[QUOTE=Cheesedragon;41707759]This so much. The main reason i haven't "upgraded" from XP is because Micro$oft hasn't made an operating system that actually [B]works[/B] better, and also isn't a blatant "oh look it's shiny and glossy buy it" cash-grab while we're at it.[/QUOTE]
Uhhh...Windows Vista, 7 [B]and[/B] 8 all work better than XP. They offer a lot of improvements incrementally, or a fucktonne if you just skip Vista (and 7 if you would like to). Define "works better"? Because there are a ton of things that "work better" than XP today.
Please, post some reasons XP "works better" than Vista (SP2 preferred), 7 or 8. If you post "RAM usage" you lose.
My old high school has computers that came pre-installed with Windows 7, and you could tell because of the stickers on them.
They replaced it with Windows XP.
Windows 8 is way too glossy and flat everywhere, and going through the start screen is a pain in the ass.
I have to click through like 5 things just to shut the computer down.
Windows 7 is pretty cool though.
[QUOTE=Quark:;41708805]You're acting like Vista, 7 and 8 are immune from security issues.[/QUOTE]
No I'm not.
The reason Vista and onward aren't security nightmares today isn't because they have no holes (I imagine they have about the same number of holes each), but because Microsoft is actually updating and patching these OSes. Thus, less holes are "known" to the dark parts of the Internet at a time as compared to Win XP.
[quote]I've never had a security issue [b]that I know of[/b] on XP because I know how to use my computer properly.[/quote]
Fixed that for you. And even if by some miracle you haven't been hit yet? Believe me. You will.
If you really don't want to pay for a newer Windows OS, get Linux; 100% free, just as good at almost anything, has less resource overhead, and unless you're dumb enough to run root as your regular user, safer.
[QUOTE=zakedodead;41712307]Windows 8 is way too glossy and flat everywhere, and going through the start screen is a pain in the ass.
I have to click through like 5 things just to shut the computer down.
Windows 7 is pretty cool though.[/QUOTE]
how is it glossy AND flat
make your mind up
[QUOTE=lavacano;41712541]No I'm not.
The reason Vista and onward aren't security nightmares today isn't because they have no holes (I imagine they have about the same number of holes each), but because Microsoft is actually updating and patching these OSes. Thus, less holes are "known" to the dark parts of the Internet at a time as compared to Win XP.
Fixed that for you. And even if by some miracle you haven't been hit yet? Believe me. You will.
If you really don't want to pay for a newer Windows OS, get Linux; 100% free, just as good at almost anything, has less resource overhead, and unless you're dumb enough to run root as your regular user, safer.[/QUOTE]
And don't forget Internet Explorer. :v:
[img]http://puu.sh/3TMEX/e6bce0280b.jpg[/img]
Off topic, but...
[IMG]http://puu.sh/3TTxQ/c0e3e85f56.png[/IMG]
Dafuq? You heve done 1 of 2 things:
-You have seen sense and changed your browser and not your avatar
-Someone joke changed your avatar
Enlighten me, please
[QUOTE=zakedodead;41712307]Windows 8 is way too glossy and flat everywhere, and going through the start screen is a pain in the ass.
I have to click through like 5 things just to shut the computer down.
Windows 7 is pretty cool though.[/QUOTE]
Windows 7 is actually more glossier than Win 8. You are right about Win 8 being flat though.
Also you can just ALT+F4 on the desktop, only takes about 5 seconds.
[QUOTE=RockmanYoshi;41714626]Windows 7 is actually more glossier than Win 8. You are right about Win 8 being flat though.
Also you can just ALT+F4 on the desktop, only takes about 5 seconds.[/QUOTE]
Keycombos are kind of moot though since most people aren't going to know them and aren't going to find out. Shutting down in W8 through the UI is kind of a chore
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41699169]While the install consumes ~20GB, Vista isn't all that bad as most modern computer hard drives are 250GB or more.
I've not noticed any issues with RAM/CPU consumption on my laptop (which is an Intel Atom with 2GB of RAM)[/QUOTE]
There's no excuse for it taking up 20 GB for a default install. You can get more features in a fraction of the space on Linux or XP. And just because huge drives exist, doesn't mean you should accept the OS taking up a disproportionate amount of that space.
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41699169]Nope. You're just a part of the Vista hate bandwagon.[/QUOTE]
It's based on real world experience, I don't know where you're getting this hate bandwagon from.
