Windows Vista

[KC9ECI]

I am truly getting tired of Windows Vista. #I looked at the System Stability chart and was annoyed to see that this system has suffered near daily failures. #I took a screenshot and posted it and a comment at digg.com

http://digg.com/microsoft/Windows_Vista_Most_Unstable_OS_Ever/

[G0GQK]

I've read a number of reports about Vista and nobody is satisfied with it. Why would they put it on the market knowing it can cause huge problems for their customers ?

G0GQK

[W8EFA]

Think there may be an issue with buying a compete PC with Monitor and OS for less than $400.00 new? Think it could be the system or the apps on such a crappy PC?? You get what you pay for.

In fact looking at your report none seem to be OS crashes, all Application problems.

[K9STH]

Vista may be bad, but NOTHING can compare with IBM's OS-2 for being the worst operating system ever devised for mass distribution.

OS-2 was so bad that you had to pay someone to even dispose of brand new, unopened, installation packages!

Glen, K9STH

[KC9ECI]

The application that keeps crashing is Explorer.exe. Not to be mistaken for IE7. The price of the system isn't important. When I purchase a product new in the box, be it from Best Buy, Circuit City, (Insert your favorite store here), I should be able to expect it to work properly.

[WF7A]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 02 2007,08:22)]The application that keeps crashing is Explorer.exe. Not to be mistaken for IE7. The price of the system isn't important. When I purchase a product new in the box, be it from Best Buy, Circuit City, (Insert your favorite store here), I should be able to expect it to work properly.
You're right, Tom, and JonnyNapalm--who on Digg commented about your plight--is a real nematode.

I don't know about you guys but the System Stability chart looks awfully similar to my 401k's performance. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

I mentioned this elsewhere before, but when users buy a new computer and start offloading or adding programs left and right--and without restarting between a few of those actions--the Registry gets all messed up...which I suspect is the culprit here.

I know it's a _real_ pain, but maybe your best bet is to wipe the drive, reinstall the system software using the provided CD (or the virtual restore drive on your hard disc--I don't know how e-Machines are set up for that), run all the Windows updates, _then_ start deleting programs a few at a time, restarting, then rinse...lather...repeat. Also, do you have a back-up drive? If so, after reinstalling Vista and downloading its updates, back it up. That way, if you're hosed again at least you won't have to start from absolute zero again.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (W8EFA @ Mar. 02 2007,15:27)]Think there may be an issue with buying a compete PC with Monitor and OS for less than $400.00 new? Think it could be the system or the apps on such a crappy PC?? You get what you pay for.

In fact looking at your report none seem to be OS crashes, all Application problems.
Tell the truth, is your name Steve Ballmer ??

If you look at his hardware list you'll see his hardware is pretty much standard, up to date, and compatable with what most people are running. There is no reason why Vista should be so unstable on such a system. Nor, is there any reason why the "Made for Windows" apps should be so unstable. If he was running very old hardware, or some bleeding edge hardware or unusual hardware I could perhaps see problems. But, unless he is doing something very wrong, or somehow got the system infected with some sort of malware, a standard out of the box system should be that problematic.

Now, it would be interesting to see how it would run under XP compared to Vista. Or, dare I say, how the same machine would run under another OS altogether.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 02 2007,16:22)]The application that keeps crashing is Explorer.exe. Not to be mistaken for IE7. The price of the system isn't important. When I purchase a product new in the box, be it from Best Buy, Circuit City, (Insert your favorite store here), I should be able to expect it to work properly.
Tell the truth. have you loaded up lots of old programs and lots of stuff you downloaded on line ?? If so you probably have a messed up registry as well as a system full of viruses, trojans, spyware, malware and assorted junk. Windows is an extremely tender operating system and is easily corrupted by even the slightest things. Given enough time it will usually corrupt itself.

if you have downloaded a lot of stuff you might consider consider a clean sweep and a full reinstall.

[KC9ECI]

Let's see, Firefox, Thunderbird, ACLog, TrustedQSL, MixW, and UI-View32.

[NC5P]

I'm just enjoying all this. I'm running Fedora Core 5. Now, I did find out Bill Gates owns part of the electric company here. We have blackouts at least once a week. Wonder if there is a connection?

[KC9ECI]

I've got two older computers, one was my XP system the crapped out on me due to a bad drive and one that I rescued from an impending date with the dumpster at work. That one was a power supply issue. I've got both of them running Freespire. The older one has been up since December and the newer one has only been up for 4 days now, but that's just because I turned it on 4 days ago.

Billy Gates is making a mistake. Instead of no longer supporting older versions of Windows, he should just release them to the public. More and more people are getting ahold of older computers and putting various versions of Linux on them. The more they do this, the more comfortable they will get with the Linux OS, and the easier it's going to be to abandon Windows all together. The writing is on the wall...the Wal-Mart that is. They're already selling a computer with Linux pre-installed.

[KA8DKT]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 02 2007,17:32)]I am truly getting tired of Windows Vista. #I looked at the System Stability chart and was annoyed to see that this system has suffered near daily failures. #I took a screenshot and posted it and a comment at digg.com

http://digg.com/microsoft/Windows_Vista_Most_Unstable_OS_Ever/
No wonder. You don't have anywhere near enough RAM. Load it up with 2GB of RAM and then come back to tell us how it is working.

-gary

[ad4mg]

I was thinking the same thing. Any of the post-NT Micro$oft OS's need at least 1 GB to run well. I have 2 GB in all three of my PC's running XP, and 1 GB in the laptops running XP.

Memory is where you get the best bang for the buck!

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (NC5P @ Mar. 02 2007,18:26)]I'm just enjoying all this. I'm running Fedora Core 5. Now, I did find out Bill Gates owns part of the electric company here. We have blackouts at least once a week. Wonder if there is a connection?
I'm running Fedora on 5 computers here at home. One is on Fedora Core 3 is a network server / NAT router running httpd, sendmail, ftp, named, squid, and several other things. Runs 24/7/365 and never a crash or reboot. Only time I take it down is for cleaning and maintenance. Upstairs i got a print server and Desktop running Fedora Core 1, 2 dual boot desktops running Fedora Core 6 and Windows XP, and a dual boot laptop running FC5 and Win XP. They are all solid workhorse machines in the Linux mode running office productivity, entertainment, multimedia, etc and rarely a problem. I've been using Linux since the mid 1990's and I am very satisfied with it.

Now, to solve your problems with blackouts maybe you can convince Gates to sell that electric company to Redhat, or Debian, or SUSE. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[ka5piu]

Hello.

I was given my new replacement for the older laptop.
Just to be a pain, I loaded Vista on several spare harddrives I have.
Each one is the exact same model.
After the 12th or so install, I had to call Microsoft.
Microsoft said that this was the maximum number of times that Vista could be installed.
I pointed out the the system configuration was never changed.
MS is not sure what to do at this point.
Why would I want to do something like this?
ComSec.
As a matter of policy I wipe the drive on a regular basis.

[al2i]

I finally got around my driver issues and I have had Vista running as a customer use computer with almost continuous usage yesterday and today. That is two whole days of Vista against Wasilla's most dangerous computer users. So far, so good.

tick..tick..tick..

[al2i]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Mar. 02 2007,18:10)]Hello.

I was given my new replacement for the older laptop.
Just to be a pain, I loaded Vista on several spare harddrives I have.
Each one is the exact same model.
After the 12th or so install, I had to call Microsoft.
Microsoft said that this was the maximum number of times that Vista could be installed.
I pointed out the the system configuration was never changed.
MS is not sure what to do at this point.
Why would I want to do something like this?
ComSec.
As a matter of policy I wipe the drive on a regular basis.
I just had trouble last night with my very first Vista clone. What did you clone with OM?

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Mar. 02 2007,19:10)]Hello.

I was given my new replacement for the older laptop.
Just to be a pain, I loaded Vista on several spare harddrives I have.
Each one is the exact same model.
After the 12th or so install, I had to call Microsoft.
Microsoft said that this was the maximum number of times that Vista could be installed.
I pointed out the the system configuration was never changed.
MS is not sure what to do at this point.
Why would I want to do something like this?
ComSec.
As a matter of policy I wipe the drive on a regular basis.
I read somewhere a couple days ago that Microsoft has had to lighten up on WGA.

[KC9ECI]

"Nobody will ever need more than 640k RAM!"

[ka5piu]

Hello.

There are dozens of clone utilities out there.
http://www.data-backup-and-storage.com/disk-manager-from-maxtor.html
Most are free, but be sure you get one that can work with NTFS.
I use the one that came with IBM OS/2 warp.

[KC9ECI]

I might have to get medieval (http://www.boredstop.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=1) on this thing yet.

[W8EFA]

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Mar. 02 2007,19:41)]Quote[/b] (W8EFA @ Mar. 02 2007,15:27)]Think there may be an issue with buying a compete PC with Monitor and OS for less than $400.00 new? #Think it could be the system or the apps on such a crappy PC?? #You get what you pay for.

#In fact looking at your report none seem to be OS crashes, all Application problems.
Tell the truth, is your name Steve Ballmer ??

If you look at his hardware list you'll see his hardware is pretty much standard, up to date, and compatable with what most people are running. There is no reason why Vista should be so unstable on such a system. Nor, is there any reason why the "Made for Windows" apps should be so unstable. If he was running very old hardware, or some bleeding edge hardware or unusual hardware I could perhaps see problems. But, unless he is doing something very wrong, or somehow got the system infected with some sort of malware, a standard out of the box system should be that problematic.

Now, it would be interesting to see how it would run under XP compared to Vista. Or, dare I say, how the same machine would run under another OS altogether.
And who are you Linus Torvald.

The fact of the matter is he paid $400.00 for the whole system, what do you expect?

$400 for the whole system, monitor, and OS. He is running video off the motherboard and 512MB ram - I would expect problems with that setup running Vista. Even if it didn't crash it would have to be a dog.

You can get a decent Motherboard processor and memory for $400.00

[KC9ECI]

How do you know what I paid for it?

[al2i]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Mar. 02 2007,19:02)]Hello.

There are dozens of clone utilities out there.
http://www.data-backup-and-storage.com/disk-manager-from-maxtor.html
Most are free, but be sure you get one that can work with NTFS.
I use the one that came with IBM OS/2 warp.
Weird. A brand new and paid for copy of Acronis didn't successfully clone a Vista image from the original SATA-250 to a SATA-320. I guess I need to try harder. Thanks OM.

[kf6snj]

I use PCLinuxOS with 256MB of DDR with 1.5Ghz processor (yes, 32-bit). My brother dual boots PCLinuxOS and WinXP. He says that PCLinuxOS is far more stable booting from an IDE drive than XP. I can only wonder how Vista would compare with Mandriva on the same hardware?

