Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: fuzeman on March 23, 2007, 10:38:06 AM
-
Not a good sign when the government doesn't want it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/22/AR2007032200787.html
-
That just means MS didn't offer enough bribe money.
-
Mintz wrote that there is "no compelling technical or business case" to upgrade to the new products and specific reasons not to upgrade.
and so children this was the beginning of the revolution to overthrow Lord Gates and his Microsoft minions
-
I would bet that MS next response to this would be to tell all of the folks who provide ancilary software to put in a patch requiring vista if they want to maintain ability to use ms products.
-
I don't know about the government, but I sure don't want it. With MS track record of releasing OS before they are finished. Who would?
-
Originally posted by Maverick
I would bet that MS next response to this would be to tell all of the folks who provide ancilary software to put in a patch requiring vista if they want to maintain ability to use ms products.
Then the governments will find Linux. Some already have.
-
Our government will not Fishu. They are the most computer illiterate people on the planet. It takes them 10 years to get a dang bid done. Most computer companies do not want the business from the government due to the insane support requirements.
It really is pathetic. There is one local agency here who is still using 486 based computers. They have the fundng for next generation replacements, but cannot find anyone willing to quote 133 MHz Pentium systems to them. Yeah, that is how old the spec bid is. So they are going to write another bid. In 5 years it will be ready, maybe. Due to adminstration changes it will more than likely be 10 years before they get approved to submit the new spec for bids.
The government is a drop in the sales hat of MS. OEM's is where MS's bread gets buttered and they are all over Vista.
-
We can't use Vista right now because there is no Novell support.
I've got 20 Novell servers and MS' answer is to switch to Windows servers.
Sorry but I have my handy XP Pro CD handy and I know how to use it.
Piss on Vista!
-
I feel for people who get stuck with it. Now that my office system is running Vista, I have even more sympathy. I remember my old XP Pro system at idle had around 210 threads (not processes) or so running. Vista, as stripped as I can get it, still runs over 430 threads at idle.
All the things MS is doing in background is rather scary. I would not put anything you wanted to keep a secret on a Vista computer. That is for sure.
Oh, and you have not had any real fun until you try and share something on a Vista box. Or try to run a remote executable from the Vista box. Let me tell you, it is a barrel of laughs.....NOT!!!!! freaking IT nightmare is what it is.
-
Just a quick question since quite a few here know about computers. I am buying a new laptop once I get out of boot camp (I leave in 3 days) and I'm wondering since I can't get any with WinXP OEM on it anymore, if I can just do a format and put my old XP Pro CD on there without losing any features. I'm guessing yes, since it's just an OS, but you never know.
-
You can put any older version of windows on and it is legal. You will need to find the XP drivers to all your devices before you wipe it out.
-
Originally posted by Mightytboy
You can put any older version of windows on and it is legal. You will need to find the XP drivers to all your devices before you wipe it out.
That's what I was figuring, but I had a hard time putting 98SE on one of my laptops that came with XP Pro. The difference in 98SE vs XP Pro for installation and driver support was like the difference in the hills in Oklahoma vs Mt. Everest though.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Our government will not Fishu. They are the most computer illiterate people on the planet. It takes them 10 years to get a dang bid done.
Not only that, but when they finally get companies to bid on stuff the margins are so small that the foolish company that wins the bid is likely to lose money. Where is the first place said company would try to cut corners? The only place is post sales support, of course.
As a joke I once bid on a govt contract w/ only a 3% profit margin built in. I lost.
-
3%? is that all Lockheed is getting?
-
Originally posted by fuzeman
Not a good sign when the government doesn't want it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/22/AR2007032200787.html
I knew I had read this somewhere before! :)
http://forums.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=200189
Regards,
Sun
-
As usual, I'm two days late and two dollars short.
Apologies.
-
what Microsoft deserves for making a POS Operating System:furious
my 2 cents:D
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Our government will not Fishu. They are the most computer illiterate people on the planet. It takes them 10 years to get a dang bid done. Most computer companies do not want the business from the government due to the insane support requirements.
