[QUOTE=Panda X;25662757]Essentially what happened to Vista being an overhaul.[/QUOTE]
Well, essentially Windows 7 is apart of that overhaul of the OS. With some of the backwards compatibility with other applications, and stability issues.. and less RAM whoring.
I know Vista (longhorn lol) was a major overhaul of the operating system, and featured many great innovations that XP was lacking on. However, it was buggy.. unstable and didn't play ball nicely with many corporations. Early adopters were severely hit with it too.
8 would be interesting. Perhaps, another XP, or maybe something that would snuff out this disgusting apple fire.
[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;25665149]8 would be interesting. Perhaps, another XP, or maybe something that would snuff out this disgusting apple fire.[/QUOTE]
Why people don't realize that even through they are not going to ever use the competitors products, monopoly of their favorite brand is the worst what can happen to them? Microsoft did jack shit for the nearly 7 years XP were going, except for necessary patches. Now they launched 2 versions in 3 years.
If there were no competition for Microsoft (there isn't much, anyway), Microsoft might just do jack shit, and only care enough to make the every next OS at least apparently better than the previous, which isn't really too much of an achievement. If there was a balanced competition like is between AMD and Intel, Microsoft would actually have to develop shit to sell a single copy, and Windows themselves would have been better.
[QUOTE=johan_sm;25657286]I'd rather use windows. I can have all the same fancy useless apps that ubuntu and osx has by downloading a program or two[/QUOTE]
I'd use Windows as my everyday OS if it was repository-based like most modern *nixes are. There's nothing better than typing in pacman -Syu and getting all of your software (both userland and kernel binary) updated automagically.
[QUOTE=johan_sm;25665111]You have default beaver avatar, your argument is invalid[/QUOTE]
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem[/url]
Educate yourself.
[QUOTE=mrcsb;25665519][url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem[/url]
Educate yourself.[/QUOTE]
So you confirm that you like beaver?
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;25663057]nt is on version 7 :eng101:[/QUOTE]
nt is on version 6.1 :eng101:
[QUOTE=mrcsb;25664295]LOL, Ubuntu ripped off those features from the iPhone.
I challenge anyone here to name one end-user feature that Linux has innovated, ever.
e: Thanks for rating me Dumb, Ibby, instead of attempting to complete my challenge. You have merely proved my point! :)[/QUOTE]
[list]
[*]Security
[*]Stability
[*]User Customization
[*]Portability
[/list]
The list goes on and on.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;25665350]Why people don't realize that even through they are not going to ever use the competitors products, monopoly of their favorite brand is the worst what can happen to them? Microsoft did jack shit for the nearly 7 years XP were going, except for necessary patches. Now they launched 2 versions in 3 years.
If there were no competition for Microsoft (there isn't much, anyway), Microsoft might just do jack shit, and only care enough to make the every next OS at least apparently better than the previous, which isn't really too much of an achievement. If there was a balanced competition like is between AMD and Intel, Microsoft would actually have to develop shit to sell a single copy, and Windows themselves would have been better.[/QUOTE]
Jack shit? Longhorn/Vista was their busiest project. And just because it took them twice as long doesn't mean anything. And 2 releases in 3 years? I'm sorry but Microsoft has always done this in 3 years or less. Vista technically only took two as it technically started August 19th, 2004 and ended in November of 2006.
[QUOTE=mrcsb;25664295]LOL, Ubuntu ripped off those features from the iPhone.
I challenge anyone here to name one end-user feature that Linux has innovated, ever.
e: Thanks for rating me Dumb, Ibby, instead of attempting to complete my challenge. You have merely proved my point! :)[/QUOTE]
Original Apt-Get architecture arrived late 1999 early 2000.
First Iphone came out in late 2006 early 2007.
If you want to get really picky, a mainstream GUI for apt-get and technically RPM packages too was introduced in 2004ish in the form of Synaptic Package Manager..
Go home. And take your shitty trolling with you.
[QUOTE=Panda X;25667503]Jack shit? Longhorn/Vista was their busiest project. And just because it took them twice as long doesn't mean anything. And 2 releases in 3 years? I'm sorry but Microsoft has always done this in 3 years or less. Vista technically only took two as it technically started August 19th, 2004 and ended in November of 2006.[/QUOTE]
You didn't get what I said at all.
Microsoft didn't do jack shit through the 7 years XP was running (or ok, didn't do jack shit first 4-5 years, worked last 2 on Longhorn). And 2 releases in 3 years is not few, but shows that shit is actually changing, from time of XP.
[QUOTE=mrcsb;25664295]LOL, Ubuntu ripped off those features from the iPhone.