[ka5piu]

Quote[/b] (al2i @ Mar. 02 2007,21:54)]Weird. #A brand new and paid for copy of Acronis didn't successfully clone a Vista image from the original SATA-250 to a SATA-320. #I guess I need to try harder. #Thanks OM.
Hello.

Please note that I said identical model hard drives.
Starting with XP, windows has gotten super picky with the hardware.
So, what do you do, short of a full reinstall?
Set both drives in the machine and do a repair install.
Have the drives exactly as they were, the master drive as a master and the new drive as a slave.
But, install all the updates to the slave drive.
Now, boot into safe mode and create a recovery disk, this can be a thumb drive.
Next, switch drives and reboot, leaving the recovery disk in place.
Again, repair install.
Now, windows will transfer everything from the old drive to the new drive, just as if there was a bad sector on the drive, except this time it is from drive to drive.
Windows does not count a repair install as a full install, so the meter is not ticking.

[WF7A]

Admittedly, I'm ignorant of how Linux (and its brethren) would replace the Windows operating system; how about a thumbnail description of what's involved such as driver availability, effects on the apps (will all native Windows software run on Linux, or do I need a different "flavor" of the app specifically for Linux), etc.?

If I were assured that all of my Windows apps (from Adobe's Creative Suite down to utilities) would run on a non-Windows platform I'd go for it; I don't mind a little tweaking with the result being a more stable system. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[KI4PEQ]

The more problems I see with Windows Vista, the more I like my Macs. All five of them. Some five years old, and all capable of running the latest Mac OS X version.

I only have two Windows boxes. The daughter has one in her room, the other is a school district castoff in my shack which has just enough memory to feed the weather data to the internet and stream NWS weather radio audio to the Weather Underground. I only work with Windows under protest.

[KC9ECI]

I can't speak for all flavors of Linux, but here's a short overview from the Freespire/Linspire POV.

Quick Tour Of Freespire (http://wiki.freespire.org/index.php/Quick_Tour_of_Freespire)

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (ka5piu @ Mar. 03 2007,01:12)]Quote[/b] (al2i @ Mar. 02 2007,21:54)]Weird. #A brand new and paid for copy of Acronis didn't successfully clone a Vista image from the original SATA-250 to a SATA-320. #I guess I need to try harder. #Thanks OM.
Hello.

Please note that I said identical model hard drives.
Starting with XP, windows has gotten super picky with the hardware.
I had a drive failure on a Gateway laptop that was running XP. Fujitsu drive that went belly-up was 80GB. I replaced it with a 120GB drive and the restore would not install to the new drive.

There are apparently a number of issues surrounding the Vista release, and the issue of the tight limit on "reinstalls" is generating a fair amount of heat from what I have been reading.

Actually, I can see both sides of the issue quite clearly, and I cannot fault MS for seeking to protect themselves from wanton abuse -- which, like it or not, has become a trademark among some folks. OTOH, I have been inconvenced by having to call the folks in Redmond to get new permission to reinstall a few of their products in the past.

I am looking at the purchase of a new computer in the next several weeks (or a few months at most) and it will probably be a Vista flavor. You can still find a lot of new XP-system computers on the market, and often at far better prices than their newer V siblings.

Were I having all of the problems that ECI is experiencing, I would strongly suspect the software that I had loaded rather than take an ax to the computer or blindly condemn the OS.

I strongly suspect that incompatible apps are at the root of the Explorer crashes. There is a lot of software out there that is NOT V compatible. I understand the MS is preparing a list that will be downloadable from their site, but I don't know the status of that effort.

73

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 03 2007,07:11)]I can't speak for all flavors of Linux, but here's a short overview from the Freespire/Linspire POV.

Quick Tour Of Freespire (http://wiki.freespire.org/index.php/Quick_Tour_of_Freespire)
Linspire was originally named "Lindows," and WalMart has been selling desktops with that OS installed for several years.

Of all the flavors of Linux that I tried out in my "spearmint" (SuSE, Fedora, and Linspire), Linspire worked the best and had the nicest GUI. I also liked their CNR site, which made the mishmash of installing Linux apps a very simple and straightforward process.

The problem with Linux as a stand-alone, desktop OS, however, is the dearth of drivers that are easily available for the many on-mobo systems that are now the most common computer models.

Were I to become totally disenchanted with Windows, I would move to the Macintosh OS and be done with it. Of course, that would demand a considerably greater outlay of money than is required for Windows, or Linux for that matter.

73

[n2nh]

C-Net has advised people not to waste their money buying Vista.

[KC9ECI]

FWIW, the first two system crashes I had, were prior to loading any software, and just running IE7.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 03 2007,08:25)]FWIW, the first two system crashes I had, were prior to loading any software, and just running IE7.
That would lead me to wonder if you have a fully updated Vista installed.

Have you gone onto "Windows Update" and checked to see if any patches are needed to your system?

New computers (or over-the-counter DVDs) are loaded with OS that may be substantially different from that which is now available (and necessary). I would suggest setting the computer for auto updates, but I would also suggest logging into Windows Update and checking the "Custom" option to see if any of the other hardware/software needs patching as well.

GL

[KC9ECI]

Setting up the Windows updates is the first thing I do with a new system once it comes online.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (WF7A @ Mar. 02 2007,23:12)]Admittedly, I'm ignorant of how Linux (and its brethren) would replace the Windows operating system; how about a thumbnail description of what's involved such as driver availability, effects on the apps (will all native Windows software run on Linux, or do I need a different "flavor" of the app specifically for Linux), etc.?

If I were assured that all of my Windows apps (from Adobe's Creative Suite down to utilities) would run on a non-Windows platform I'd go for it; I don't mind a little tweaking with the result being a more stable system. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
In order to run under Linux the application must be compiled for Linux so it will run as a native Linux app. Some apps have Linux , i.e. Adobe Acrobat Reader, Flash Player, many browsers, etc. have Linux counterparts. Many others don't. rest assured, no application made by Microsoft is going to have a Linux version. For apps that don;t have Linux versions it may be possible to run them on Linux anyway, using WINE or a virtual machine like VmWare.

Beyond that the best way to move from Windows to Linux is migration over a period of time. You set up a Linux box and you keep your Windows box. As you learn and gain familiarity with Linux and you get to know the different kinds of apps that are available, which ones are viable alternatives to the Windows apps and you gradually migrate. In many cases where you don;t find the same apps that are on Windows you will often find alternative apps that perform the same tasks. Of course there are also issue of compatable file formats, format conversion without loosing data and integrity, etc/

In many respects it would be similar to migrating from Windows to the Mac. yes it can be done.

If you are interested in going the Linux route and are not really familiar with Linux the best thing is to try and locate a nearby LUG (Linux User Groups). There are many throughout the country and they usually have active mailing lists as well as regular meetings. They are excellent for people who are just getting started or want to learn more.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Mar. 03 2007,12:45)]...the best way to move from Windows to Linux is migration over a period of time.
I should live so long!

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kc8uzl]

I like vista. I think that it is way better than XP because of the speed. Once it is working with your hardware then there are no problems. The problems are getting the hardware to work.

I was unhappy with it but then I fixed some driver problems and now I wouldn't trade it in. Its all getting use to something. It just takes a while.

[n2nh]

My friend is an IT tech. He's always been a big MS fan. Not anymore. He beta'd this dog and ran the original release (a month early). It's been installed, re-installed and re-configured countless times. Does it work now. Sort of. He now has issues with his Internet connection running glacial.

I'll wait until XP support dies.

Then I'll buy a Mac.

[kc8uzl]

I guess that works for you. I think that the main reason that people don't like vista is because they are trying to run it on their computers that can't handle it. I would never tell anyone to get it unless they have 2 gigs of ram, and a min. of 1.66 duo processor. Most computers can't handle that right now so people are complaining.

[KC9ECI]

If the OS requires 2G of RAM and can't work reliable on the 512M that comes with it, that's sort of like buying a car with 3 tires and some assembly required on the 4th.

[kc8uzl]

It doesn't but to get it to work well you need 2 gigs of ram. 1 gig will work but you will use 512 just on the OS.
With 2 gigs you have a lot to work with.

[W3MIV]

I also suspect there is a substantial difference between Home Basic and Home Premium.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Mar. 03 2007,11:25)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Mar. 03 2007,12:45)]...the best way to move from Windows to Linux is migration over a period of time.
I should live so long!

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Actually it doesn't take long at all. I've migrated several business to Linux and open source on the desktop level and the transition went quite fast and was very smooth. There are cases where I recommend people don't migrate but in many cases migration can be feasable, painless, and cost effective.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (W8EFA @ Mar. 02 2007,21:14)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Mar. 02 2007,19:41)]Quote[/b] (W8EFA @ Mar. 02 2007,15:27)]Think there may be an issue with buying a compete PC with Monitor and OS for less than $400.00 new? Think it could be the system or the apps on such a crappy PC?? You get what you pay for.

In fact looking at your report none seem to be OS crashes, all Application problems.
Tell the truth, is your name Steve Ballmer ??

If you look at his hardware list you'll see his hardware is pretty much standard, up to date, and compatable with what most people are running. There is no reason why Vista should be so unstable on such a system. Nor, is there any reason why the "Made for Windows" apps should be so unstable. If he was running very old hardware, or some bleeding edge hardware or unusual hardware I could perhaps see problems. But, unless he is doing something very wrong, or somehow got the system infected with some sort of malware, a standard out of the box system should be that problematic.

Now, it would be interesting to see how it would run under XP compared to Vista. Or, dare I say, how the same machine would run under another OS altogether.
And who are you Linus Torvald.

The fact of the matter is he paid $400.00 for the whole system, what do you expect?

$400 for the whole system, monitor, and OS. He is running video off the motherboard and 512MB ram - I would expect problems with that setup running Vista. Even if it didn't crash it would have to be a dog.

You can get a decent Motherboard processor and memory for $400.00
Look at his hardware list. There is nothing extraordinary about it and no reason why a modern operating system shouldn't run out of the box on that hardware without crashing or dogging out on it. .There is nothing so sophisticated about Vista that should cause it to crash problematically or go to the dogs on the hardware he is running and/or without any ultra resource intensive processes running.

[n6yg]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Mar. 02 2007,15:52)]Vista may be bad, but NOTHING can compare with IBM's OS-2 for being the worst operating system ever devised for mass distribution.

OS-2 was so bad that you had to pay someone to even dispose of brand new, unopened, installation packages!

Glen, K9STH
Well you can thank Microsoft for all of OS-2's faults. OS-2 would have been and should have been a far superior OS, Unfortunately Microsoft Sabotaged OS-2

OS-2 was developed in partnership between Microsoft and IBM.
Microsoft being the rotten dishonest company it is screwed IBM on the deal.