It really is pathetic. There is one local agency here who is still using 486 based computers. They have the fundng for next generation replacements, but cannot find anyone willing to quote 133 MHz Pentium systems to them. Yeah, that is how old the spec bid is. So they are going to write another bid. In 5 years it will be ready, maybe. Due to adminstration changes it will more than likely be 10 years before they get approved to submit the new spec for bids.
The government is a drop in the sales hat of MS. OEM's is where MS's bread gets buttered and they are all over Vista.
Holy crap... I agree 100% with skuzzy.
-
Damn Vista anyway. It broke my program I wrote and sell. They have a dummy WinHlp32.exe installed on Vista that pops a message that says go fish whenever help is invoked. Never mind the fact that support for the API is still built into the Kernal. Had to change all the online help over to HTML Help (.Chm) files, code it up and recompile. Now I have a couple of hundred users who's programs are going to break as they migrate to Vista. I will keep an update at the website but it is, nonetheless, a monumental pain in the bellybutton for no good reason. There are literally hundreds of other legacy applications that will fail in this way. Of course you can d/l an update to make it function from MickySoft or just grab a WinHlp32.exe from an XP box but the technical level of the folks I deal with makes either of those untenable options.
I'm hoping Microsoft screwed the pooch on this deal. They are forcing the upgrade through blunt economic force and it's nice to daydream that average users will wake up to amount of control they are giving to Microsoft and descend on Redmond with torches and pitchforks. Probably no such luck.
-
OOOOOOOOOO my,,,, Skuzzy Took the Vista Plunge .... eek whats this world coming too ...
and how about that hack coming thru the xbox live accounts and infiltrating your vista pc ? .... Just something to beware of guys . theres alot more to it then what there letting go public at this time.
-
Originally posted by Casca
Damn Vista anyway. It broke my program I wrote and sell. They have a dummy WinHlp32.exe installed on Vista that pops a message that says go fish whenever help is invoked.
So what your saying is the "Help" isnt any more helpful in Vista then is was in XP, or 98, or 95?
LOL MS Help files are the most useless things I ever came across. In any software I ever owned. In countess times in giving them a shot I havent one single time had an instance where it helped me
-
Originally posted by Roscoroo
OOOOOOOOOO my,,,, Skuzzy Took the Vista Plunge .... eek whats this world coming too ...
and how about that hack coming thru the xbox live accounts and infiltrating your vista pc ? .... Just something to beware of guys . theres alot more to it then what there letting go public at this time.
He probably has to.
After all hes going to have to try and provide some sort of tech support for all the new vista users
-
Originally posted by Roscoroo
OOOOOOOOOO my,,,, Skuzzy Took the Vista Plunge .... eek whats this world coming too ...
Business decision. My home PC is doing quite well running XP Pro. I do have to find a way so Vista users can play the game. Only way to do that is to work with the mess. And it is a mess. Much worse than I had originally thought.
Orginally posted by Mini D[]i]
Holy crap... I agree 100% with skuzzy.
Uh, that just ain't right. :D
-
yea I knew you would have to mess with it sooner or later ... to many prebuilt pc's with it on the store shelves now .
Now you get to convince the noob gamers that Vista performs 100% better with the aero pack turned off ... Good luck
-
My first thought on how to approach it...
Me: Disable Aero.
Mr Big Computer User: But its pretty and lame to turn it off.
Me: I have heard over the Internet, if you like Aero, it means you are gay.
Mr Big Computer User: I meant to say, "it's pretty lame, I intend to turn it off!"
Me: That's what I thought you said!
Sigh,..hey a support guy can dream, can't he?
-
he he he.....skuzzy said "gay"
OTOH I seriously don't see why somone with a brain doesn't design a stipped down OS that can run games, emulate windows, and doesn't bogg down the system. There's a serious market for something like that that's easy to use.
-
Lot of people want to do it. But, MS would tie it up in court for a bazillion years. No one can fight Microsoft. At least, no one in this country can. Even the U.S. government got stomped on my MS.
Nope, it will have to be done off shore and it would never see the light of day in the U.S.
-
well its been about 6 months now on Vista and still no problems...
internet is faster, torrents work just fine, and so does everything else...
