Zxian

Well... I was bored one night while studying... so I figured I'd try overclocking my video card to squeeze a bit more performance out of it... Stock speeds are 300/216 (core/mem), and I've been able to get it up to 420/300 stable for a while now. Stock 3DMark05 scores are in the 1300 range, and I hit 1679 at 350/300. We'll have to see how high I can push things. 40% on core and memory is pretty decent I think. I've heard of some people getting similar overclocks on the X1400 in the Dell I6400's (the next generation of my laptop).

Wow... After a couple hours of using the beta 1, I'm impressed. They've even got the "hover-preview" of your tabs, similar to the feature that's due to come in Vista. I haven't played much with the widgets, since I get most of those through AveDesk, nor have I tried the BitTorrent features. Other than that, it seems very nice indeed. My only peeve with it is the fact that they've copied the Firefox keyboard shortcuts. Ctrl+N makes a new window by default now, instead of a new tab. Isn't that the whole point of a tabbed browser?

Definately give 8 a try. Once you've got all your settings back to the way you want them, it's well worth the upgrade. Or... if you want, give the 9 Beta 1 a try. I'm using it right now, and it's definately got some nice features.

3Dmark06 requires a really high end graphics card to run. From the "Minimum System Recommendations": Not everyone has a 256MB video card...

Device Manager or the Display Properties will tell you what graphics card you have. Right-click the desktop and select Properties. Then go to the Settings tab. You should be able to see the model of your video card there. If you click on "Advanced", you might be able to get more information.

Why don't you want to update to v8? There are several performance and security improvements... Not really much reason not to.

What part of " Any further discussion will be deleted until this is sorted out." do people not understand. Posts deleted.

Why don't you use the latest version of Opera? 8.54 is the latest stable release, and I don't have any troubles with it in Windows or Suse.

Hey everyone, The AveScripter group over on Aqua-Soft forums has been hard at work. The latest release is something I've been waiting for for a long, long time. OSX Volume Indicator in Windows That's my computer, running XP Pro, and the control shows up when I press the media keys on my laptop. Here's the link to the original thread - http://www.aqua-soft.org/board/showthread.php?t=34274

Yup... BartPE is the way to go.

The MicrowinX vs Mindows discussion ends here. No more topics/posts about this in open discussion. Any further discussion will be deleted until this is sorted out. If you want to discuss this further, PM or e-mail me or the rest of the administration team.

For plain-jane computer usage, 128MB will do just fine. The only difference is that Word may take 3 or 4 seconds to load, as opposed to 1 or 2. If those 2 seconds are such a big hit to your productivity, then you should consider upgrading. Most people fail to realize, it's not XP that needs the memory, it's all the other programs that you run. Oh, and those of you who suggested Windows 2003... stop it. Don't tell people to either pirate or waste $1000 on an OS.

This topic is actually really rediculous. Windows XP is meant for common computers, Server 2003 is meant for servers. Plain and simple. The fact that Win2k3 has the 5.2 kernel will not mean that it'll run 50% faster (or whatever) than the 5.1 kernel in XP. The kernel does not just have to deal with memory management, but it controls the entire system. Going from 5.1 to 5.2 is not a major revision, and is probably just the improvements that they had between 2001 and 2003. I'm getting ready to close this topic. It started off on the completely wrong basis, and isn't getting any better...

I use Acronis True Image. I really don't like Ghost all that much, and True Image is nice and easy to add to a Multi-boot CD. I always make an image of my Windows install after I've got everything up and running. The only thing that you have to deal with is that all of your programs will probably be out of date.

Not deleting, but closing. Have you tried searching? All the answers you need can be found already. Topic Closed

If you're on dial-up, then the browser "speed" would matter less than if you had high-speed. You've got to think about where your bottleneck on speed is. If your ISP is able to give you the webpages fast enough so that your computer is the slow part of webbrowsing, then the browser will make the difference. I say stick with whichever one is easier for you to use.

There might be some redundancy in the inbound protection of Outpost when you've got NAT firewall as well, but there's also the advantage of having your traffic controlled in one location. It makes it a bit easier to find your security settings. Oh... and I've got my laptop to think about. No NAT firewalls at university for me... The main reason that I wonder about the service configuration of Winpooch is the possible complications that arise when dealing with multiple user accounts. If you've got two user accounts, and Winpooch is running on each, will the other user's Winpooch stop your connection?

Yup... I confess. I'm using Outpost now. Like Jeremy said, it takes some getting used to, but it's a firewall for the more paranoid of us. I just disable all the plugins except for the Attack Detection and the DNS Cache (and then you can disable the Windows DNS Cache service), and it's fine for me. The only slight gripe I've got with it is the fact that you can't hide the tray icon. I want my firewall (and AV) to just sit in the background and do it's job. If it crashes or gets shutdown by some malicious program, then it's not a very good firewall in the first place. I've also tried out Winpooch, but the lack of a service configuration makes it a no-hit for me. It seems like it's got a lot of potential, but it's still a WIP.

On the other hand, if you look at the Windows picture, it seems more modular than the Linux version. That indicates to me that there's more abstraction in the implementation (at least if Microsoft has done something right). If there's more abstraction, then there should be less direct memory access in each part.

http://ca.php.net/manual/en/index.php To make it short, PHP enables you to generate the webpage when it is requested, instead of having a pre-made page that someone just downloads.

Some of us who work in the tech industry will have to be evaluating it right away. Fortunately I have both a TechNet Plus and MSDN subscription at work so I can start testing a little early.I'm with nmX.Memnoch on this one. If I can get my hands on Vista for free through my university's MSDNAA program, I'll definately be running it as my primary operating system. If my system can handle it, there wouldn't be much reason not to use it.

Thanks for the link. I'll definately check that out.

That's generally what I suggest to my friends (and follow myself). I've got my system partition with all of my programs on there. The only time that I defrag that partition is when I've added or removed about a gig worth of programs (and then possibly every month or so if there hasn't been any change). I've also got my "scratch" partition, where I've set all my programs to dump their temp files (Photoshop, browser caches, etc etc) - oh... and for my UA XP Installs... . Heck... I've even got "My Documents" set to be a separate partition...

@spenxa - *drools* That's a very pretty desktop. Not just the wallpaper, but the VS and icons just fit very very nicely together. Good work! @oldwolf - Very pretty...

Pagefile fragmentation would be minimized (since pages never actually go to disk), but not general file fragmentation. The limitation with such a setup would be the fact that it would require 4GB of RAM to be "perfect", something that you'd only expect to find in the most extremely high-end systems.