While Microsoft was supposed to be developing code for their portion of OS-2 they where secretly working on their latest version of Windows. Microsoft wanted to release Windows before OS-2 so they could capture and dominate the market while at the same time dealing a devastating blow to IBM.

Delay after delay, Microsoft released Windows just after they turned their portion of the final code for OS-2 over to IBM. What IBM did not know is that Microsoft purposely sabotaged the OS-2 code. Among other nasty surprises, Microsoft purposely made Its office products incompatible with OS-2.

Business as usual at Microsoft lie, cheat, steal, and screw any company foolish enough to sign a deal with them. The only reason Microsoft signed the deal to co-develop OS-2 was so they could sabotage it. Not only that, Microsoft was so bold that they they stole IBM developed OS-2 code and used it in WINDOWS!

Some people say Bill Gates and Microsoft are an American success story.
If you think forming a criminal corporation based on stolen software then lying stealing and cheating your way to the top is an American success story then I am truly ashamed to be an American. Lying cheating and stealing where not the values I was raised with.

I personally detest Microsoft, Microsoft is a perfect example of worst traits in human nature. greed, lying, stealing it's all spelled out in Microsoft's business model. Always remember, Microsoft is a convicted criminal corporation that acts as though it is above the law. Exactly how is this an American success story.

As far as Vista is concerned, it's no wonder it is full of problems. Vista is the only operating system Microsoft has developed from the ground up. Every other Operating system Microsoft claims to have developed has been full of illegally borrowed code.

The only reason Vista will propagate is because it is being forced on new computer buyers.

Computer Users world wide our beginning to see Microsoft's true colors that's why Pre-installed Linux is the most requested feature for new dell computers.
http://www.dellideastorm.com/

"In a world without Fences and Walls who needs Windows and Gates"

[n6yg]

Quote[/b] (kc8uzl @ Mar. 03 2007,13:07)]I guess that works for you. I think that the main reason that people don't like vista is because they are trying to run it on their computers that can't handle it. I would never tell anyone to get it unless they have 2 gigs of ram, and a min. of 1.66 duo processor. Most computers can't handle that right now so people are complaining.
Herein lies the problem, why in the world would a simple desktop OS require a 1.66 C2D and 2 GIGS of RAM!! that's like building an HF rig that consumes 200 watts idling on receive. somethings wrong!

I have run Linux "Ubuntu" on an old non HT Pent 4 with 512 megs of ram using Beryl's 3d desktop spread across two 22.5 inch LCD monitors. With Windows XP in one monitor running under VMware and Firefox with 30 open taps on the other monitor and never access's the swap file.
Beryls 3D desktop is so advanced it makes Vista's Aero desktop look like it came right out of the computer stone age. So why is it again Vista Aero desktop requires such horsepower. Hint: Sloppy coding!! My Linux's boxes regularly go months at a time without restarting. Why is Vista can barely run a day without needing a reboot. Hint: Sloppy coding!!

Famous quote and Microsoft's motto "It doesn't need to work, It just needs to be profitable"

"In a world without Fences and Walls who needs Windows and Gates"

[ka5piu]

Hello.

I now run only one laptop.
It runs linux and windows Vista without flaw or fault of any kind.
Guess what machine it is?











Apple MacBook. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[n2ize]

One of the absolute worst Windows versions that MickySofty came out with was Windows ME. If any OS is a dog then ME was a dog team. My brother had it on a desktop PC and wow...what a bomb. Whenever I scoured the net looking for fixes to the multitudes of problems I cam across countless articles about people having problems with ME.

Now I have found that XP was quite an improvement over previous Windows versions that I used. While It still didn't match my Linux installation for stability at least I was able to get my work done most of the time without a crash and a BSOD.

It is disheartening to hear about so many problems with Vista. I hope things improve. I would hate to think that MS went froma reasonably stable and functional OS, i.e. XP to a dog.

[kb9lei]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Mar. 02 2007,18:52)]Vista may be bad, but NOTHING can compare with IBM's OS-2 for being the worst operating system ever devised for mass distribution. #

OS-2 was so bad that you had to pay someone to even dispose of brand new, unopened, installation packages!

Glen, K9STH
I dunno Glen, DOS 4.0 should have been packed with a cyanide pill--'cause you could get a wee bit sucidal trying to keep a machine running!

Thank goodness 5.0 was already on the line ready to ship! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[ka5piu]

Hello.

DOS 6.2.2 was, and is, the best DOS there is.
It has support for FAT16 and FAT32.
2000 and XP are NT, in fact 2000 was almost called NT5.
But, one can install NT, and that includes XP, under FAT16.
Why would one want to do this?
First off, it will allow access by almost all OS.
The next little tidbit, if the first partition is FAT16 that means windows sees a 2 GB C: drive, and HAS to install elsewhere.
So, the next partition is FAT32.
Just limit this to 50% larger than what windows needs.
10 Gig is a nice number.
Once this is done, you can copy XP and vista to any hard drive you want as long as it is 10GB or larger.
Just format and partition it the exact same size and type in the same volume name and date, time does not matter.
NT can not see the hard drive serial number under FAT.
Whatever remains can be NTFS, but I like to drop linux in also, so I also plan for this.
I also trick the OS into thinking that this is a dual CPU board, so it will allow other CPU serial numbers.
One can always disable the CPU serial number scheme or write a redirect.
http://www.intel.com/support/processors/pentiumiii/sb/cs-007580.htm
I, however, have a custom message for my processor serial number.
Hint, 0 to 9 and A to F are valid.
Intel has given permission to write a custom ESN, even if is tells one off.

[AC0H]

Tom,

That system is a little light on memory.
Consider this. You've only got 512MB of memory. The video subsystem, which is on the mobo and not a seprate card, uses system ram and can use half of what you've got.

We've found from testing that you need 1Gig of Ram and a dedicated video subsystem of 256MB or bigger to run Vista and some apps. Vista itself may run on 512MB but that's about it.

Double the ram in the machine and use one of those PCI-E slots for a good video card.

Anybody else considering running Vista on a factory built computer needs to apply these guidelines. The $400 bargain will cost you another $400 to run Vista.

[al2i]

Many factory machines suck. Fancy on the outside, hardlyware on the inside.

[al2i]

I have had Vista running unprotected and open to the public with heavy usage for three whole days now. No problems yet... tick...tick...tick...

[W8EFA]

Exactly - #you get what you pay for. #I am looking at upgrading my PC now. #I already have a great Video CArd ,CD,RAID HD, 500W PS, 21" Monitor, and brand new DVD and CD player. #Problem is my ATHLON XP will not run the common program Adobe Elements because the processor doesn't have the SSE2 instruction set!

I am looking at buying an Asus P5B Motherboard , Intel #Core 2 E6400 Processor, 1GB DDR 2 800 (to start) and a CPU fan. # Just for this motherboard, processor,and #memory upgrade it is about $500.00 #I am thinking that is a good combo for the money?

Though Cnet hates MS they have a good Vista Requirements Checker. #As you can see they recommend 1GB even for Basic.


http://www.cnet.com/4520-33_1-6671810-1.html
This has recommended requirements for basic, mainstream, and enthusiast levls.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (al2i @ Mar. 04 2007,10:07)]I have had Vista running unprotected and open to the public with heavy usage for three whole days now. #No problems yet... #tick...tick...tick...
tick...tick...tick... BOOM !!!!!!!

[KF0RT]

Quote[/b] (W8EFA @ Mar. 04 2007,10:22)]I am looking at buying an Asus P5B Motherboard , Intel Core 2 E6400 Processor, 1GB DDR 2 800 (to start) and a CPU fan. Just for this motherboard, processor,and memory upgrade it is about $500.00 I am thinking that is a good combo for the money?
I just built a new machine for my wife last month... Specs:

E6300 Core 2 Duo processor (1.86GHz)
2 Gig RAM
EVGA 7900GS 256Meg PCI-E Graphics card
160 Gig SATA hard drive
MSI 945GM3-F Mobo
400W PS
Xion case
CD/DVD burner
NEW copy of Win XP

CPU, MB and 1 Gig RAM would have been under $400 -- your price seems high...?

This is for high-end gaming; my son-in-law spec'd the MB and video -- I doubled the RAM and went with a bigger hard drive. Total parts cost was under $900 from NewEgg, and it screams. I couldn't get anything similar cheaper from Dell -- it's also the cheapest computer I've ever purchased. XYL LOVES it.

The Core 2 Duo processors come with a fan (and the mounting sucks).

I just couldn't bring myself to "upgrade" her old machine (a 2.2 GHz P4). Put a new hard drive in it, and now have two working computers where there was just one. The old box now boots Kubuntu Linux, but I'm not finding the interest in that. Think I'll give it to my Dad to replace his old 600MHz PIII Gateway.

73, Rob

[W8EFA]

Well your MB is around 80 your proc around 180 and 1GB memory around 100 so yes about 400 for yours.

The MB from ASUS I picked is around 150 and the processor around 220, 100 for memory, 50 for the fan so around $520.00or so from discount like Tiger or Newegg. Could maybe save some more using E-bay. Maybe I am going more than I need on the MB? Always liked ASUS though and it gets good reviews.

I have to laugh when someone complains that Vista needs 2GB memory. What is memory now 50 to 100 per GB according to type? Like you said you can component build a heck of a PC for 1000 to 1500 now. 10 years ago a comparable PC was at least twice as much

[KF0RT]

Dunno about the motherboard or why the Asus would cost so much more. I don't much keep up on that stuff these days. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Why a $50 fan, though? The processor comes with a heatsink/fan assembly from Intel.

73, Rob

[AC0H]

Quote[/b] ]Why a $50 fan, though? #The processor comes with a heatsink/fan assembly from Intel.
The OEM heatsinks and fans that come with boxed processors are capable of cooling the processor but aftermarket HS/Fan combo's do much better job.

It's always been that way. A happy side effect from the enthusiast and overclocker sections of the market and well worth the money.

[KC9ECI]

Quote[/b] (KF0RT @ Mar. 04 2007,13:44)]This is for high-end gaming; my son-in-law spec'd the MB and video -- I doubled the RAM and went with a bigger hard drive. #Total parts cost was under $900 from NewEgg, and it screams. #I couldn't get anything similar cheaper from Dell -- it's also the cheapest computer I've ever purchased. #XYL LOVES it.
No games on this other than the solitaire game and minesweeper games that it came with. I use it to surf the net, read my email, contest logging, and a little of the soundcard digital stuff. I really shouldn't need all the bleeding edge tech with all the bells and whistles.

[KF0RT]

Quote[/b] (AC0H @ Mar. 04 2007,12:34)]Quote[/b] ]Why a $50 fan, though? The processor comes with a heatsink/fan assembly from Intel.
The OEM heatsinks and fans that come with boxed processors are capable of cooling the processor but aftermarket HS/Fan combo's do much better job.