I must be gay cause I use Aero, just cause skuzzy said so:rolleyes:
-
^ Must be one of Bill Gates shades. ^
-
Originally posted by Catalyst
.....
internet is faster, .....
So a different OS can make the internet faster???
Where's Al Gore when you need him?
-
Originally posted by fuzeman
So a different OS can make the internet faster???
Where's Al Gore when you need him?
:rofl
-
Gore is busy burning up lots more fuel and electricity trying to find ways to tell folks how to live in a manner he refuses to.
-
Any computer running better with Vista than on XP is only due to poor management of the XP installation. There is no way Vista can run anything faster or better than XP. Absolutely no way.
So when anyone says, "Vista made everything faster", then translate that to, "My XP installation was seriously messed up so I installed Vista so I could get a fresh start".
And there are serious compatibility problems with Vista, or MS would not be releasing patches to correct application compatibiity problems. The last patch addressed 30 or 40 applications which had problems running under Vista.
-
(http://ftp.hostingromania.ro/Linux/pics/linux_penguin_suck-microsoft.jpg)
Word
Mac
-
I maybe building a new computer in a few months and have been thinking about putting Linux on it. Is that a good idea for a gaming computer?
-
Originally posted by Xargos
I maybe building a new computer in a few months and have been thinking about putting Linux on it. Is that a good idea for a gaming computer?
2 drives or MS and Linux will headbutt and try to strangle each other on startup. Then partician the start up Linux first on startup. Or better yet, you can hub two puters, each with a diff OS.
Mac
-
If the game uses DirectX, the answer is no, but OpenGL games run fine. There are several distros of Linux that will suit most typical users for all other tasks - web browsing, email, music and video, etc. - so, you can have a clean WindowsXP for a DirectX games and use Linux for eveything else. You simply select which OS on startup.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Any computer running better with Vista than on XP is only due to poor management of the XP installation. There is no way Vista can run anything faster or better than XP. Absolutely no way.
So when anyone says, "Vista made everything faster", then translate that to, "My XP installation was seriously messed up so I installed Vista so I could get a fresh start".
And there are serious compatibility problems with Vista, or MS would not be releasing patches to correct application compatibiity problems. The last patch addressed 30 or 40 applications which had problems running under Vista.
bite your tongue, you don't know everything skuzz, before you come all high and mighty, try a little research...
no need to use TCP Optimizer for Vista...ex: network stack, research that
and for the rest of you followers, switch to Linux if ya'll so damn scared of change...you will come back to MS eventually
still remember little kids Biatchin the same way when XP came out, now XP is the key, the platform to compare, stuff it, 2000 was better and still is better then XP...
-
See Rule #4
-
Originally posted by Catalyst
See Rule #4
Isn't that changing the way your computer reacts or interacts with the internet and not a change on the internet itself?
If I change from dialup to broadband I get a faster connection but I have not changed the internet one bit.
-
Originally posted by Catalyst
and for the rest of you followers, switch to Linux if ya'll so damn scared of change...you will come back to MS eventually
Yes, Yes of course MS has the "Divine Right" to rule the world. If you speak against MS your a heretic and you'll be burned at the stake.
Is MS the leader of the "New World Order"?
-
See Rule #4
-
Catalyst, it is a phsyical impossibility for Vista to be faster than XP, given similar installations.
It is impossible for the 430+ threads Vista runs by default (and that is the low side count) to run faster than the 230+ threads XP runs by default, which is also on the low side count.
You cannot run more software on any given hardware platlform without sacrificing performance to the overall system. It cannot be done.
it has been proven by many sites on the Internet, that given the same hardware, software runningunder Vista, will be approximately 25 to 35% slower, than running the same software on XP.
This is not about bashing MS, this is just a simple fact. If your, or anyone else's computer, is running better under Vista that it did under XP, with the same software installed, then the installation of XP was fouled up. It is a simple deduction based on the facts and backed up my many other sites on the Internet who have tested and compared the two operating systems.
I have already spent a good deal of time on Vista trying to get back as much performance as possible, and I still cannnot get close to the performance I had running Windows 2000. See my sticky post in the Technical support forum about Vista performance tips.