I challenge anyone here to name one end-user feature that Linux has innovated, ever.
e: Thanks for rating me Dumb, Ibby, instead of attempting to complete my challenge. You have merely proved my point! :)[/QUOTE]
compositing.
[editline]27th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;25665892]nt is on version 6.1 :eng101:[/QUOTE]
ok but it's the 7th major release in the NT line anyway.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;25668347]You didn't get what I said at all.
Microsoft didn't do jack shit through the 7 years XP was running (or ok, didn't do jack shit first 4-5 years, worked last 2 on Longhorn). And 2 releases in 3 years is not few, but shows that shit is actually changing, from time of XP.[/QUOTE]
Longhorn was being worked on in 2001. The same year XP finished. And as I said 2 releases in three years is standard for Microsoft. Hell 2000 to XP took under 2. NT 4 to 2000 took 4 years but NT 4 had 6 service packs which more than made up for the difference in time. 95 to 98 ~3. 98 to ME ~2.
It's not like the Windows devision came to work and told jokes by the watercooler until 2003 and wrote Longhorn in a week.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;25665350]Why people don't realize that even through they are not going to ever use the competitors products, monopoly of their favorite brand is the worst what can happen to them? Microsoft did jack shit for the nearly 7 years XP were going, except for necessary patches. Now they launched 2 versions in 3 years.
If there were no competition for Microsoft (there isn't much, anyway), Microsoft might just do jack shit, and only care enough to make the every next OS at least apparently better than the previous, which isn't really too much of an achievement. If there was a balanced competition like is between AMD and Intel, Microsoft would actually have to develop shit to sell a single copy, and Windows themselves would have been better.[/QUOTE]
Technology is easy to invent and push forward. All you need is the skill, idea and determination.
The 7 years since XP was released, microsoft did shit? :laffo:
Lets see, XP was released in 2002. Vista was released in 2007 (5 years). During the 5 years since XP to Vista, Microsoft was reconstructing the operating system from the ground up. Therefor the bountiful compatibility issues.
Microsoft typically released a new operating system every 1, 1½years since the release of Windows 3.0.
Windows 3.2 was released in 94, Win 95 was released, take a guess. Did you guess 1995? You're right! It was!
Windows 98 was surprisingly released in 98, it was about a 2 ½ year wait. Since 95 was released in late Q3/Early Q4 of 95, 98 was released in Q2 of 98. Windows ME and 2000 were released in 2000.
Windows NT was released about once every year till about 96.. where NT4.0 went on a hiatus and Win2k was released (NTFS introduced to the mainstream consumer market, huge driver issues.. but NT (New Technology, which is just as old as Win3) was primarely a server platform till W2k.
So, did you learn something? Great, because you obviously didn't put any education to your unfounded, poorly constructed statement.
[editline]Awesomecake looks at transvestite pornography, and enjoys fapping to cp[/editline]
Actually, upon further research.. XP was released in Q3 of 2001. OOPS! But Vista was released in Q1 of 2007.
So we put a gap in there of 5fy 1q.
[editline]26th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;25665892]nt is on version 6.1 :eng101:[/QUOTE]
Awesome catch :buddy:
[editline]26th October 2010[/editline]
Also, don't forget the other versions of windows that were released in the proper timeframes.
Like windows CE, (Embedded) or Windows Mobile. Which surprisingly, do differ from their counterparts.
[editline]26th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;25668391]
ok but it's the 7th major release in the NT line anyway.[/QUOTE]
No. Windows 7 just marks the 7th major release of the mainstream windows.
There is many "major" releases of NT. Hell, you can even count SP's for NT4 being a "major release".
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;25668391]compositing.
[editline]27th October 2010[/editline]
ok but it's the 7th major release in the NT line anyway.[/QUOTE]
2000 was nt 5.0, and XP was 5.1.
[QUOTE=Foda;25654030]i don't like how they add like 3 new features then charge 150$ for it.[/QUOTE]
Count 2, because the App Store for Mac OSX 10.6 will be out in < 90 days.
[editline]27th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=Panda X;25668622]Longhorn was being worked on in 2001. The same year XP finished. And as I said 2 releases in three years is standard for Microsoft. Hell 2000 to XP took under 2. NT 4 to 2000 took 4 years but NT 4 had 6 service packs which more than made up for the difference in time. 95 to 98 ~3. 98 to ME ~2.
It's not like the Windows devision came to work and told jokes by the watercooler until 2003 and wrote Longhorn in a week.[/QUOTE]
To be honest, Longhorn looked better than Vista. I think Microsoft just scrapped it because people didn't have high-end graphics cards (For example, Dell Latitudes)
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;25669644]2000 was nt 5.0, and XP was 5.1.[/QUOTE]
yes I am well aware.