It's always been that way. A happy side effect from the enthusiast and overclocker sections of the market and well worth the money.
I get that, but what does a cooler processor buy me?

I mean... I assume the Intel fan meets all of the cooling specs for the processor, or Intel wouldn't be making them and shipping them with the chips.

Or is the aftermarket fan for boxes that are so overloaded with stuff that they need extra cooling? If I recall... on the new machine here, the processor was shutting down at 200 degrees or so and was running under 120 degrees once I figured out how the fan was supposed to be mounted.

If the chip is happy and operating within spec at 120 degrees, why would I pay $50 to run it cooler unless I was overclocking it?

('Scuse my density on this...)

73, Rob

[KF0RT]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 04 2007,13:23)]Quote[/b] (KF0RT @ Mar. 04 2007,13:44)]This is for high-end gaming; my son-in-law spec'd the MB and video -- I doubled the RAM and went with a bigger hard drive. Total parts cost was under $900 from NewEgg, and it screams. I couldn't get anything similar cheaper from Dell -- it's also the cheapest computer I've ever purchased. XYL LOVES it.
No games on this other than the solitaire game and minesweeper games that it came with. I use it to surf the net, read my email, contest logging, and a little of the soundcard digital stuff. I really shouldn't need all the bleeding edge tech with all the bells and whistles.
The hardest thing that machine has to run is Vista! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

73, Rob

[n6yg]

Quote
"which made the mishmash of installing Linux apps a very simple and straightforward process."

Are you saying installing software in Linux is hard. I don't know how much easier they can make it. How hard is typing apt-get install "software name"
Fact is you can use "apt-get" to install over 20,000 Linux programs. The hardest part is looking through the list of available software.

And if you are one of these people who is scared to death of your own shadow and the thought of actually typing something into a terminal gives you the cold sweats, then use the GUI version of apt-get for point and click installs.

The myth that all software needs to be compiled in Linux is nothing but horse dung.
The only time you might need to compile software is if you are trying to install beta software or software that is not considered stable enough to be offered via the trusted repository's. I am so tired of seeing this myth propagated, it's really nothing but FUD

By the way, apt-get is the debian installer. Almost all other distributions have similar installers.

My entire network is Linux based, With various versions of Windows OS's served up in Virtual environment as needed.

Who says Linux won't run on the latest hardware.

My main play system:
Massively overclocked Intel Core 2 Extreme quad core (QX6700) CPU
4 gb Corsair DHX-XM52 Dominator Dual Channel PC9136 DDR2 Ram
ATI X-1900 video card powering two ViewSonic 22.5 inch LCD monitors
4 tb of WD SATA drives (Raid 0+1)
Thermaltake Armor case.
Networked to 9 other Linux boxes including a networked Konica color laser printer via switched gigabit lan

Software:
Host operating system: Ubuntu 64bit, Beryl 3D desktop.

Virtual environment running in VMware.
Fedora Core, OpenSuse, Linspire, Mepis, Mandriva, Gentoo, Freebsd .........
Windows XP, Windows 2000, Windows 98 and Windows 3.1

Other computers:
Dedicated IPcop firewall (Linux)
Dedicated Webserver, MySql server, and Mailserver
Wireless Hotspot server and Radius server
Various laptops and desktops for web browsing and office work.

Now if this was a Windows network. I would need to hire an assistant and spend the better part of my day fixing problems. Thankfully it's a Linux system and I can pretty much forget about it and let it do its thing.

Stats:
Web server, Sql server, Hotspot, Mail server, Radius server and IPcop box's have been up 24/7 365 days a year for well over a year.

My play system normally runs for months at a time without reboots. The only time it gets turned off or rebooted is for hardware upgrades. Windows will never have this kind of stability.

[W8EFA]

Quote[/b] ]Now if this was a Windows network. I would need to hire an assistant and spend the better part of my day fixing problems. Thankfully it's a Linux system and I can pretty much forget about it and let it do its thing.



Not likely as the total cost of ownership (TCO) are what business people are interested in.

From Linux Today
Quote[/b] ]Microsoft has long asked third party analysts for accurate assessments of the total cost of ownership of Microsoft Windows deployments, especially against the Linux deployments commonly going into all segments of the market. However, Immunity, Inc. as a third party assessment provider has, until now, not done a thorough analysis, using Immunity proprietary data to tell the true story about the costs of Open Source...

"Based on our analysis, Microsoft Windows has one half the Total Cost of 0wnership (TC0) of modern Fedora Core Linux based technologies..."



http://www.linuxtoday.com/securit....P-SW-NT (http://www.linuxtoday.com/security/mailprint.php3?action=pv&ltsn=2004-08-13-022-26-OP-SW-NT)

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (KF6PYF @ Mar. 04 2007,16:44)]My play system normally runs for months at a time without reboots. The only time it gets turned off or rebooted is for hardware upgrades. Windows will never have this kind of stability.
Horsefeathers. I have Windows XP Pro computers that run all the time, and only reboot when an update or patch requires it. While you may howl and yammer about patching and security, were Linux desktops operating in the numbers that Windows machines around the world are, I strongly suspect that the attacks against them would be as earnest and as ubiquitous as those against Windows.

These XP computers have shown themselves to be very stable, and I cannot remember the last time I suffered a "crash."

Rebooting does not necessarily reflect adversely on stability.

[KD5SHW]

Running Vista on a machine that only has 512 MB is crazy. Running it on a machine that has to share that memory with graphics is suicide. Vista is a memory hog. If I was you I would delete Vista and put a copy of XP on that computer. Keep your copy of Vista until you can put at least 2GB of RAM and a video card in it.

I didn't even know they still made P4 processors. I think you just got ripped off on your PC.

[KC9ECI]

I am no way going to go out and pay $200 for an obsolete OS. For that I could buy 2g of memory.

[al2i]

Take the "folding" software off of the machine and get back to us. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (KF6PYF @ Mar. 03 2007,15:44)]Quote
"which made the mishmash of installing Linux apps a very simple and straightforward process."

Are you saying installing software in Linux is hard. I don't know how much easier they can make it. How hard is typing apt-get install "software name"
Fact is you can use "apt-get" to install over 20,000 Linux programs. The hardest part is looking through the list of available software.
I never get the attitude on this either. One of the reasons I like linux is because the apps are so easy to install. When I need to do something that requires some utility I can almost always install it without even bringing up a web browser to try and search for something that does the job.

[n6yg]

Quote[/b] ]

While you may howl and yammer about patching and security, were Linux desktops operating in the numbers that Windows machines around the world are, I strongly suspect that the attacks against them would be as earnest and as ubiquitous as those against Windows.


This is called security through obscurity and is a common misconception.

Consider for one instance the majority of Web Servers run some flavor of Linux or FreeBSD. If this was true then Linux and FreeBSD Web Servers would be attacked and compromised far more often then Microsoft Servers. Just the opposite is true, servers running Windows server platforms are compromised far more often and have far more remote vulnerabilities in the wild then Linux and FreeBSD platforms combined.

I speak from experienced. My hobby might be radio but my day job is network penetration assessment. I get payed the big bucks ($590 and hour) to hack/attack corporate intranets and ecommerce sites.

The longest its ever taken me to hack past a IIS server and download personal customer data is about 40 min the fastest is under 5 min with the average being about 15 min.

The best part of my job is when I hand the CEO a CD containing all their customers personal information. My all time favorite is to hand them a CD containing private corporate financial records. The end result is usually a Microsoft Certified Network Engineer loosing their job.

By the way these are not just unpatched servers either.
I have yet to come across a Microsoft Server patched or unpatched I could not penetrate. As for FreeBSD and Linux Well that's a whole different story. Unless I am working on a totally neglected and unpatched system these are rarely penetrable.

While many Microsoft fan boys will try and claim that Linux has many vulnerabilities. What they fail to mention is very few of those vulnerabilities are remotely exploitable. Almost all require actual physical access to the server console. On the other hand Microsoft servers are like Swiss Cheese with the majority of vulnerabilities remotely exploitable.

As for total cost of ownership, I can't believe this person actually brought this up. What a load of horse dung. I guess the old saying is true "there's a sucker born every min" http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif If I had Microsoft's money I could buy favorable study reports too http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif Every non biased professional in the IT industry knows these studies are bought and paid for, there not worth the paper they are printed on "End of Story"

[n6yg]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Mar. 04 2007,15:36)]These XP computers have shown themselves to be very stable, and I cannot remember the last time I suffered a "crash"

Then you are very lucky indeed. Unfortunately most Windows users are not as fortunate

The Microsoft Keyboard
http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/2865/mkhz1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[KC9ECI]

Quote[/b] (al2i @ Mar. 04 2007,18:15)]Take the "folding" software off of the machine and get back to us. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
I'm only folding on the Linux boxes and the XP system upstairs. I remembered the Seti@home project messed with my soundcard packet something terrible back in the day. The current battle is to try and get ACLog and TQSL to work in harmony so I can upload my DX Contest logs to LoTW....already got it submitted to eQSL.

[KC9ECI]

BTW, what do you guys (and gals) suggest in the way of a video card?

[n6yg]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 04 2007,18:30)]BTW, what do you guys (and gals) suggest in the way of a video card?
If you are running Linux then anything Nvidia. You can use ATI, I am. ATI drivers suck, of course they always have so this is nothing new. If you decide to go ATI just keep in mind you will have to spend a bit of time to get reasonable 3D performance out of it. This is true for both Windows and Linux, more so for Linux.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (ab8ro @ Mar. 04 2007,16:24)]Quote[/b] (KF6PYF @ Mar. 03 2007,15:44)]Quote
"which made the mishmash of installing Linux apps a very simple and straightforward process."

Are you saying installing software in Linux is hard. I don't know how much easier they can make it. How hard is typing apt-get install "software name"
Fact is you can use "apt-get" to install over 20,000 Linux programs. The hardest part is looking through the list of available software.
I never get the attitude on this either. One of the reasons I like linux is because the apps are so easy to install. When I need to do something that requires some utility I can almost always install it without even bringing up a web browser to try and search for something that does the job.
The notion that Linux apps are hard to install comes from the old days when most apps were distributed as source code in tarball format, i.e. "app-name.tar.gz", or even worst, as a collection of #"name.c" files which you had to figure out how to compile. In those days that meant having all the compling and gnu development tools installed as well as makking sure the nessesarly libraries and header files were installed and in their proper places and then still hoping and praying that the compiler didn't balk and croak.

Then came the idea of package management. Installing software became as simple as #typing

# #rpm -ivh app-name.rpm

But this still left the problem of manually installing and satisfying dependencies.

