Favorite OS?

[Mhurron]

Re: Favorite OS?

why would you spend triple-quadruple that price for a Windows PC that does the same thing?

Because it doesn't.

Little OS fanbois forget one thing. No one buys a computer because of the OS on it. People don't care that they run Windows. They buy a computer that runs their apps. That makes the following order of usefulness:

1. Windows
2. Mac OS X
3. Everything else.

Between Office, Quickbooks, Tax software and games, that isn't going to change any time soon.

but do they allow themselves to be deactivated *Without* Vista?

It only 'requires' Vista because drivers do not exist for any other OS, meaning the device does absolutely nothing anyway.

A little thinking goes a long way.

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

And I remember when a complete Linux distro came on a dozen floppies, not a dozen CD's, hell I remember before distros at all. A linux kernel used to be able to be compiled with every option turned on and fit on a floppy with space left for a boot loader. When Mac System 6 fit on a floppy. When computers didn't have hard drives because they cost thousands of dollars. Stuff gets bigger because it does a shitload more, Windows apps getting bigger is one of the dumbest arguments that exist.

And I've seen linux distros still getting down into the 20-40MB range. I'm not talking about growth in computers though, that's natural, I'm talking about the program being filled with junk for the sake of being filled with junk. See http://web.archive.org/web/200108022...faq/bloat.html

Now that was written back in 99, but the fact that it's bloated so much is still relevant, since that seems to be all MS has done with Vista. Unless you can come up with a good reason for "There were humungoid bitmaps never used. There were dozens of icons never referenced. There were tens of kilobytes of entries in the string table that had no meaning for the application whatsoever." being part of an application...

Oh, and a modern, user friendly distro won't install and run on much less then a P2, at least, not if you don't want to learn how to do things outside of a poorly written GUI (GNOME).

Nonsense.
http://www.delilinux.org/wiki/doku.p...ses:deli-0.7.2
http://www.puppylinux.org/wikka/MinReq

They might not be as friendly as Ubuntu or Mint or something like that, but I've tried out a couple LiveCDs and they're not hard to use at all. Now, the more technical side might be less user friendly than others, yes, but at the same time, if people were focusing on making computers efficient instead of having the latest and greatest, that would be a non-issue.

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

You can actually disable the TCP Module in the Device Manager (Windows Vista PCs), but you'd also lose the ability to play content that requires it. That would be very interesting if a driver or a hardware component stops functioning due to you not having the TCPM running.

Well that's good at least... but do they allow themselves to be deactivated *Without* Vista?

Maybe they had it in with those snooty Hard Drive Corporations and got kickbacks!

Replace "Snooty hard drive corporations" with "Intel" and we're probably more on the right track.

Also keep in mind that MS can't allow computers to become cheaper than their OS.

Imagine, even if a manufacturer is only charged 80$ for a 160$ copy of windows (which is what it seems to be now, with Dell selling Ubuntu PCs), how much would PC prices be able to plummet if companies were selling PCs for what people *need* instead of what Windows requires?

Think about it, if you can buy a PC running linux for 50-100$ (which quite a few companies on working on making laptop prices, remember) that does everything you NEED, why would you spend triple-quadruple that price for a Windows PC that does the same thing?

Honestly, that's the biggest problem I see with OS right now- people keep going with the latest and greatest not because they can, but because they feel it's required (and with the way MS forces people to update, in some ways, it is)

Really though, look at the system requirements for DSL, Puppy, or DeLi linux. They're perfectly usable OS for what most people do with their computers. They could run well on a Pentium II, let alone a 486 (which is DeLi's testing platform, don't quote me on that, I'd have to check again)

Honestly, other than games and youtube, I can do everything I use this computer for on my seven year old iMac. I see no good reason why the average computer user nowadays should use Vista over Windows 95, excepting of course the fact that Windows 95 is incredibly insecure.

Now I will admit that I run Ubuntu, and it is at least as demanding as XP (Moreso in RAM, not sure about processor or graphical power), but I would never allow my OS to determine what I buy for my computer. If Ubuntu were to grow to the point that my computer couldn't handle it, I would almost certainly switch to another distro, not upgrade my computer.

[Mhurron]

Re: Favorite OS?

they talk about a microsoft application that should've been about 45KB that was made to take up 1MB.

And I remember when a complete Linux distro came on a dozen floppies, not a dozen CD's, hell I remember before distros at all. A linux kernel used to be able to be compiled with every option turned on and fit on a floppy with space left for a boot loader. When Mac System 6 fit on a floppy. When computers didn't have hard drives because they cost thousands of dollars.

Stuff gets bigger because it does a shitload more, Windows apps getting bigger is one of the dumbest arguments that exist. When it costs $1 or less for a GB of disk space and processors got faster then 99% of people need 5 years ago there is no reason to take a whole lot of time optimizing and shrinking compiled code.

Oh, and a modern, user friendly distro won't install and run on much less then a P2, at least, not if you don't want to learn how to do things outside of a poorly written GUI (GNOME).

[Moaku Hyena]

Re: Favorite OS?

oh, so it's not a matter of the OS wanting better picture quality, it's just "Trusted" computing. honestly I hate the entire concept.

