Jump to content

2010: The Year the OS shot itself in the foot


FridgeTooFar
 Share

Recommended Posts

So here we go my essay/paragraph on why personal computer is going to give way to cloud computing for all of the catastrophically wrong reasons.

I have always used and loved Windows, its been my flagship OS since 2000, I had left apple products and went to windows back when apple was actually cool, but now I find myself angered at not only Microsoft but twice as angry at Linux and Apple. The reason for this is I was happy on Windows 2000, it worked, I worked, life was good, I played games, windows 2000 liked games, bada-bing™, bada-boom.

Now picture 2005 rolling along and Microsoft says new games wont work on 2000 YOU MUST UPGRADE, so it is written, so shall it be done, so says The Gates-man, so after being dragged away, tooth and nail from my beloved Windows 2000, I go to XP and after 3 years of therapy I was used to it (paper-bag, duck-tape, Nlite™ and a little napalm works wonders) So now I am happily putting along, I get brave and work my way to XPPro64.

I am very happy at this point but now talk of this so called longhorn project was stirring and boy did it reek of a$$. Needless to say time goes by and suddenly I find myself in the same problem as before, why because Microsoft was too da** tight to put DX10 on xp (which it could do easily, dont tell me they couldn't) so I have to go to vista to enjoy games, but oh boy now do I really hate life now. This turd makes my 4gb ram, dual-core 3.0ghz machine drop to its knees and barely run (even with Vlite) every time I move my files around from driveA to driveB it eats all my memory and runs like dog-doo-doo, at this point im foaming at the mouth, so in desperation I go to windows 7 and guess what it runs fast YEAH!!! but......... it has so many other problems the biggest one I cant remove IE with vlite, so i see if nuhi is going to make 7lite and guess what, they bought nuhi, thanks Microsoft just die would ya?

So I look at Linux and boy was that a short book. (I have a choice of 15 games, 5 of them work) SO then I look at that one fruity company I used to use (pear, pinapple something like that) and low and behold, they switch to intel, build a new crappy OS based on a really old Unix and have about 5 more games than Linux....... So here is my story of how I took and burned my computer completely to the ground.... THE END

EDIT: Bought a MINI-COMPUTER and a KVM so now I can do the curly...I mean Linux Shuffle and run windows.. but seriously who ever approved windows vista should be f***ing ashamed of themselves.. You cant polish a turd.....

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seriously though im in tears, not a single OS does what I need it to do, Linux cant run games (becuse they wont get their act together), Mac is over-priced, out of date 100% grade-A el-junko, and Windows is just a money making vehicle (why does a brand new PC hand built with SATAII harddrives run slower than my Windows 2000 PC).... I guess TDTinaBaggy was right "Every OS sucks......."

Edited by FridgeTooFar
Link to comment
Share on other sites


With Windows 7 you can now remove IE8 through the Control Panel; vLite is unnecessary.

Vista did have some fundamental problems that were worked out by the time of SP1, and SP2 is now availible. And IMO Windows 7 RC has even better performance than Vista SP2.

Vista is a much more complex and feature rich OS compared to 2000. If you understand all the bells and whistles, you will see the productivity gains are worth the hardware toll.

If you're having performance problem with games, it's probably the graphics drivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Windows 7 you can now remove IE8 through the Control Panel; vLite is unnecessary.

Vista did have some fundamental problems that were worked out by the time of SP1, and SP2 is now availible. And IMO Windows 7 RC has even better performance than Vista SP2.

Vista is a much more complex and feature rich OS compared to 2000. If you understand all the bells and whistles, you will see the productivity gains are worth the hardware toll.

If you're having performance problem with games, it's probably the graphics drivers.

LOL IE8 remove via control panel right.... you mean it removes the ie.exe only, and also you forget the point that the OS needs 20gb hd space compared to windows 2000s 400mb, vista sp2 has memory leaks from he11, any kind of large scale file movement will fill my 4gb of ram to the top and then freeze, (which I think is an intentional bug, becuse ive never seen such a **** thing) also your right vista is much much more complex and barely functions as such, I dont need a 20gb OS to run the same games that ran with win2000 and before you say go back to 2000 dont forget that microsoft has pretty much made that moot, and dont talk to me like im a noob, I got the newest drivers and the most up to date os and one big mother of a videocard, so anywhos, if someone has something more constructive then bashing my skills or my hardware by all means post it, but assume I know what im doing (I am on my way to linux as for the 590 pc games I own, well im sure wine will run at least 5 of them after 2 kernel recompiles, but its better than windows not doing nothing with breaking)