If you have another explanation, please assert it. As a side note, I do not know why you are getting all worked up about the fact that Vista is slower than XP. This is something that has been known for a little while now.
-
Originally posted by Catalyst
bite your tongue, you don't know everything skuzz, before you come all high and mighty, try a little research...
no need to use TCP Optimizer for Vista...ex: network stack, research that
and for the rest of you followers, switch to Linux if ya'll so damn scared of change...you will come back to MS eventually
still remember little kids Biatchin the same way when XP came out, now XP is the key, the platform to compare, stuff it, 2000 was better and still is better then XP...
TCP Optimizer is a sign of other problems within your network (ie a scummy router). At the end of the day it makes only a minor difference in performance. Often when it helps in one area it creates performance issues in others. Increase your MTU size to better web performance, and it hurts gaming. Decrease your MTU size to help gaming performance, and it hurts downloads/browsing.
I haven't needed to touch tcp optimizer since Win 98.
-
i use a TCP Optimizer for my XP...
i only used it to max out all the alloted bandwidth through my modem or something like that
the modem was set for 600KB/s i believe i have it set at 2000KB/s
i think using the Optimizer i could crank it up to 4000KB/s but i don't want to fubar anything
-
OK, here are some test, as I thought the 25-30% slower comment is unfounded:
Music processing:
http://rainrecording.co.uk/vista/performance
Vista wins.
Graphics benchmarks:
http://www.ozhardware.com.au/content/view/18/1/1/2/
Looks like fundamental driver issues on one of the important tests.
Vista comes of really bad.
PCMark
http://www.ozhardware.com.au/content/view/18/1/1/3/
More trouble with graphics again.
Overall 10% slower than vista in PC Mark test (due to graphics issues)
Games:
Generally 4-10% slower.
Some games had a bad drop of 50% compared to XP.
Most of the negative feedback is from Nvidea card drivers, games not running the same as XP. This is not necessarily the fault of Vista, could be the fact its new and they are not yet optimised.
-
Originally posted by Wes14
i use a TCP Optimizer for my XP...
i only used it to max out all the alloted bandwidth through my modem or something like that
the modem was set for 600KB/s i believe i have it set at 2000KB/s
i think using the Optimizer i could crank it up to 4000KB/s but i don't want to fubar anything
I don't think you understand what TCP optimizer does. It does none of things you're talking about.
-
Brendo, one thing about benchmarks. They can be done to prove whatever point you want to make with them. I put little stock in them.
I had read all over the net and got contridictory results. But, now that I have a Vista machine in my hands. I can categorically state it is significantly slower in everything I do everyday. I managed to get back a significant amount of the performance loss by stripping down Vista, but it is still slower than Windows 2000 was.
Would you feel better if I put together a bunch of charts and data to show why it is slower?
I now know why it is slower and it makes perfect sense. You cannot run that much software, at one time, and not have it impact the computer. But, you can get most of the lost performance back. And that is good news.
And yes, drivers are a problem with Vista. Some are worse than others.
-
Originally posted by Catalyst
bite your tongue, you don't know everything skuzz, before you come all high and mighty, try a little research...
no need to use TCP Optimizer for Vista...ex: network stack, research that
and for the rest of you followers, switch to Linux if ya'll so damn scared of change...you will come back to MS eventually
still remember little kids Biatchin the same way when XP came out, now XP is the key, the platform to compare, stuff it, 2000 was better and still is better then XP...
LOL XP was never the security issue that Vista is.... now you go enjoy your vista now... while they watch
-
Originally posted by Shuffler
LOL XP was never the security issue that Vista is.... now you go enjoy your vista now... while they watch
who is *they*? :)
-
Originally posted by Elfie
who is *they*? :)
They is THEM ! DUH!!!!:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by WilldCrd
They is THEM ! DUH!!!!:rolleyes:
I was being serious, who the heck is watching Vista comps? :)
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Lot of people want to do it. But, MS would tie it up in court for a bazillion years. No one can fight Microsoft. At least, no one in this country can. Even the U.S. government got stomped on my MS.