These days it's become super easy. To install an application on a Linux box it's usually as easy as:

# # #yum application-name

or
# # apt-get application name

The utility automatically figures out all the dependencies and installs whatever is nessesary along with the app. It couldn't be simpler and works virtually all the time,

package management and #app installation has come a long #way. it is no longer a mishmosh or a difficult process.

BTW, I still install from source tarballs from time to time. But generally only when i am testing something bleeding edge or, if I need a special configuration that precompiled packages just cannot give me. However I don;t like to install too much system dependent software this way because it can really corrupt the package manager and make package management a nightmare... i.e. what did the package manager install and what did I install manually.. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (KF6PYF @ Mar. 03 2007,19:41)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 04 2007,18:30)]BTW, what do you guys (and gals) suggest in the way of a video card?
If you are running Linux then anything Nvidia. You can use ATI, I am. ATI drivers suck, of course they always have so this is nothing new. #If you decide to go ATI just keep in mind you will have to spend a bit of time to get reasonable 3D performance out of it. This is true for both Windows and Linux, more so for Linux.
While this is true, and I have both nvidia and ati cards in linux boxes, installing the nvidia drivers can also be a pain. It depends on the card you are buying. Generally, older means more stable and less hassle.

If you just need a basic machine then a lot of people like to use intel motherboards with intel 965 graphics since there are open source drivers (http://intellinuxgraphics.org/) available.

This is one of the advantages of distributions like Linspire which don't have a problem with incorporating non-free work into their installation. I think Ubuntu might make it reasonably painless also, but don't quote me on it.

Debian does not, but then again, I don't care, I know how to make it work and I've yet to find anything that I like better than debian.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Mar. 04 2007,15:36)]Quote[/b] (KF6PYF @ Mar. 04 2007,16:44)]My play system normally runs for months at a time without reboots. The only time it gets turned off or rebooted is for hardware upgrades. Windows will never have this kind of stability.
Horsefeathers. I have Windows XP Pro computers that run all the time, and only reboot when an update or patch requires it. While you may howl and yammer about patching and security, were Linux desktops operating in the numbers that Windows machines around the world are, I strongly suspect that the attacks against them would be as earnest and as ubiquitous as those against Windows.

These XP computers have shown themselves to be very stable, and I cannot remember the last time I suffered a "crash."

Rebooting does not necessarily reflect adversely on stability.
Quote[/b] ]
, were Linux desktops operating in the numbers that Windows machines around the world are, I strongly suspect that the attacks against them would be as earnest and as ubiquitous as those against Windows.


This is very likely true. However the problem that has been traditional with windows is a hangover to their single user DOS days. Namely that on Windows far too many processes run priviledged and/or can easilly run as priviledged users and thus co-opt critical system files and resources. On Linux most apps traditioanlly run as non-privileged users and thus it is more difficult to co-opt them into altering critical resources.

Fortunately more recent versions of Windows have moved away from this "everything runs priviledged' model.

As far as stability goes XP was about the most stable version of Windows that I have ever tested. At home while not as stable as my Linux boxes it still was not bad. On the job it didn;t fare as well. after examining the stats for thousands of XP machines versus thousands of Linux machines the XP machines showed a tendency to crash considerably more often than Linux pr proprietary Unix boxes. But, they were still a very big improvement over earlier Windows versions. I hope Microsoft gets it down as good or better with Vista. But it's too early to tell at this point. Let's see what happens after a couple rounds of patches and service paks.

[AE6QE]

Among all the reviews, etc. cursing Vista, I find the most hideous part is the cost. Since XP Home was a crippled OS, I upgraded all my systems to XP Professional. Now, I am looking at $200+ per license to upgrade (not a stand alone install), meaning that just to upgrade the home I am spending $600+ should I choose to go with Vista!

Even Apple is smarter than that, selling a group license for those with wired homes.

So, regardless of the quality of Vista (which I understand as poor), Microsoft has practically forced me to a Linux or Mac solution once XP support is discontinued.

73,
Rickey/AE6QE

[n6hcm]

Quote[/b] (AE6QE @ Mar. 05 2007,00:02)]Among all the reviews, etc. cursing Vista, I find the most hideous part is the cost. Since XP Home was a crippled OS, I upgraded all my systems to XP Professional. Now, I am looking at $200+ per license to upgrade (not a stand alone install), meaning that just to upgrade the home I am spending $600+ should I choose to go with Vista!
well, you might really do better with forklift upgrades ... that is, to buy a new computer with vista pre-installed.

and, fwiw, vista business isn't bad at all. if you turn off "User Account Control" (the thing that keeps prompting you to allow or not allow pretty much anything) it's as civilized as windows xp. i haven't had a crash or bluescreen yet. of course, i haven't had it long enough to know if its stability will compare favorably to that on my linux boxes...

[kl7aj]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Mar. 02 2007,15:52)]Vista may be bad, but NOTHING can compare with IBM's OS-2 for being the worst operating system ever devised for mass distribution. #

OS-2 was so bad that you had to pay someone to even dispose of brand new, unopened, installation packages!

Glen, K9STH
Hmmm...that's interesting. At Hipas Observatory, we have LOTS of legacy OS-2 data acquisition software running, including an ionosonde that probably hasn't been rebooted in a decade. We were really sad to see the demise of OS-2....it could have been a GREAT system with a little more support.

[k5jat]

Before I write this, I want to let everyone know that I use WinXP Pro, Win2k, Mac OSX, and Linux on the daily basis (usage is a combination of home and work).

To the Linux Users: Synaptic is a pretty sweet gui front-end to apt-get. There are few installation front-end as easy to use. Now, on with the show!

After months of watching and waiting to see what Vista was going to look like from a stability as well as compatibility point of view, I decided to side-step the issue all together. My PC's will remain Win2k and my laptop will remain WinXP Home. No Vista upgrade for me! None of my systems will run it anyway with all the bells and whistles without major surgery, and although it was time for an upgrade, I decided not to. Why? I'll tell you why. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I chose to buy a brand new 20" iMac instead. I decided it would be worth the money to not have to deal with the Vista headache right now, and yet have the option later if I wanted/needed it. I get a plus of not having to support the thing myself for 3 years. (I've built and maintained my last 5 systems) Besides all that, there is nothing I ran on my Windows boxes that I can't run on my mac, save a little app from Kenwood for programming my new TH-D7A(G) and the laptop runs it fine. The only app I was really concerned about (and the reason I didn't pick Linux) was running WoW. I ran firefox and thunderbird on Windows, and now they run just fine for me under Mac OSX. I couldn't be happier. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[WA7KKP]

Typical Micro$haft o/s. Let the user debug it . . . When it is stable, they'll just come out with a different version, and you just start all over again.

Thanks to Winblows, we have spam/spyware/viruses/hackers galore.

Bill Gates is laughing all the way to the bank -- he knows P. T. Barnum's saying very well.

Gary WA7KKP
Linux forever!!!

[KD6NIG]

XP is fine. I have it running on 3 computers at home. One is my main computer, one is the computer with my weather station/webcams running on it (24/7/365), one is my wifes laptop.

The only box that stays up constantly is the weather box. As of this morning its at 52 days uptime. I'll probably take it down this weekend for updates, only because I want to get the new DST setting into it.

It runs the weather software, the uploading program, and 2 screens-one is a fullscreen browser that flips through my webcams that sits where its visible in the living room. The other is on my desk with the weather data, and a web browser that reloads a radar picture every 10 mins.

The only data dropouts I get on the uploads to findu are internet connection issues-the box just keeps on ticking. It records webcam images to a slave drive also that I clean off every few weeks. It runs 1.5GB of ram.

My main computer I just got. Its an emachine, supposedly 'VISTA READY' with 512MB of ram! (I raised it to 1.5GB quickly!) It runs XP still. Supposedly for $20 or so I could get a OEM copy of Vista (which flavor I don't know) but I don't think I want it, to be honest.

My wifes laptop also runs XP.

I do have a virtual server for running my websites which is Mandrake, and I used to run a local box, but not since I went to the virtual one. Cheaper to run that than to have a business line to the house and my own box now, at least for what I'm doing.

XP has been great, at least compared to the prior OS's I used like 98 (which the internet and 'hackers' made into swiss cheese) but linux was solid. I remember having uptimes in excess of 200d easily with the mandrake box. I think my virtual one is above 100d, but it gets rebooted by the provider sometimes, so that one is beyond my control.

From what I've heard about Vista though, it really makes me wonder. Course, XP has been the usual 'release with ongoing patches' but its pretty solid. Vista just scares me though.

For now I'm sticking to XP.

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 02 2007,19:55)]"Nobody will ever need more than 640k RAM!"
My Apple ][+ and //e ran fine with 64k. The extra 128K in the //e was a nice, fast Ramdisk..(SIGH.)

[KC9ECI]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ Mar. 10 2007,19:29)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Mar. 02 2007,19:55)]"Nobody will ever need more than 640k RAM!"
My Apple ][+ and //e ran fine with 64k. #The extra 128K in the //e was a nice, fast Ramdisk..(SIGH.)
Heh...I used to make RAM drives too.

I tried a GeForce MX 4000 Video card with my Vista system today. Made things worse. I even checked the NVIDIA website to make sure there were Vista drivers for it before I purchased it. Oh well...the wife now has a nice GPU in her computer. Not that she'll ever notice. The kid might when he hijacks it to play video games at some point.

[NN4RH]

Windows Vista is probably best thing that has happened to Apple in a long time. A lot of people I know who are in the market for new computers, are so frightened of Vista that they're buying iMacs instead!

[k8pg]

Hello: Iam running Vista Ultimate -with a Accer Aspire 9500-3GB ram- 2Ghz. processor -no problems at all .
These are the programs Iam running- Logic 8, Transmit manager,Multipsk,MSSTV,CC Net Logger,Pathfinder,Awards hunters logger,Echolink,EZnec,VOA PropView,Dreamweaver,flash and 3D pro I can run them all at the same time-NO Crashes Yet and no problems with the sattellite link.I like it you must have at least 2GB ram to run properly.Good luck 73

DE K8PG Paul CW LIVES http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[KB3NDN]

Quote[/b] (kg4czo @ Mar. 06 2007,23:58)]Before I write this, I want to let everyone know that I use WinXP Pro, Win2k, Mac OSX, and Linux on the daily basis (usage is a combination of home and work).

To the Linux Users: Synaptic is a pretty sweet gui front-end to apt-get. There are few installation front-end as easy to use. Now, on with the show!