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41699169]No, it doesn't. It took me just under an hour to install all the required drivers for my laptop, a laptop which has never even supported vista. You're over exaggerating. The updates don't take [I]that[/I] long to install unless you're on dial-up.[/QUOTE]
You try installing Vista, then install both service packs, then install the updates from WU about 7-8 times (because some updates depend on other updates to be able to install.) This alone takes [I]hours[/I]. You aren't factoring this in, nor are you factoring in that not all machines have readily available lists of compatible drivers to install. WU drivers don't count because they're almost always years outdated and can make things break.
Windows 8 automatically detected my HP printer on my network and installed the drivers for it by itself which I admit is pretty awesome.
[QUOTE=Rika-chan;41717088]Windows 8 automatically detected my HP printer on my network and installed the drivers for it by itself which I admit is pretty awesome.[/QUOTE]
It also did the same for my 5 year old Dell printer that [I]wasn't even on at the time.[/I]
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;41716827]You try installing Vista, then install both service packs, then install the updates from WU about 7-8 times (because some updates depend on other updates to be able to install.) This alone takes [I]hours[/I]. You aren't factoring this in, nor are you factoring in that not all machines have readily available lists of compatible drivers to install. WU drivers don't count because they're almost always years outdated and can make things break.[/QUOTE]
I remember XP being the same way.
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;41716827]There's no excuse for it taking up 20 GB for a default install. You can get more features in a fraction of the space on Linux or XP. And just because huge drives exist, doesn't mean you should accept the OS taking up a disproportionate amount of that space.
[/QUOTE]
Windows 7 and 8 take up a "disproportionate amount of space"
I recently installed Windows 7 on my desktop PC and it was about 15-20GB of my hard disk.
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;41716827]
It's based on real world experience, I don't know where you're getting this hate bandwagon from.
[/QUOTE]
People are hating it for no reason.
[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;41716827]
You try installing Vista, then install both service packs, then install the updates from WU about 7-8 times (because some updates depend on other updates to be able to install.) This alone takes [I]hours[/I]. You aren't factoring this in, nor are you factoring in that not all machines have readily available lists of compatible drivers to install. WU drivers don't count because they're almost always years outdated and can make things break.[/QUOTE]
I have. Everything works perfectly fine. (FYI, I've installed it on a laptop that came preinstalled with 7 and doesn't have any official drivers for Vista, and FYI the reason I have used [I]that much[/I] hard disk space is because of the software I've installed on it)
Please try backing up your pointless claims before trying to argue with me.
[t]http://puu.sh/3UfPv/bd01c6f291.jpg[/t]
And also, that windows 7 install is completely fresh, no windows updates.
[QUOTE=Forumaster;41717788]It also did the same for my 5 year old Dell printer that [I]wasn't even on at the time.[/I][/QUOTE]
Golden rule - if it's plugged in, it might as well be on. :eng101:
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41712902]And don't forget Internet Explorer. :v:
[img]http://puu.sh/3TMEX/e6bce0280b.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
I'm taking that Lavacano just uses a user-agent spoofer? Or is this some sort of 'IE' clone for Linux?
[QUOTE=benbb;41721027]I'm taking that Lavacano just uses a user-agent spoofer? Or is this some sort of 'IE' clone for Linux?[/QUOTE]
More or less the latter, probably a fork of IE compatible with Linux.
[QUOTE=RockmanYoshi;41722519]More or less the latter, probably a fork of IE compatible with Linux.[/QUOTE]
Who would [I]willingly[/I] use IE on anything?
[editline]5th August 2013[/editline]
Let alone [I]install[/I] it
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41722608]Who would [I]willingly[/I] use IE on anything?
[editline]5th August 2013[/editline]
Let alone [I]install[/I] it[/QUOTE]
I was gonna post from a standalone IE 6 but it crashed trying to get on FP.
[QUOTE=Durrsly;41725323]I was gonna post from a standalone IE 6 but it crashed trying to get on FP.[/QUOTE]
Only JUST managed to get it working on IE6... Holy crap, this reminds me of the table bbcode glitch in the GDi when it existed.
[img]http://puu.sh/3UGyE/147cdfd5c8.png[/img]
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41726286]Only JUST managed to get it working on IE6... Holy crap, this reminds me of the table bbcode glitch in the GDi when it existed.
[img]http://puu.sh/3UGyE/147cdfd5c8.png[/img][/QUOTE]
Cloudflare and/or Garry won't even let IE 1-5 access it.
