my home box i use Windows XP because of my intention for the gaming nature which means relaxing while playing (Warcraft III etc.) and chating with friends. On my laptop i run Ubuntu 8.04 Hardy TLS Desktop Edition for business purposes and since i'm on university of electrotechnical science with main object: telecommunications and programming they require from us that we stick with Linux distros rather then Windows.
Both Windows and Linux come in many flavors. All the flavors of Windows come from Microsoft, the various distributions of Linux come from different companies (i.e. Linspire, Red Hat, SuSE, Ubuntu, Xandros, Knoppix, Slackware, Lycoris, etc. ).
Windows has two main lines. The older flavors are referred to as "Win9x" and consist of Windows 95, 98, 98SE and Me. The newer flavors are referred to as "NT class" and consist of Windows NT3, NT4, 2000, XP and Vista. Going back in time, Windows 3.x preceded Windows 95 by a few years. And before that, there were earlier versions of Windows, but they were not popular. Microsoft no longer supports Windows NT3, NT4, all the 9x versions and of course anything older. Support for Windows 2000 is partial.
The flavors of Linux are referred to as distributions (often shortened to "distros"). All the Linux distributions released around the same time frame will use the same kernel (the guts of the Operating System). They differ in the add-on software provided, GUI, install process, price, documentation and technical support. Both Linux and Windows come in desktop and server editions.
There may be too many distributions of Linux, it's possible that this is hurting Linux in the marketplace. It could be that the lack of a Linux distro from a major computer company is also hurting it in the marketplace. IBM is a big Linux backer but does not have their own branded distribution. Currently there seem to be many nice things said about the Ubuntu distribution.
Linux is customizable in a way that Windows is not. For one, the user interface, while similar in concept, varies in detail from distribution to distribution. For example, the task bar may default to being on the top or the bottom. Also, there are many special purpose versions of Linux above and beyond the full blown distributions described above. For example, NASLite is a version of Linux that runs off a single floppy disk (since revised to also boot from a CD) and converts an old computer into a file server. This ultra small edition of Linux is capable of networking, file sharing and being a web server.
Both Linux and Windows provide a GUI and a command line interface. The Windows GUI has changed from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95 (drastically) to Windows 2000 (slightly) to Windows XP (fairly large) and is slated to change again with the next version of Windows, the one that will replace XP (Windows 7). Windows XP has a themes feature that offers some customization of the look and feel of the GUI.
Linux typically provides two GUIs, KDE and Gnome. See some screenshots of Lycoris and Lindows in action. The lynucs.org web site has examples of many substantially different Linux GUIs. Of the major Linux distributions, Lindows has made their user interface look more like Windows than the others. Then too, there is a desktop environment (XPde) with a window manager (XPwm) for Linux which really makes Linux look like Windows to make it easier for Windows XP users to use a Linux box.
Mark Minasi makes the point (Windows and .NET magazine) that the Linux GUI is optional while the Windows GUI is an integral component of the OS. He says that speed, efficiency and reliability are all increased by running a server instance of Linux without a GUI, something that server versions of Windows can not do. In the same article he points out that the detached nature of the Linux GUI makes remote control and remote administration of a Linux computer simpler and more natural than a Windows computer.
Is the flexibility of the Linux GUI a good thing? Yes and No. While advanced users can customize things to their liking, it makes things harder on new users for whom every Linux computer they encounter may look and act differently said Michael Horowitz.
When it comes to Text Mode Interface, that is also known as a command interpreter. Windows users sometimes call it a DOS prompt. Linux users refer to it as a shell. Each version of Windows has a single command interpreter, but the different flavors of Windows have different interpreters. In general, the command interpreters in the Windows 9x series are very similar to each other and the NT class versions of Windows (NT, 2000, XP) also have similar command interpreters. There are however differences between a Windows 9x command interpreter and one in an NT class flavor of Windows. Linux, like all versions of Unix, supports multiple command interpreters, but it usually uses one called BASH (Bourne Again Shell). Others are the Korn shell, the Bourne shell, ash and the C shell (pun, no doubt, intended).
For desktop or home use, Linux is very cheap or free, you can download Linux for free from each of the Linux vendors, Windows is expensive, either for server use, Linux is very cheap compared to Windows. Microsoft allows a single copy of Windows to be used on only one computer. Starting with Windows XP, they use software to enforce this rule (Windows Product Activation at first, later Genuine Windows). In contrast, once you have purchased Linux, you can run it on any number of computers for no additional charge. The irony here is that Windows rose to dominance, way back when, in large part by undercutting the competition (Macs) on cost. Now Linux may do the same thing to Windows.When it comes to deal with viruses, worms, Spyware, etc. a big advantage goes to Linux here.
You can read many articles and eBooks about which OS is the best or why it's no.1 in the comparison to others telling why the one sux and other not but i think that it depends on the user it self to decide about that regarding his expirience and his own needs.
Last edited by Greedy; 20th May 2009 at 01:56 PM.
im broke but no broken, cold but not frozen // lost but not forgotten, b!tch ill crack your skull open - terrorize your whole clique, make you suck on your own tits // i spit the cancer out, grab a glock, call me sir Manson-a-lot
first of I'd like to point that KDE and GNOME are Desktop environements and not GUIs
linux distros are the strenght of linux IMHO, as they allow pretty much ~ everyone, in case they need to to make their own distro suited for their needs, witch is ussualy not needed since pretty much they are already distros for pretty much every need
Linux Distros are always free the non free part comes from proprietary code/stuff inside it ex (lindows it's icons and sounds aren't open source as-well as some of their programs) and ussualy server linux distros cost money for the technical support the companies allow, you pay more for a service than for the distro itself but of course proprietary tools cost money as-well
There is no best in general just the best for a purpose witch basically comes to the best for a user
Ignore This:
Greedy, next time you copy and paste something off the internet, make sure you state your source...
Anyway, paying for editions of Linux is stupid. It should remain free and open-source for people who would like to try something other than Windows.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