Edited by FridgeTooFar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

why because Microsoft was too da** tight to put DX10 on xp (which it could do easily, dont tell me they couldn't)
In your blind rage, it seems, you've missed something vitally important - to get DX10 to run on XP, they would have had to backport the whole DWM window manager from Vista to Server 2003 AND XP (explained later), the new WDDM 1.0 video driver model, and tested it across all supported XP and Server 2003 versions at the time (home, pro, tablet, MCE, and embedded for XP, and Server 2003 web, standard, enterprise, and datacenter, and likely the x64 variants of both as well). Not only would this have been a huge undertaking for what was already a very late OS (they "rebooted" the whole codebase to run on Server 2003, making it less than easy to backport code from Server 2003's code that ultimately ended up in Vista's DWM window/shell manager, meaning they'd have to backport it twice - once to 2003, then again back to the XP variant of that codebase at the SP2 level) and would likely have made Vista even later to release, but how costly would it have been for an OS that was already 5 years old? Not only that, but to get the WDDM 1.0 spec, they'd have had to backport a whole host of the new kernel as well in the same manner. Ultimately, this is *not* as simple or easy as you've deluded yourself to believe. It's a huge cost (in both code and testing, not to mention maintenance) for very little return on investment (and the possibility that most users at that point are getting all of that work, for free, as the vast majority of folks running XP had likely already paid for their Windows XP copyies at that point in late 2005 / early 2006), and it's also going to detract from sales of your new flagship OS as well, making it even less palatable for management and stockholders.
it has so many other problems the biggest one I cant remove IE with vlite, so i see if nuhi is going to make 7lite and guess what, they bought nuhi, thanks Microsoft just die would ya?
Honestly, if removing IE is your biggest problem with Win7 (and you could conceivably use the "E" variant available in the EU if this is such a big deal), the other problems *can't* really be that bad, can they? Also, care to expand? This is very vague. Also, nuhi has a right to employment wherever and whenever he chooses (although I don't know if he works for Microsoft or not, but if he did, that's his choice to pay his bills and feed his kids, etc). Seems you've got a burr in your saddle and I'm unsure as to why - again, your complaints and problems in this thread are vague, so perhaps I'm missing something, but it seems you've got something against Microsoft in general clouding your judgement.
LOL IE8 remove via control panel right.... you mean it removes the ie.exe only,
Yes, because if removed more apps based on the webbrowser control or the browser engine (say, the Windows help engine, for starters, and Microsoft passport/LiveID login) fail miserably with no way to fix it (these things break with the E editions now, which *does* have IE removed, but hopefully those will be "fixed" before RTM).
and also you forget the point that the OS needs 20gb hd space compared to windows 2000s 400mb,
To wit, Windows 2000 needed 650MB at minimum (not 400MB as you claimed), whereas Windows NT4 needed ~120MB. Going by your logic, you should also chastise Windows 2000 for such huge "bloat", even though in the 2000 timeframe a large HDD and a good deal of RAM to hold the "bloat" was expensive - a Maxtor 20GB 7200 RPM IDE hard disk was ~$250 in late 2000 when Windows 2000 released, making it ~$14.50USD per gigabyte, whereas a 1TB (yes, that's right, a TERABYTE) hard disk can be had for less than $100USD (~10¢USD/GB). It's just not a valid, or fair, comparison. You paid far more for the same space in 2000, and this would only make any real comparison sense if you could even actually viably expect to run Vista on Windows 2000-era hardware, which would be fairly absurd (you couldn't run 2000 on NT 3.51/Win3.1-era hardware either, which was approximately the same jump backwards in years and versions as Vista is to Windows 2000). Try to see things in perspective rather than simply taking the one point of view, and you'd see your comparisons aren't really logical or fair.
vista sp2 has memory leaks from he11
Funny, I'm not getting those. What kinds of leaks, perchance? I had a problem with Vista RTM leaking in audiodg.exe, but that was an audio driver issue fixed by realtek, not Microsoft. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I've not heard of any leaks in Windows with either SP1 or SP2, so a little more info on what and why you see it as a Vista problem would clarify your statment. It's very vague and quite blanket on it's face.
any kind of large scale file movement will fill my 4gb of ram to the top and then freeze
Again, funny, but I routinely copy 100+GB files across local drives and across the network, and I never see that. More info, again, please, because it seems like less a Windows problem and more a driver or config issue.
but assume I know what im doing (I am on my way to linux as for the 590 pc games I own, well im sure wine will run at least 5 of them after 2 kernel recompiles, but its better than windows not doing nothing with breaking)
That's a really good idea - cut off your nose to spite your face, so to speak. Your problems reek of driver issues, and Linux isn't going to magically make your life better - I run Mac, Linux, and Windows Vista and Win7, and I'd take Windows over the others for a variety of reasons every time. In fact, I'd drop the Mac and Linux boxes if I could, but for now I need to keep them running and actively use them.
Seriously though im in tears, not a single OS does what I need it to do, Linux cant run games (becuse they wont get their act together), Mac is over-priced, out of date 100% grade-A el-junko, and Windows is just a money making vehicle (why does a brand new PC hand built with SATAII harddrives run slower than my Windows 2000 PC).... I guess TDTinaBaggy was right "Every OS sucks......."
Probably a few things - one, Windows 2000 was basically NT4 with plug-and-play and directx slapped on, so it's codebase was pretty old (technically, XP prior to SP2 was pretty old as well, and most people find it still runs very slick on older hardware - it's buggy, insecure, and doesn't do much in the way of security or features, but it's a virtue some people want - hence the popularity of the xLite suites). Two, Vista prior to SP1 *was* buggy and bloated compared to XP, but SP1 has fixed most of these problems. I think Vista will be a flop in history, but it does pave the way for Windows 7 which (on Vista-era hardware and newer) run just as well for most folks as XP did circa SP2 in 2004, has far more security than XP ever did, has quite a few more features and graphical polish than the lego OS that XP was without classic mode, and was designed natively for x64 (which is far better than x86 long-term, especially for those of us who stress our CPUs regularly - native x64 code flies with the additional 32 registers that 32-bit software can't use). I've hand-built and purchased OEM systems running Vista and Windows 7, and don't run into the problems you seem to be - I don't know if that's driver issues, hardware choices, or what, but given we both have different experiences I'd say it's at least possible that the differences aren't Windows, but other factors like drivers or 3rd-party software (or both, or neither - again, your complaints are a bit vague so I'm left guessing).