What about firefox version 1 :v:
[QUOTE=Mors Quaedam;41731955]What about firefox version 1 :v:[/QUOTE]
[img]http://screencloud.net//img/screenshots/6f95c049cd044170f06f811cf59eb04c.png[/img]
[img]http://screencloud.net//img/screenshots/cc9625135fd397f3b21b94643120eb1b.png[/img]
Apart from the GTK theme, fonts and a few javascript issues, seems all right to me! (Not Firefox version 1, Firefox version 0.8!)
[QUOTE=gk99;41668434][img]http://puu.sh/3QLlv.jpg[/img]
250 million signed into SkyDrive, eh?
[url=http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1295061]Not anymore they're not.[/url]
[editline]31st July 2013[/editline]
Windows 98 to XP? Subtle. XP to Vista? Subtle. Vista to 7? Subtle.
7 to 8? Fuck no.[/QUOTE]
Literally the only thing that has changed is the start menu. And I don't see the big fuss. Instead of clicking start, hovering over Programs, hovering over the shortcut to the directory I'm looking for and then clicking on the program, I simply push the Windows Key and then click the program I want.
It's nothing but whining about something that has become more efficient. I've cleaned out all the shit tiles I don't want on my start menu and organized things into categories and it's much easier to use than the standard start.
[QUOTE=Sungrazer;41773195]Literally the only thing that has changed is the start menu. And I don't see the big fuss. Instead of clicking start, hovering over Programs, hovering over the shortcut to the directory I'm looking for and then clicking on the program, I simply push the Windows Key and then click the program I want.
It's nothing but whining about something that has become more efficient. I've cleaned out all the shit tiles I don't want on my start menu and organized things into categories and it's much easier to use than the standard start.[/QUOTE]
I love the tiles. My desktop is still relatively clean, and usually by now it's a cluttered mess because I hated navigating through bullshit to get to files and whatnot, but I've had no issue getting to what I needed. It's literally as easy as just arranging the tiles how you want, just like you would the desktop anyway. The updated information that shows on them is a nice bonus, I can see headlines, activity on facebook or whatever just by pushing the windows button.
Different strokes for different folks, some people may not like Windows 8, that's cool, I'm not bothered, but people just flat out saying it is the worst thing are really being over-dramatic. If you don't have a touch-enabled computer, yeah I guess it may be a bit of a hurdle, but it's fantastic [B]in my opinion.[/B]
[QUOTE=Bentham;41773431]I love the tiles. My desktop is still relatively clean, and usually by now it's a cluttered mess because I hated navigating through bullshit to get to files and whatnot, but I've had no issue getting to what I needed. It's literally as easy as just arranging the tiles how you want, just like you would the desktop anyway. The updated information that shows on them is a nice bonus, I can see headlines, activity on facebook or whatever just by pushing the windows button.
Different strokes for different folks, some people may not like Windows 8, that's cool, I'm not bothered, but people just flat out saying it is the worst thing are really being over-dramatic. If you don't have a touch-enabled computer, yeah I guess it may be a bit of a hurdle, but it's fantastic [B]in my opinion.[/B][/QUOTE]
I don't have an issue with 8, as I used it for several months, but I downgraded to 7 now. Windows 8 still has improvements to be made. Start8 doesn't solve everything :v:
I don't get why people wont upgrade to Windows 7 or 8. The only reason to use XP these days is if you work in a business which requires hardware/software which hasn't been updated for modern OSs.
Using a PCI card with software only available for XP to measure water purity or some shit, fine keep XP. Using a home computer with 512MB of RAM, a RADEON 9800, and a Pentium 3, maybe it's time to leave 2003 and join the rest of us.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;41774443]I don't get why people wont upgrade to Windows 7 or 8. The only reason to use XP these days is if you work in a business which requires hardware/software which hasn't been updated for modern OSs.
Using a PCI card with software only available for XP to measure water purity or some shit, fine keep XP. Using a home computer with 512MB of RAM, a RADEON 9800, and a Pentium 3, maybe it's time to leave 2003 and join the rest of us.[/QUOTE]
I heard some Intel atom notebooks can't upgrade to windows 7 either.
[sp]Intel atom. major cringe.[/sp]
I have 7 and XP dual booted on my laptop, the only reason i have XP on it is due to program compatibility. I have to use Microsoft virtual server and it only runs on XP and Vista. We all know XP is better than Vista, the only downside is the lack of support.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;41774443]maybe it's time to leave 2003 and join the rest of us.[/QUOTE]
And "the rest of us" cares because?
I also use a spoon or fork to stir things in the kitchen. Not because I have anything against electric hand mixers, but because I like the rhythmic experience.
Does "the rest of us" care about that?
Should it?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.