Nope, it will have to be done off shore and it would never see the light of day in the U.S.
That's what off-shore torrent sites are for :cool:
-
I'm sure those extra treads where put in for the NSA. I bet that is part of the contract MS has with our government to track so called terrorists.
-
There is the mistake right there skuzzy.
In fact, specifically state that AH can not be installed, or used on a vista system.
Then make DANG sure it can't and won't work on vista.
If they want to play AH, they have to use XP or earlier os.
After all, isn't that what MS is doing to us in reverse?
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Business decision. My home PC is doing quite well running XP Pro. I do have to find a way so Vista users can play the game. Only way to do that is to work with the mess. And it is a mess. Much worse than I had originally thought.
Uh, that just ain't right. :D
-
stop comparing XP and Vista performance Skuzz, you keep repeating yourself...old news
I was talking about NET STACKS, Vista is AUTO, XP is NOT, Vista will CHANGE its stack accordingly, XP will NOT, Vista will INCREASE your speed automatically by adjusting your stacks, TCP Opt. helps to better manage your UPLOADS speed range which create a bottle neck if not set right, lowering your DOWNLOAD speed...no need for TCP Opt in VISTA
these TESTS I performed myself and saw the actual speed increase in download performance when I adjusted to upload speed accordingly...
yes Vista uses more processes, more RAM etc etc...repeat rinse and wash
RAM is cheap bud...
If not, there's always the much talked about but rarely used super OS Linux good for servers but pretty rotten for users...
you see pretty much only negative attributes for Vista, I prefer trying to stay positive and dealing with the beast...no choice really.
-
It does not matter what the MTU size is set to. The ISP's routers are hard wired to a specific maximum. Either 1536 or 1500, depending on the terminal server/router brand.
If your computer makes a request larger than the above, then the packets are broken apart and reassembled on your computer.
Network stacks themselves are always dynamic. They are a linked list of packets in the operating system and have been that way since Windows 98.
An operating system cannot adjust the physical speed of your Internet connection. That is handled by the line protocol device, which is normally a modem. A modem negotiates the physical link, which includes the speed.
Even dialup connections are fixed by the modem. The OS can reduce the speed of the connection, but even a dialup connection starts at its maximum speed.
If you tested your connection over the Internet to get your result, then the tests are invalid. The Internet is too dynamic to be relied upon for any type of performance testing. To test it properly, you would have to connect two computers together, through a router. Then adjust the router settings to emulate an ISP's router. The you would have valid numbers.
And RAM is irrelevant. More RAM does not speed up processes. It only allows more room for more processes to be loaded. The CPU is still doing the work for all of that.
Windows XP Pro will be supported until January 2014. So there is a choice. And it is still a better OS than Vista. There are far more negatives about Vista than positives.
I do not care if you like the OS or not. If you like it, then peachy. But there is no point in ignoring the problems with it. And there are many problems with it.
-
Don't you just love it when people come into your house and pick a fight with you? :rolleyes:
-
I do not mind it when people challenge me with intelligent discussions. Keeps me on my toes. I do not care for it when it gets trivialized by anyone being disrespectful of others.
Software never got better when people just blindly accepted the warts and problems with it. If anyone wants, they can go over to Microsoft's TechNet (http://forums.microsoft.com/technet/default.aspx?forumgroupid=204&siteid=17) forums and read about all the problems/issues with Vista.
I would urge anyone looking for information about it, to do just that. It would not be wise to use a forum like this one to base your decision on.
-
Skuzzy have you a list anywhere of what is needed in the back ground of XP Home on the start up and what is optional?I just know after 3 years with this install that I have a LOAD of crap waiting in the wings to eat my resources...I just dont know what is what.
-
Try this link for what some of the processes are.
http://www.processlibrary.com/directory?files=UrlLstCk
-
You can also download FSAutoStart. (Right click and save Here>> (http://hells-angels.us/ah/fsasv1111.zip))
FSAutoStart will display what each running service does and a recommendation on whether or not it can be stopped. You can set a configuration for AH. FSAutoStart will stop the programs and services you select, launch AH, then restart the services after AH is closed.