Author Topic: Here we go again (Read 558 times)

AKIron · « **on:** September 10, 2003, 02:01:22 PM »

Microsoft's gettin' more oh ****s these days than attaboys.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=&e=7&u=/ap/20030910/ap_on_hi_te/microsoft_security

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #1 on:** September 10, 2003, 02:43:41 PM »

Windows XP had ScriptKiddies written all over it from the beginning, glad I kept that FUBAR'd OS off my machine.
-SW

AKIron · « **Reply #2 on:** September 10, 2003, 02:50:13 PM »

Just gotta take some precautions Wulfe. A cheap firewall makes life much easier. I think I've used every OS Microsoft has written and imo XP is head and shoulders above the rest.

However, don't use protection, like many of my customers on their home PCs, and life ain't so good.

JimBear · « **Reply #3 on:** September 10, 2003, 03:04:24 PM »

Anyone remember Steve Gibsons hue and cry about the holes in XP and the vilification he got for his troubles?

Your right Iron it IS head and shoulders above the previous efforts, but the user awareness of their need to protect themselves needs to be addressed by MS with more than a warning on the update page (which most of them dont even know exists)

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #4 on:** September 10, 2003, 03:30:19 PM »

It's head and shoulders above the rest in terms of being user friendly for the neophyte PC user (which includes setting up simple things like a network connection), and in terms of memory management shipped with it (although I do believe Win2000 still has XP beat here) - but for gaming, Win98 is still better. Has less overhead than XP and memory management can be solved with shareware/freeware like Cacheman.

Lots of the "features" XP comes with I don't find very good. Such as the stock disk copy feature, using programs that come with most CD burners - you can have far more options and better customize what you want to copy and how you want it copied (layout). The Zip feature is pretty nice, but in my experience, WinZip produces more compact (smaller) zip files.

To each their own of course, I just don't want XP on my system (I do have a copy of it) anytime soon.
-SW

AKIron · « **Reply #5 on:** September 10, 2003, 03:48:49 PM »

Reliability is my main concern and XP has it. Win2K is good too from the user viewpoint though it doesn't have near the plug and capability of XP.

From the maintainer perspective XP is much better. You can replace a motherboard in an XP machine with very little difficulty. So far, every Win2K machine in which I've replace a motherboard had to have Windows reinstalled.

vorticon · « **Reply #6 on:** September 10, 2003, 03:50:41 PM »

i hace it and any features are moot...layout thing...annoying as ****...i run in normal windows setup...zip feature...great if your so stupid you cant even find winRAR (produces better zip and RAR files than winzip) windows messanger...great just what i need a built in thing that really isnt needed then it has 2 built in web browsers (msn explorer and internet explorer)

then of course its got these massive security flaws (the biggest being microsoft offering to much info about flaws) and cant play any game made before 1999...the compatibility modes are ****...

AKcurly · « **Reply #7 on:** September 10, 2003, 03:59:06 PM »

I'm not a big fan of microsoft software. However, I have been using XP for about a month now and while it still has the same security problems as 95/98/NT/ME, the OS itself appears to be fairly stable.

For example, last night, I was bitten by one of (god knows how many exist) the sound problems in Aces High. My system locked up with a username stuck in the upper right corner from a voice transmission.

In the past when I was running win98SE, I would have been unable to gain control of the system -- the OS would be nonresponsive.

With XP, I did a couple of ctrl/alt/dels and got the task manager to respond. I deleted the task (aceshigh), fell back to XP and restarted the aces high.

I have yet to have winxp crash because of an XP bug. I'm sure it has numerous bugs, but I haven't had one bite me yet either.

I use XP for one thing: Aces High. When I do honest work, I use Linux.

curly

slimm50 · « **Reply #8 on:** September 10, 2003, 04:08:31 PM »

Running Windows ME, here. I hear a lot of people say it's a piece of junk, but I have not had any problems with it, since I got patches for the bugs that initially came with it.

Roscoroo(work) · « **Reply #9 on:** September 10, 2003, 04:11:02 PM »

I have bolth 98se and xp os's and i had them set up as a dual boot for quite awhile (just to compare the 2 )

XP may install easier because of its driver base ,(i only had to load a sound driver manually) and it has a couple of bells and whistle's that the other os's dont have. the picture slide show is neat .. and it system restore works nice.and it reconized additional hard ware really easy (hd's, printers,cams,scanners, ect)
but XP is a pain ...trying to get its resorces up by shutting down stuff was always a nightmare (sometimes it worked other times the os crashed)its firewall program sux,,,, the video was always "wavy" even after changing drivers ect. the mass security updates ...what a pain for a 56k user...along with now having to add the same stuff as i add to 98.... dx9.0b , msn messenger 6, ect.

I myself see no real advantages with xp and wont use it for gaming, Microsoft needs to build a better os then xp in my opinion. (they intended XP as an os for beginners/and to sell with new pc's)

LePaul · « **Reply #10 on:** September 10, 2003, 04:19:15 PM »

hate windows and are a computer novice?

Go run Linux for a week...cya back in 7 days!

AKIron · « **Reply #11 on:** September 10, 2003, 04:29:33 PM »

Quote

(they intended XP as an os for beginners/and to sell with new pc's)

Actually I believe they intend XP for everyone. Also, XP is based on the NT kernel which was originally intended for servers and high-end workstations.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #12 on:** September 10, 2003, 04:58:46 PM »

My system serves as 2 things: Gaming system first and foremost (set it up that way from the instant I first put it all together) and secondly, a wordprocessor, video playback (avi,mpg,wmv,etc), graphic editor (through PSP7.0), stereo (Sound card runs through my stereo to play CDs and, shield your eyes!, MP3s), and the occasional CD burning/copying and powerpoint presentation.

Since I first put this machine together, I have had one problem that has become one of those 2nd nature things (like taking vitamins in the morning) - and that is that my joystick can't be left in the USB port when I power down the PC and must be plugged back in (also must nuke the USB port). Other than that, its stable and I've never encountered non-user errors or problems.

I do regular maintenance on the PC hardware - cleaning dust off the hardware and fans/heatsinks, making sure all debri is out of the way for optimum airflow through the case - and software - fully removing entries for programs after deleting them, scandisk atleast once a week, defrag every month or 2, completely removing all evidence of prior hardware (which is really only the video card) driver/installation, and a few other things I can't remember off the top of my head. I only put in this much effort to keep the system running its best so I can put games at max details and recieve decent/fluid framerates.
-SW

AKIron · « **Reply #13 on:** September 10, 2003, 05:07:04 PM »

Well, there may be only one advantage of XP for ya to consider SW, memory. Unlike 98, XP does have a flat memory model and if ya want to go over 512mb yer gonna need XP.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #14 on:** September 10, 2003, 05:09:06 PM »

Running 768MB PC133, no problems and with Cacheman it actually uses that memory.
-SW