After months of watching and waiting to see what Vista was going to look like from a stability as well as compatibility point of view, I decided to side-step the issue all together. My PC's will remain Win2k and my laptop will remain WinXP Home. No Vista upgrade for me! None of my systems will run it anyway with all the bells and whistles without major surgery, and although it was time for an upgrade, I decided not to. Why? I'll tell you why. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I chose to buy a brand new 20" iMac instead. I decided it would be worth the money to not have to deal with the Vista headache right now, and yet have the option later if I wanted/needed it. I get a plus of not having to support the thing myself for 3 years. (I've built and maintained my last 5 systems) Besides all that, there is nothing I ran on my Windows boxes that I can't run on my mac, save a little app from Kenwood for programming my new TH-D7A(G) and the laptop runs it fine. The only app I was really concerned about (and the reason I didn't pick Linux) was running WoW. I ran firefox and thunderbird on Windows, and now they run just fine for me under Mac OSX. I couldn't be happier. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
good thing you dont run wow on vista, the video driver crashes and recovers every 5 minutes on that game. at least on my system.

[KC9ECI]

I'm hearing now that Vista is trashing Ipods.
Link (http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=197002833&subSection=All%20Stories)

[n2ize]

Maye this is what Bill Gates meant when he described Vista as a WOW moment, as in...

WOW...can it really be this bad after all the hype.
WOW... I got ripped !!

[KE7IPY]

From my experiences with it, Windows Vista seems to be the second coming of Windows Millenium. Everyone I knew who ever installed WM wiped it and went back to Windows 98. So far, this seems to be the case with Vista. Everyone I know who has "upgraded" to Vista has ended up going back to XP. I do have a couple friends who've bought machines with Vista pre-loaded. I'm curious to see how well it turns out for them.

[KB3NDN]

Quote[/b] (KE7IPY @ Mar. 15 2007,08:03)]From my experiences with it, Windows Vista seems to be the second coming of Windows Millenium. Everyone I knew who ever installed WM wiped it and went back to Windows 98. So far, this seems to be the case with Vista. Everyone I know who has "upgraded" to Vista has ended up going back to XP. I do have a couple friends who've bought machines with Vista pre-loaded. I'm curious to see how well it turns out for them.
i did wipe it after i got my laptop - but low and behold sony doesnt make any other drivers so i am stuck with it.

[KE7IPY]

Quote[/b] (KB3NDN @ Mar. 15 2007,13:55)]low and behold sony doesnt make any other drivers so i am stuck with it.
Sony is the WORST when it comes to supplying drivers. Hold on to your install disks that came with the machine because you won't be able to download any of those from their site. I stopped recommending their equipment years ago for that very reason.

[KB3NDN]

Quote[/b] (KE7IPY @ Mar. 15 2007,09:21)]Quote[/b] (KB3NDN @ Mar. 15 2007,13:55)]low and behold sony doesnt make any other drivers so i am stuck with it.
Sony is the WORST when it comes to supplying drivers. Hold on to your install disks that came with the machine because you won't be able to download any of those from their site. I stopped recommending their equipment years ago for that very reason.
nice laptop - its ashame. oh well, good thing i made multiple copies of my restore disks. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[K3UD]

Where do you want to go today?

It doesn't matter because you are going with us http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[kf6snj]

I switched to Linux in 2001. Never looked back. Given everything I hear from here and CS-FSLUG, I can say that I am glad I made the switch.

[AA7BQ]

I thought I'd add a few random thoughts based on the 3+ pages of articles before this so please excuse any ranting or rambling...

"OS/2 could have been great if...". This is just plain wrong. Software becomes obsolete as technologies mature. It's like comparing a tube radio to a modern DSP transceiver. The fact that it worked and continues to work in certain specialized applications is a testament to those apps and the engineers who designed them. In the end, however, OS/2 was a good OS that didn't reach it's full potential. Had it survived today, it would have had to undergo a massive internal restructuring in order to provide the types of services that modern systems require.

Vista is related to DOS, but I'd venture to say that not one line of code in Vista came from the original DOS source. Some of the data structures survived, such as the FAT file system, but those exist for compatibility, a little thing that we all love and take for granted.

In my humble opinion (IMHO), Microsoft fell victim to Gate's personal vanity. It has been the belief that "We're smarter than everybody else" that has caused them to time-and-time again reinvent the wheel and to discard better ideas in favor of those that they developed in-house.
Some of it's also just plain greed, i.e., things that are developed in house are royalty-free, and potentially patentable. Gates has always been a first rate businessman.

Other posters have already pointed out that Windows was a single-user operating system, lacking proper memory management, a primitive user rights management system, a crippled file system, and a hideous configuration database known as the Registry.

The registry is one of my pet peeves with Windows (all versions). It's the place where things are hidden. The longer a windows system has been in use, the slower it gets and the more likely it is to fail because of things which don't match up in the registry. Some call it "registry rot", and others call it the built-in upgrade timer. Every wonder why a new computers are always faster? New, faster processors sure help, but clean fresh registries do wonders too.

Windows XP has been the best and most reliable OS so far in the Microsoft line. My main XP system is running about 3 years old now and it curiously seems to work most of the time. It's a 2GHZ P4 that's loaded down with a ton of software, and every once in a while I have to go in and strip out junk programs to keep it running at its best. I've also installed a professional background disk defragmenter that seemed to improve performance a lot.

Some folks on this forum agree that XP is reliable however I would add the caveat that it's reliability is directly proportional to the skill of its user/owner. I have a number of computer challenged friends who will occasionally ask me to come over and have a look at their machines. The complaint? "The system is running slow and takes forever to start up". Their system tray will usually have about two dozen mini-icons in it, giving the user the feeling that they're very accomplished at setting up all sorts of sophisticated software packages. Little do they know that their propensity for installing these things is what got them into the mess they're in.

I blame the independent software vendors for this tragedy as much as I do Microsoft. Every one of them wants to make their program what we used to call a TSR, or Terminate and Stay Resident, background process that is always available with little or no startup time, for the maximum convenience of the user. Run at Startup and Install in System Tray are not "good things", especially for programs that you might use once in a while. There are an awful lot of these little resource users including ones from big names companies like Adobe and Apple. Who the hell needs Quicktime available in less than a second at the expense of keeping your machine thrashing for 5 minutes at bootup and thereafter whenever anything changes?

Speaking of Apple, another fellow chimed in earlier that he had a number of Macs and that they were superior. Raves also for OS-X and it's BSD OS roots. Well, I too have a 20" iMac on my desk sitting right next to my aforementioned windows machine. I use it a lot, every day. There are a number of things I detest about it that I simply grit my teeth and live with, however. Apple has done a lot of things right, and a few things horribly wrong, just like Microsoft. Let's look at the Pros:

Apple Pros
- A user interface that is visually appealing
- A great compliment of bundled software
- A very handsome system unit/monitor combo
- Great stability, few reboots, no crashes
- Good auto-software updates from the mother ship.
- Reasonably good support for peripherals, usb, etc.
- Good support for modern protocols, TCP, SSH, etc.
- Native applications look really good

Apple Cons
- Cute but crappy keyboard and mouse
- Refusal to accept keyboard standards (Option key?)
- Really bad documentation, difficult to troubleshoot
- Based on Linux but detached enough to be cryptic
- Their own confusing "registry" (Netinfo database)
- Lukewarm support of the X-window system
- Yet another API means a lot of effort to write programs
- Lots of great capabilities are hidden.

Apple has always been the epitome of arrogance when it comes to being different. Only recently did they add the right mouse button and that is even hidden on the Mighty Mouse (it's a smooth mouse with a capacitive finger sensors to detect whether the left or right side of the mouse has a finger on it). The Mac's preference of putting the menu bar at the top of a shared area at the top of the screen is irritating, and makes you feel like you're being herded into their own version of the one button Jetson world. I vastly prefer letting each application manage it's own top level menu within the confines of it's own window space.

The simple act of resizing a window on the mac ticks me off as you can't just grab the border and instead have to find that little triangle at the lower right of the window. Sure, there probably is a special Option-Key click for this but frankly, I don't have the time to learn another set of option keys. Take copy and paste, for example. On windows it's control-C/Control-V. On Mac, it's Option-C, Option-V, unless you have a PC USB keyboard (like me) and it becomes Alt-C/Alt-V. It's like relocating the brake pedal on a car. What the hell is wrong with these people? For a guy that uses Microsoft/Apple/Unix on a daily basis, it's a royal pain and a lot of mistyped keystrokes trying to remember which system my fingers are on.

I bought the Mac because it had a unix-like OS and that it would make a very capable console with multiple terminal windows into my servers, good (but not great) email, and some really nice gee-whiz apps like Garage Band and the ability to make DVD's of my family vacations. I'm still PO'd that I can't take my iPod from the PC to the Mac because the iPod will either have a DOS or a MAC filesystem on it, but no cross compatibility.

One time I shut down my Mac with a music CD stuck
in the DVD drive. It wouldn't boot after that. It would attempt to boot, find an unrecognizable image on the CD, and then just sit there with a grey screen. I thought it was broken. Oh yes, and there is no eject button, and no emergency eject hole to get it out. After about 20 minutes of web surfing the Apple website with dozens of missed searches, I finally learned that if you hold down the eject button on the keyboard while powering the system on that it will eject the cd. There is no good excuse for the hour and a half of frustration that I was subjected to.

I guess my problem with the Apple is that there is an unwritten rule that you can't buy into their Kool-Aid halfway: you either become a Mac bigot or you aren't going to be a part of the party. Mac does 100% of what I want to do, but only if I want to be 100% Mac. I'm still not willing to make that jump even though I did give the cute machine a chance to prove itself. If it weren't for the DVD authoring stuff that I use a couple of times per year, I'd dump OS-X and load Solaris or perhaps Linux on the box. It's still a reasonably fast box with a 2GHZ Core Duo Intel in it, 2GB of RAM and all the basic IO I need.

-fred AA7BQ

[n6hcm]

Quote[/b] (aa7bq @ Mar. 20 2007,17:43)]Apple Cons
- Cute but crappy keyboard and mouse
- Refusal to accept keyboard standards (Option key?)
- Really bad documentation, difficult to troubleshoot
- Based on Linux but detached enough to be cryptic
- Their own confusing "registry" (Netinfo database)
- Lukewarm support of the X-window system
- Yet another API means a lot of effort to write programs
- Lots of great capabilities are hidden.
crappy is in the eye of the beholder--i've been happy with apple keyboards and mice. i don't have this burning desire to have extra mouse buttons. the option and command keys were on apple keyboards long before there was a windows key on the brand x keyboards.

macos x isn't especially based on linux at all (although i suppose one could say that linux and bsd unix have a good deal of common ground).

the netinfo stuff does, indeed, stink to high heaven. it seems they didn't learn their lesson with this on nextos.

[KB3NDN]

Quote[/b] (aa7bq @ Mar. 20 2007,12:43)]I thought I'd add a few random thoughts based on the 3+ pages of articles before this so please excuse any ranting or rambling...