Ultimately, you're free to your opinions, but again your complaints seem more like someone holding onto the past with driver problems on Vista rather than real, actual Vista-caused problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got 3 things to say about performance here and don't shoot the messenger ;)

Using more disk space does not affect performance, unless there is more data to read, or there is excessive fragmentation.

I don't see any memory leaks with anything later than Vista SP1, of course I notice greater memory usage than 2000 but again there are more services and caching (SuperFetch).

If you jump to WINE on Linux because of performance problems on Windows well good luck. The graphics drivers are poor, WINE is not going to be as fast or reliable as native win32, and probably only games in directx 8 or opengl will render.

Have you done FPS comparisons? I bet there is not much difference and I think anything beyond v-sync / refresh rate doesn't matter. BTW the software forum is really for specific software issues, not hardware and not the Windows operating system in general. In this case a particular game or app with a performance issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well im not going to disect all of that and give 20 half-***** responses, but heres what I will give:

Driver problems, eh? = I got all uptodate ATI drivers for motherboard/video, newest everything, and this has happened with old drivers, new drivers and the windows built in drivers, it even occurs with server 08, so please leave the driver problems at the door

Windows 2000 + Nlite = 400mb

DX10 does NOT need wddm, how do I know this, becuse vlite took wddm out of my vista install and magically DX10.1 works fine, also you should check your sources becuse DX10 is nothing more than a few extra files and an OS compat check (crysis comes to mind, I can do dx10 in xp, theres 2 other dx10 titles that work with xp as well, and I mean actually IN dx10 mode) the only thing that stops dx10 from being on xp is the fact that the said game checks for vista its just another Microsoft $$$ machine.

Also wine may be buggy BUT at least the **** OS actually works, I got 500 games and cant play them becuse vista wont run for more than an hour before needing a reboot.

Also my rig: Gigabyte 790x-UD4, AMD Athlon Dual 3.0ghz, 4gb ram, 1gb 4850 ATI video card, I doubt my hardware choices are poor in taste when I specifically recall my old P4 machine having similar symptoms.