If the day comes where you can't buy a computer here without them, I will probably buy my PCs from Russia or China.

Then again, even now there's little reason why I can't use a 486 as my main computer. It might not look as pretty, or be as fast, but it can do 96% of the things I want it to do- so I imagine even older computers won't a huge problem keeping up in the future either.

You can actually disable the TCP Module in the Device Manager (Windows Vista PCs), but you'd also lose the ability to play content that requires it. That would be very interesting if a driver or a hardware component stops functioning due to you not having the TCPM running.

Now don't get me started on Tilt Bits and the constant pinging of your CPU.

If you read those links I posted, they talk about a microsoft application that should've been about 45KB that was made to take up 1MB. Gee, I wonder why MS would intentionally make their products take more space and power to run than they need to.

Maybe they had it in with those snooty Hard Drive Corporations and got kickbacks! Actually, I don't know. >.>

[Murphie]

Re: Favorite OS?

I remember installing Windows on my 486 at some point in my teen years. But it took up my entire hard drive (nearly), so I had to go back to DOS.

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

oh, so it's not a matter of the OS wanting better picture quality, it's just "Trusted" computing. honestly I hate the entire concept.

If the day comes where you can't buy a computer here without them, I will probably buy my PCs from Russia or China.

Then again, even now there's little reason why I can't use a 486 as my main computer. It might not look as pretty, or be as fast, but it can do 96% of the things I want it to do- so I imagine even older computers won't a huge problem keeping up in the future either.

If you read those links I posted, they talk about a microsoft application that should've been about 45KB that was made to take up 1MB. Gee, I wonder why MS would intentionally make their products take more space and power to run than they need to.

Most people don't know that computers existed before Windows 95 or that there are other OS's then Windows or the MacOS.

To be fair, I think most people know that computers existed, they just thought they were only for universities, businesses, and nerds.

[Mhurron]

Re: Favorite OS?

I'm suprised the older OSs aren't mentioned here

Most people don't know that computers existed before Windows 95 or that there are other OS's then Windows or the MacOS.

[Moaku Hyena]

Re: Favorite OS?

Yep, but those drivers usually work fine. The big problem with drivers is just a lack of support from manufacturers, but that's constantly improving. Linux's driver constraints are definitely less of a hassle than, say, Vista. I mean, I've seen MONITORS marketed as being "Vista Compatible"... what the heck does a monitor need to do to keep up with an OS!?

Okay, that's an easy answer. Windows Vista is all about hardware DRM using TCPM (Trusted Computing Module) for managing playback of HD Content. Everything, even the frickin' MOUSE must have the little chip inside or else Vista will degrade the quality of the picture to 480p or won't even play the HD content at all (You'll get a message saying the hardware is not DHCP Compliant).

That being said, that "Vista Compatible" monitor will have the required TCPM chip so it can display HD Content--provided that everything else has the chip as well. If ANYTHING that's hardware is labeled Vista Compatible, that chip's there.

Just jot that down as one more reason not to like Vista.

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

ME-tan is cuter.

I don't consider Mac OS before OSX very relevant- I used an old old old mac back in grade school, but it was so incredibly different.

[Akashimo]

Re: Favorite OS?

Voted Win2k just because of 2k-tan, that and the fact it was my primary OS before I gotten XP, though 2k gave me less trouble than XP with being so possive with IE(for when I HAVE to use it), and installing drivers.

I'm suprised the older OSs aren't mentioned here, like OS/2 Warp 3, PC DOS and Windows NT 4.0. All of which were good and stable at their prime, though I haven't really gotten a chance to tinker around using DOS =x

Linux, I've tried Mandrake and Red Hat. Even set it up to be my back up OS when incase I messed up my registery in Windows, gotta admit, love Linux's interface on all versions I tried.

Mac OS, I remember using primary during middle school(old Apple 2 computer version for typing class >_> what a waste of good computers), and OSX in sophmore year for Video Productions. iMovie & Garage Band > Windows Movie Maker.

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

http://www.vcnet.com/bms/departments/innovation.shtml

I enjoyed reading this.

http://www.vcnet.com/bms/departments/dirtytricks.shtml
http://www.kmfms.com/whatsbad.html
http://www.openaddict.com/microsofts...ringement.html
http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/ The infamous "Halloween Documents"

'Course, it doesn't make the OS itself any worse, just interesting stuff to read.

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

Nope, Virtual Box is free (As in beer, at least. I don't think it's free as in speech)

http://www.virtualbox.org/

[Moaku Hyena]

Re: Favorite OS?

Moaku, have you tried virtual box?

Ran great for me in Ubuntu... but I go so fed up with dealing with Windows I tossed it out the window... well, I deleted it, anyway.

No, does it cost anything?
And how would I get it? Though I do like Linux and got through, I'm still kinda learning it myself being so damn used to Windows (Still count as a general user, ya know).

[Feba]

Re: Favorite OS?

Moaku, have you tried virtual box?

Ran great for me in Ubuntu... but I go so fed up with dealing with Windows I tossed it out the window... well, I deleted it, anyway.