"OS/2 could have been great if...". #This is just plain wrong. #Software becomes obsolete as technologies mature. #It's like comparing a tube radio to a modern DSP transceiver. # The fact that it worked and continues to work in certain specialized applications is a testament to those apps and the engineers who designed them. # In the end, however, OS/2 was a good OS that didn't reach it's full potential. #Had it survived today, it would have had to undergo a massive internal restructuring in order to provide the types of services that modern systems require.

Vista is related to DOS, but I'd venture to say that not one line of code in Vista came from the original DOS source. #Some of the data structures survived, such as the FAT file system, but those exist for compatibility, a little thing that we all love and take for granted. #

In my humble opinion (IMHO), Microsoft fell victim to Gate's #personal vanity. #It has been the belief that "We're smarter than everybody else" that has caused them to time-and-time again reinvent the wheel and to discard better ideas in favor of those that they developed in-house. # #
Some of it's also just plain greed, i.e., things that are developed in house are royalty-free, and potentially patentable. # Gates has always been a first rate businessman.

Other posters have already pointed out that Windows was a single-user operating system, lacking proper memory management, a primitive user rights management system, a crippled file system, and a hideous configuration database known as the Registry. #

The registry is one of my pet peeves with Windows (all versions). #It's the place where things are hidden. #The longer a windows system has been in use, the slower it gets and the more likely it is to fail because of things which don't match up in the registry. #Some call it "registry rot", and others call it the built-in upgrade timer. #Every wonder why a new computers are always faster? #New, faster processors sure help, but clean fresh registries do wonders too. #

Windows XP has been the best and most reliable OS so far in the Microsoft line. #My main XP system is running about 3 years old now and it curiously seems to work most of the time. #It's a 2GHZ P4 that's loaded down with a ton of software, and every once in a while I have to go in and strip out junk programs to keep it running at its best. #I've also installed a professional background disk defragmenter that seemed to improve performance a lot.

Some folks on this forum agree that XP is reliable however I would add the caveat that it's reliability is directly proportional to the skill of its user/owner. #I have a number of computer challenged friends who will occasionally ask me to come over and have a look at their machines. #The complaint? #"The system is running slow and takes forever to start up". #Their system tray will usually have about two dozen mini-icons in it, giving the user the feeling that they're very accomplished at setting up all sorts of sophisticated software packages. #Little do they know that their propensity for installing these things is what got them into the mess they're in.

I blame the independent software vendors for this tragedy as much as I do Microsoft. #Every one of them wants to make their program what we used to call a TSR, or Terminate and Stay Resident, background process that is always available with little or no startup time, for the maximum convenience of the user. #Run at Startup and Install in System Tray are not "good things", especially for programs that you might use once in a while. #There are an awful lot of these little resource users including ones from big names companies like Adobe and Apple. #Who the hell needs Quicktime available in less than a second at the expense of keeping your machine thrashing for 5 minutes at bootup and thereafter whenever anything changes?

Speaking of Apple, another fellow chimed in earlier that he had a number of Macs and that they were superior. #Raves also for OS-X and it's BSD OS roots. #Well, I too have a 20" iMac on my desk sitting right next to my aforementioned windows machine. #I use it a lot, every day. #There are a number of things I detest about it that I simply grit my teeth and live with, however. #Apple has done a lot of things right, and a few things horribly wrong, just like Microsoft. #Let's look at the Pros:

Apple Pros
- A user interface that is visually appealing
- A great compliment of bundled software
- A very handsome system unit/monitor combo
- Great stability, few reboots, no crashes
- Good auto-software updates from the mother ship.
- Reasonably good support for peripherals, usb, etc.
- Good support for modern protocols, TCP, SSH, etc.
- Native applications look really good

Apple Cons
- Cute but crappy keyboard and mouse
- Refusal to accept keyboard standards (Option key?)
- Really bad documentation, difficult to troubleshoot
- Based on Linux but detached enough to be cryptic
- Their own confusing "registry" (Netinfo database)
- Lukewarm support of the X-window system
- Yet another API means a lot of effort to write programs
- Lots of great capabilities are hidden.

Apple has always been the epitome of arrogance when it comes to being different. #Only recently did they add the right mouse button and that is even hidden on the Mighty Mouse (it's a smooth mouse with a capacitive finger sensors to detect whether the left or right side of the mouse has a finger on it). #The Mac's preference of putting the menu bar at the top of a shared area at the top of the screen is irritating, and makes you feel like you're being herded into their own version of the one button Jetson world. #I vastly prefer letting each application manage it's own top level menu within the confines of it's own window space.

The simple act of resizing a window on the mac ticks me off as you can't just grab the border and instead have to find that little triangle at the lower right of the window. #Sure, there probably is a special Option-Key click for this but frankly, I don't have the time to learn another set of option keys. #Take copy and paste, for example. #On windows it's control-C/Control-V. #On Mac, it's Option-C, Option-V, unless you have a PC USB keyboard (like me) and it becomes Alt-C/Alt-V. #It's like relocating the brake pedal on a car. #What the hell is wrong with these people? #For a guy that uses Microsoft/Apple/Unix on a daily basis, it's a royal pain and a lot of mistyped keystrokes trying to remember which system my fingers are on.

I bought the Mac because it had a unix-like OS and that it would make a very capable console with multiple terminal windows into my servers, good (but not great) email, and some really nice gee-whiz apps like Garage Band and the ability to make DVD's of my family vacations. #I'm still PO'd that I can't take my iPod from the PC to the Mac because the iPod will either have a DOS or a MAC filesystem on it, but no cross compatibility.

One time I shut down my Mac with a music CD stuck
in the DVD drive. #It wouldn't boot after that. #It would attempt to boot, find an unrecognizable image on the CD, and then just sit there with a grey screen. #I thought it was broken. #Oh yes, and there is no eject button, and no emergency eject hole to get it out. #After about 20 minutes of web surfing the Apple website with dozens of missed searches, I finally learned that if you hold down the eject button on the keyboard while powering the system on that it will eject the cd. #There is no good excuse for the hour and a half of frustration that I was subjected to.

I guess my problem with the Apple is that there is an unwritten rule that you can't buy into their Kool-Aid halfway: you either become a Mac bigot or you aren't going to be a part of the party. #Mac does 100% of what I want to do, but only if I want to be 100% Mac. #I'm still not willing to make that jump even though I did give the cute machine a chance to prove itself. #If it weren't for the DVD authoring stuff that I use a couple of times per year, I'd dump OS-X and load Solaris or perhaps Linux on the box. #It's still a reasonably fast box with a 2GHZ Core Duo Intel in it, 2GB of RAM and all the basic IO I need.

-fred #AA7BQ
the only reason you hate most of the interface of macintosh and the mouse is because you were brainwashed by windows machines your whole life, plus with your comments i dont think you used apple before it was osx. lol. also vista has nothing to do with dos. i think they phased that out in xp - with maybe the exception of the fat file system as you stated - which i never saw a reason to use after ntfs.

[AA7BQ]

KB3NDN writes Quote[/b] ]
the only reason you hate most of the interface of macintosh and the mouse is because you were brainwashed by windows machines your whole life, plus with your comments i dont think you used apple before it was osx. lol. also vista has nothing to do with dos. i think they phased that out in xp - with maybe the exception of the fat file system as you stated - which i never saw a reason to use after ntfs.


Not wanting to respond simply to be contrary however I am familiar with Macintosh and their entire product line back to the Apple II back in the day that I used to be a repair tech on them. I went to the grand opening of the Mac in the Moscone Center in SF back in, 1985? and so I'm pretty familiar with their entire product line, as a whole.

My computer experience goes back, literally, to the punched card days and I've had my hands on everything in between. I went through the single board computer phase with assembly language programming on a 16-key pad, ROM based basic interpreters, Teletype machines, the TRS-80, and all of the primitive machines. I was a service tech for Osborne, Apple II, the original IBM PC, NorthStar, and a bunch of others.

As for keyboards, I've had my hands on everything imaginable I'm a fast touch typist with big hands. Tactile feedback is of utmost importance for me. Remember the old IBM keyboards with the positive 'click' sound on each keypress? How about the 'chicklet' keyboard on the IBM PC jr? I've used them all.

I have gripes with every keyboard. For example:
Keys that should be forever abolished (all mfgrs):
- Caps Lock (should burn in hell)
- SysRq
- Pause
- Scroll Lock

My current favorite keyboard is the Microsoft Desktop Elite. It has a nice wrist pad (very important), medium-high keys with good travel, it's quiet yet tactile, and it's wireless. All the keys, (even the ones I hate) are in the normal places and with drivers (on both mac and windows) some keys are assignable, and Caps Lock can be disabled. I don't really use the custom media keys, except for the volume controls.

I did put the aforementioned keyboard on my iMac and the basic typeability improved immensely. Still, however, some things were messed up having to do with the whole Ctrl-Alt-CMD-Apple key mess. This just won't go away, ever, no matter which keyboard I get.

It is clear that arguing the merits of whether Apple's or Microsoft's human keyboard interface is better is pointless. They are what they are and I have begrudgingly adapted to the differences. What I can't accept, however, is the simple fact that in a sensible world, standards are typically set by the majority. At least Apple had the good sense to adopt QWERTY over the Divorak layout. Beyond that, however, all bets are off.

As for the mouse situation, Apple's original sales pitch was that we should live in a one-button world. Anything more than one button represented a poorly designed user interface and that the masses wanted the simplicity of a one button world. Ever seen a modern fighter jet with just one button on the control stick? The whole one button idea is just plain crippling and Apple knows this. That's why they "secretly" added a second primary button to their mice.

I'm also amused at the brand loyalty of Apple users. They seem to revel in their Different equals Better mentality, or in perl, $different eq $better ? Apple : Windows;

Let me say that a great many fantastic applications are available for the Mac and for those apps, the Mac is the best choice by far.

-fred

[kf6rdn]

To the main topic:

I had no intention of "upgrading" to Vista, I didn't like the draconian security. Meaning self secruity - i.e. not being able to re-install, and all the horror stories.
Well, I got a copy of ultimate as a gift from MS (we're sort of a "partner") my first thought was hmmm, going for 280 on ebay. Second, no it's a gift, I'm old fashion that way. So I ghosted my linux install on my laptop, and installed Vista.
My main apps work just fine - SecureCRT to get into Linux systems, VNC to get into the Netbackup manager on Solaris and Linux systems.. ummm.. So, err so far it works well to get into Linux/Solaris systems. Well it's only been 2 days, maybe I'll install Battlefield 2142 or Neverwinter Nights and see how it holds up.

Fred your background is similar, funny I agree about useless keys.
yEAH I HAVE NO IDEA WHY THE HELL THE "cAPSlOCK KEY WAS INVENTED! doh!

The others I need - they're used for kvm switches.