Also I do not consider it cutting off my nose, I do not trust any OS thats needs more space than crysis and runs about as fast as a 1940s era tank.

Also this one you may not believe but the more junk that is hot-glued to an OS the worse it runs...and vista well its a walking junkyard 20gb of space for 4 bald tires and tow? I think not.

Funny becuse the IE program and the HTML engine are seperate as well, so your theory on keeping the program files IE directory is wrong.

and as for the E varient? ok so turn my PC off till october.......right...hey linus? is that new build of debian out now? oh it is, cool! and its free? so I dont have to pay $300 for a busted OS? awesome!

that WDDM is just a window decorator much like in linux, it is NOT part of DX10, it uses DX10, I dont have it on this machine now, and thats good thing becuse apparantly my 1gb videocard cant handle games and wddm without lag.

Final note: you keep talking to me like I do not know what im doing I have been on Windows+linux since 2000, and again only vista has given me this kind of craptacular-spectacular, with that said, I will not BE going to windows 7, I am going to rig up XP64 on my second drive with NLITE and start using debian as a main OS.

Edited by FridgeTooFar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason for this is I was happy on Windows 2000, it worked, I worked, life was good, I played games, windows 2000 liked games, bada-bing™, bada-boom.

I have to strongly disagree here. Win2k sucked hard -- until XP came out (mostly because when XP came out, we started getting better drivers for the NT platform, SP2 also finally made it half-stable). I was really, REALLY happy to get rid of it and never looked back.

This turd makes my 4gb ram, dual-core 3.0ghz machine drop to its knees and barely run (even with Vlite) every time I move my files around from driveA to driveB it eats all my memory and runs like dog-doo-doo

Funny, because I've run Vista SP1 it on like half those specs, and it ran just as fast as XP does, if not faster. This box is still running Vista SP1 x64 and has more or less the same specs as yours, and it's crazy fast at anything.

Never had any problems with memory leaks either (and I sure copy a LOT of large files around). You conveniently failed to answer cluberti's question regarding that.

its better than windows not doing nothing with breaking

...

vista wont run for more than an hour before needing a reboot.

...

Windows hardly ever breaks over here. We got XP installs from 2002 or so, still running just fine. Haven't had to do a single reinstall of Vista nor Win7 either -- not one! Reboots? I reboot once a month for updates. In fact, I've *never* seen anyone with the kinds of issues you describe (including a LOT of people happily running Vista) so I find it really hard to blame the OS for it. Hate to break it to you, but it sounds like PEBCAK to a lot of us.

also you forget the point that the OS needs 20gb hd space compared to windows 2000s 400mb
Windows 2000 + Nlite = 400mb

See this (specifically the quoted part). 'nuff said.

You can keep thinking porting DirectX 10 was trivial if that's what you want to believe.

Have fun with Linux. I'm very happy to pay $200 for Vista Ultimate instead of using that OS for free (for about a million different reasons). I'd sooner switch to OS X, despite the overpriced hardware, the lack of any hardware option I like (like say, a standard mid-tower with a decent dual or quad core) and many other issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My oppinion on this is that yes, Win2k is bloated for sure, and yes, NT4 was much sleeker, but we simply needed to change to Win2k, as there were several advantages over NT4, like e.g. USB support, WDM support, DirectX support over v6, Windows Installer support over v2, etc. and also not to mention the wealth of apps that only would run on Win2k and up...

Then the newer OSes also includes alot of changes/fixes, but for some of us, then the new stuff just dosen't seem very important to us, and that frankly much of it is more of an annoyance than anything else, and when they then also are much, much more bloated than Win2k, then that's why some of us feel that we would just rather stick with good ol' Win2k!

The endless comparisons of what RAM/HDDs and such costs is totally irrelavent to me, as it's simply not about that, but instead about that we don't feel that the newer OSes bring anything usefull to the table for all that extra HDD space and extra RAM usage!

Yes, there are some apps that don't work on Win2k now, and more and more will come, but untill now i've not been affected by this...

Just my 2 cents :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there were several advantages over NT4, like e.g. USB support, WDM support, DirectX support over v6, Windows Installer support over v2, etc. and also not to mention the wealth of apps that only would run on Win2k and up...