[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;25669005]No. Windows 7 just marks the 7th major release of the mainstream windows. [/QUOTE]
3.1, 3.5, 4.0, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 are what I would call the major releases in the NT line
3.1, 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 are mainstream releases in Windows, leaving W7 at number 8
Just in case you didn't know, 8 is more than 7
[QUOTE=toaster468;25667494]
[list]
[*]Security
[*]Stability
[*]User Customization
[*]Portability
[/list]
The list goes on and on.[/QUOTE]
HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA
Linux did not invent those; those are just traits of linux
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;25669751]yes I am well aware.
3.1, 3.5, 4.0, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 are what I would call the major releases in the NT line
3.1, 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, Vista, 7 are mainstream releases in Windows, leaving W7 at number 8
Just in case you didn't know, 8 is more than 7[/QUOTE]
You forgot 3.0, 3.1, 3.2x. All count as "major releases" as well.
I would say either ME or 2k were excluded. 2k was still aimed at early adopters of NTFS, and was still.. very NT4.0 like.
[editline]26th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=toaster468;25667494][list]
[*]Security
[*]Stability
[*]User Customization
[*]Portability
[/list]
The list goes on and on.[/QUOTE]
No.
[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;25669846]
No.[/QUOTE]
I don't think Linus invented Portability for Operating Systems, but that could just be me.
For that challange that there is no "unique" environment for Linux...
Try X window managers.. theres a considerable amount there. From Gnome and KDE derivatives, to KDE.. even BB/FB.
[editline]26th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sinclair;25669900]I don't think Linus invented Portability for Operating Systems, but that could just be me.[/QUOTE]
He didnt. It just came along the road seeing that Linus designed a platform to be purely open. But modern "linux" distros are hardly what Linux was brought up from. They're pretty much just GNU-Linux hybrids.
Linux today is hardly Linux at all, it's just the GNU operating system.
[QUOTE=ButtsexV2;25669983]Linux today is hardly Linux at all, it's just the GNU operating system.[/QUOTE]
To me, it's just a free Operating System that's been seeded so many times, that it takes a second to download over BitTorrent. And, it's free as in Free Beer :cheers:
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;25663275][img_thumb]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0e/Wb_20.png[/img_thumb]
AmigaOS 2.0 (1991) :frog:[/QUOTE]
[img]http://images.appleinsider.com/leopard-preview-desktop-3.jpg[/img]
Xerox Alto (1973) This was what started it all, this invented the Mouse and Desktop, and Apple stole it (1979), then Microsoft (1982-1984, from the Macintosh by Apple).
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;25670142][img_thumb]http://images.appleinsider.com/leopard-preview-desktop-3.jpg[/img_thumb]
Xerox Alto (1973) This was what started it all, this invented the Mouse and Desktop, and Apple stole it (1979), then Microsoft (1982-1984, from the Macintosh by Apple).[/QUOTE]
None of them stole it... they improved it.
[QUOTE=Sinclair;25670101]To me, it's just a free Operating System that's been seeded so many times, that it takes a second to download over BitTorrent. And, it's free as in Free Beer :cheers:[/QUOTE]
And this is why I do not consider Ubuntu, Linux. It is so dumbed down it isn't funny
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;25663275][img_thumb]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0e/Wb_20.png[/img_thumb]
AmigaOS 2.0 (1991) :frog:[/QUOTE]
Good god! That looks better than Snow Leopard! It even has a paint program!
[editline]27th October 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=JohnEdwards;25670190]And this is why I do not consider Ubuntu, Linux. It is so dumbed down it isn't funny[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that's correct. I like Arch because it's so much cooler and has a very light footprint on my hard drive.
[QUOTE=Sinclair;25670234]
[editline]27th October 2010[/editline]
Yeah, that's correct. I like Arch because [B]it's so much cooler[/B] and has a very light footprint on my hard drive.[/QUOTE]
:smithicide:
[QUOTE=ForTehWolf...2!;25670471]:smithicide:[/QUOTE]
It looks cool to me. Do you even know how to install it correctly? If you do, you get a awesome, lightweight version of Linux.
I love it.
[QUOTE=Sinclair;25670548]It looks cool to me. Do you even know how to install it correctly? If you do, you get a awesome, lightweight version of Linux.
I love it.[/QUOTE]
He isn't giving that emote because of installing it, he is doing that because people will change distros just for the "look" not the actual OS and how it handles programs and such
[QUOTE=JohnEdwards;25670639]He isn't giving that emote because of installing it, he is doing that because people will change distros just for the "look" not the actual OS and how it handles programs and such[/QUOTE]
I don't change Distros, I just came across Arch and thought it looked pretty cool so I installed it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