As far as using a mac to author DVDs actually PC's are used by the pros.

There's some good "amateur" type stuff if you are just making home movies into DVDs Nero has an included add on that works pretty well.

I never understand that brand loyalty. Use what works for you.

One thing I'll disagree with, the guy that said "OS/2: could have been great if.."
Which you disagreed with.. sort of.. I think if it was supported, as in sold alot it COULD have. At the TIME, as in when at least Warp 3 was out, comparing what was out there at the time, it was more stable, I think basicly technically superior to anything, again at the TIME. You can't compare an OS that's, what 10 or more years old to those that are a few years old. Pre-emptive multitasking, multithreading etc.

We used it as a ccmail MTA server and it would be up for months on VERY heavy usage. Course our Novell servers were up years at a time.
That's another loss, I think Novell (Not Novell Linux, but their own network OS) was FAR superior to anything even today. At least as a file, directory and print service infrastructure, not application server. (For that I'd have to say Linux).

[ka5piu]

Hello.

Come and get it!
http://www.microsoft.com/genuine....0100184 (http://www.microsoft.com/genuine/downloads/GenuineNotifier.aspx?displaylang=en&Error=0&sGuid=1521f5d2-5f77-4630-8a90-4069f0100184)

[n6hcm]

Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ Mar. 06 2007,11:13)]Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Mar. 02 2007,15:52)]Vista may be bad, but NOTHING can compare with IBM's OS-2 for being the worst operating system ever devised for mass distribution.

OS-2 was so bad that you had to pay someone to even dispose of brand new, unopened, installation packages!

Glen, K9STH
Hmmm...that's interesting. At Hipas Observatory, we have LOTS of legacy OS-2 data acquisition software running, including an ionosonde that probably hasn't been rebooted in a decade.
i think the problem with OS/2 is that its makers conceded defeat from the start by including windows compatability. software developers didn't have to do anything special to run on the platform because of this, and so they didn't.

[n6hcm]

Quote[/b] (aa7bq @ Mar. 23 2007,10:31)]As for keyboards, I've had my hands on everything imaginable I'm a fast touch typist with big hands. Tactile feedback is of utmost importance for me. Remember the old IBM keyboards with the positive 'click' sound on each keypress? How about the 'chicklet' keyboard on the IBM PC jr? I've used them all.

I have gripes with every keyboard. For example:
Keys that should be forever abolished (all mfgrs):
- Caps Lock (should burn in hell)
- SysRq
- Pause
- Scroll Lock
those clicky keyboards are awesome.

i don't understand why any modern computer needs any of those keys you identified.

[kf6snj]

I sometimes have need of the caps lock key for security reasons (I work with several case sensitive passwords). As for "SysRq", "Pause", "Scroll Lock", "Home", and "End", I have to wonder "WHY"?

To me, those five keys are absolutely worthless. I use the F1 through F12 keys to switch between the GUI and various shells (I sometimes have to compile programs rather than using a package installer). Incidentally, the keyboard I am using doesn't even have a "windows" key (yes, a 104 key Packard Bell model 5193 keyboard). Win98 didn't necessarily like it, but I managed. When I switched to Linux, it worked out great. I seriously doubt that Win2K or Vista would like this keyboard either. Micro$oft seems to have forgotten the idea that more isn't always better (I somehow suspect that they are partly responsible for how most modern keyboards are designed).


As for the Qwerty vs Divorak layout, I have come to the conclusion than neither is better than the other, just different. It is just a question of popularity and how quick can somebody learn to do something new. I suppose that I could switch to using something other than Qwerty if I needed to (not that I have seen anything else in the local thrift shop, but then again..)

[W3MIV]

As I just posted on the other Vista thread:

Quote[/b] ]I am running Vista on a new HP Pavilion. Intel e6600 dual with 4 GB of RAM and 250GB RAID 1 setup.

Though Vista is full of gremlins, they have been "self-correcting" for the most part. I have had no internal hardware issues (which I would not expect to have since the thing was built for Vista), but I have encountered a number of software issues that will not be resolved until those programs are specifically adapted to Vista.

Open Office 2.2 works flawlessly with Vista (so far ), and I have had no issues with PhotoShop or Illustrator CS2 or ACDSee 9.x.

Epson has drivers for my scanner, but SilverFast's supposedly "Vista-ready" software will not work. Worse, HP (ironically) does not yet have a working driver for my printer and I have to use a work-around that lacks some features, the worst of which lacks is automatic duplex printing.

I think once MS gets out a service pack -- and the software/hardware folks get theirs acts together -- Vista will end up a winner.


I have been running Vista on this new machine since the middle of March.

[KD6NIG]

I'm still surprised the "PANIC" or "Oh ----" button hasn't been implemented on the microsoft keyboard.

It would be much easier than control-alt-delete http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[ab8ma]

I just got KB925902 pushed to my XP SP2 while booting. 928843 was installed in Febuary. Now here is what is Microsoft's answer to the problem resulting from this:

This problem may occur after you install security update 925902 (MS07-017) and security update 928843 (MS07-008). The Hhctrl.ocx file that is included in security update 928843 and the User32.dll file that is included in security update 925902 have conflicting base addresses. This problem occurs if the program loads the Hhctrl.ocx file before it loads the User32.dll file.

edit ...

They have fixed this now in KB935448. But that will probably conflict with somethins else. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[KC2QYD]

This smells like a new windows ME!! haha windows stinks, i use xp and in VMware i have linux running. I have a COMPAQ SR1601nX with 1.8 64bit and 2.2 gigs of ram and a 400 gig sata drive. its a beast. it also has a 120 gig IDE but i dont like to use that, sata is fast but you can get a bottle neck with it somtimes.

[W3MIV]

Vista has an interesting "solution" regarding compatibility problems with various drivers that programs load.

Instead of just grinding to a halt (silently) as previous Windows flavors, leaving one to try to figure out what went wrong and how to fix it, Vista tells you which driver caused the problem and offers to find a solution on either the MS Knowledge database or refers you to the website of the offending driver's creator for a solution or patch. In this morning's instance of a glitch, Vista disabled and unloaded the offending driver and had a solution in seconds, taking me directly to a website from which a patch was downloaded and installed.

To date, I have only one unresolved problem with a program, and the authors of that program acknowledge the problem and are "working on it."

[KA8NCR]

Quote[/b] (n6hcm @ Mar. 25 2007,01:03)]Quote[/b] (aa7bq @ Mar. 23 2007,10:31)]As for keyboards, I've had my hands on everything imaginable I'm a fast touch typist with big hands. Tactile feedback is of utmost importance for me. Remember the old IBM keyboards with the positive 'click' sound on each keypress? How about the 'chicklet' keyboard on the IBM PC jr? I've used them all.

I have gripes with every keyboard. For example:
Keys that should be forever abolished (all mfgrs):
- Caps Lock (should burn in hell)
- SysRq
- Pause
- Scroll Lock
those clicky keyboards are awesome.

i don't understand why any modern computer needs any of those keys you identified.
My favorites are the old IBM keyboards that had a solenoid in them that "chunked" on every keypress. Made those terminals feel and sound like you were punching cards, or at the very least pounding on an old IBM Selectric typewriter.

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (G0GQK @ Mar. 02 2007,15:12)]I've read a number of reports about Vista and nobody is satisfied with it. Why would they put it on the market knowing it can cause huge problems for their customers ?

G0GQK
Because they CAN? And because they can make $$$? They discontinued support for Win98, and will do the same for XP at some point, which will mean no more security patches to fix the Swiss Cheese that passes for those OS's, so there's little choice except LINUX or other OS.

Maybe after "SP2" or "SP3" VISTA will become usable. That remains to be seen.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (wa9svd @ April 12 2007,09:49)]Quote[/b] (G0GQK @ Mar. 02 2007,15:12)]I've read a number of reports about Vista and nobody is satisfied with it. Why would they put it on the market knowing it can cause huge problems for their customers ?

G0GQK
Because they CAN? #And because they can make $$$? # They discontinued support for Win98, and will do the same for XP at some point, which will mean no more security patches to fix the Swiss Cheese that passes for those OS's, so there's little choice except LINUX or other OS.

# #Maybe after "SP2" or "SP3" VISTA will become usable. #That remains to be seen.
I am not having any problems using it right now. There are a number of little gremlins, but I have yet to encounter any serious issues other than software that does not work correctly, and that is not so much the fault of Vista as it is of the softwares' publishers. What issues I have had are being worked on, but I suspect that a lot of stuff is still being "discovered" by the software writers who are trying to catch up. I absolutely agree that most users should wait for SP1 to come out before jumping in this pool.

From what I have been seeing and reading, Vista is not a system to put on minimal computer hardware. So if you plan to play, plan to pay.

I am running an Intel e6600 duo with 4GB of RAM and twin 250GB drives in RAID1 configuration. The graphics card is NVIDIA, and 256MB RAM on the board is too little and drags the system down, so I have set up to share another 256MB from system memory. I probably will replace that card with another, based on my experience to date. I am not a gamer, but do professional graphics, including high-end PhotoShop work.

Also, I think that it is a gross error to buy anything with Vista Home Basic installed on it.

So far, I am happy with the performance overall. YMMV.

73

[ka9wfn]

Just one word on Vista! HORRIBLE

[AB8RU]

Just go Download LINUX and run it . As soon as I pick up another pack of blank CDs I am going to run LINUX for experimental. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kf6snj]

I am in the process of looking for a working copy of either OS/2 or ecomstation so I can check it out. I hear that there is an abundance of amateur radio software available for it. I figure it is worth looking into.

[face]

Greetings all

Just a quick ? fro the forum,

When Windows Xp OS gets attacked by a trojan, am correct in saying, one of the favoured root directories is aims for is the system32dir? if so why is this so?

Thanks
Regards F4CE (face)

[KC9ECI]

My guess would be because that's where the vulnerable .DLL's are located?

[ve3sre]

Quote[/b] ]This smells like a new windows ME!!

I've read at least one post on a computer forum where they are referring to Vista as "ME II" http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

I have absolutely no desire to build a new 64 bit machine with two gigs of RAM just to run what... an operating system???

I'm running Kubuntu Linux just fine on a PIII 1.0 GHz. machine with 256 MB RAM. It isn't enough to do video editing or run the fancy new Linux "Compiz" or "Beryl" desktop effects but who cares? It does everything else.

I have no viruses, spyware, trojans etc. and I don't have to spend my life defragging the hard drive.

Once some decent ham contest logging software comes along for Linux I won't even keep a spare Winbox around.

[kj3n]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Mar. 02 2007,18:52)]Vista may be bad, but NOTHING can compare with IBM's OS-2 for being the worst operating system ever devised for mass distribution.

OS-2 was so bad that you had to pay someone to even dispose of brand new, unopened,