And there are even more to upgrade to newer OS'es, like e.g. good power management support like Vista's sleep, cleartype, fast user switching, remote desktop (and remote assistance) built-in, built-in firewall, Aero (and Flip 3D, Aero Peek/Shake/Snap -- and the new keyboard shortcuts for it all too), the new upcoming multitouch interface which should become more common in the next few years, the amazing handwriting recognition in Win7 (not just using latin alphabet either, and also works for math formulas), speech recognition & tts, newer apps built in (like WMP > v6.4, IE > v5.01, revamped Calculator & tons of others) and new ones which are getting pretty nice like MCE or the photo gallery, the new start menu with the search, the built-in search (works for files, email and what not), the sidebar, the desktop composition (lots of purposes, like the nice thumbnails when you hover in the taskbar), newer DirectX -- and Direct2D for great text and DXVA for high def H.264 and the like and better video quality using the EVR renderer and all that, the desktop skins/themes thing (win2k looks a bit bland to say the least), we also get desktop slideshow now and gadgets too, far better support for a lot of devices like say device stage for portable things and DLNA support for streaming media to everyday electronics & media center extenders that just works (including the Xbox360 and PS3), support for newer CPUs and related technologies including x64 and lots of RAM -- there are some apps where a x64 version is REALLY nice to have, IPv6 and SMB 2.0 and other techs like homegroup & libraries (finally!) which makes networking fantastic, the revamped taskbar as of Win7 (tons of new features everywhere around it too), Windows Installer support over v3.1, apps that require newer than win2k, besides the countless improvements that most people don't notice but are there regardless (WMI, GPO, MMC, deployment and so on) and used heavily by many, things like VHD and GPT and SSD and exFAT support, having a built-in modern shell (PowerShell), newer VPN techs, BitLocker, the new task manager (the services tab is definitely welcomed) and resource monitor, new games, the new XP mode, having better support by modern server platforms (including Windows Home Server), tons of handy little features everywhere (like say, driver rollback in device manager), etc. Or even just being actively supported.

It's hardly just a bunch of small fixes and unimportant things. There's a HUGE difference. Sure, there may be some people that don't need or want any of that stuff, but that would be a very small minority (comprised mainly of people with very old computers, not doing much with them). Going from Win7 or Vista down to Win2k feels just like going from Win2k down to MS-DOS + Win 3.1 (a gigantic step behind)

Eitheir ways, from the next post, it looks like the OP doesn't actually want a computer (or need for that matter) but a gaming console. His main problem boils down to "it's more than a dumb game launcher" so he'll never be happy regardless. Microsoft's business model isn't making a gaming-only dumb OS (they'd rather make something the other 99.999% of users want), they already sell the Xbox precisely for that. That, and that somehow not backporting everything from Vista and Win7 to XP is just a scam. Wow, corporations trying to make money for their shareholders, by selling new products? What's with that crazy nonsense? Next thing you know, people will be talking about democracy and capitalism! They should also have backported all that new XP stuff to Win2k, and the Win2k stuff to NT4, and all that to Win 3.11 and also to MS-DOS so we don't ever have to buy anything new! To your pitchforks, down with teh eviiil M$ pig$!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heres the thing im not talking about space being used and whoopy-friggin-doo if vista works fine for you or him or whatever and Windows 2000 was an excellent OS, albeit its bootup wasnt fast but I liked its SIMPLICITY i dont need 5,000,000 features I play games, thats the only use windows has, games, I will do my work on linux for now on becuse windows refuses to function properly.

Windows XP or 2000 or any of the previous builds needed more than 4gb of space, and they were workable some more workable than others, but then vista comes along and needs at least 20gb (actually like 17 i think) so obviously expect vista to be the best OS ever to hog up 20% of my space. but it followed the universal rulebook of OS and that is: "A fat*** OS will move only as quick as the computer will allow" or in other words if the os is too big, the computer cannot possible handle the overhead becuse the computers weakest link is the HDD, so we need tools like vlite to make its footprint smaller (like under half a ton maybe?) but since vista is the size of the titanic even with vlite (300% bigger than 2000) even the best computer with a 7200rpm drive will spin its tires everytime you do anything. In my case if I move files its slow (it used to fill my memory up but I dont think it does now, but its still sluggish) in general I just am not patient enough to deal with vistas sluggish reaction time.

and once again on dx10, I have 5 games that need DX10 so far and I have gotten DX10 mode enabled on all of them on XP, but thats not the issue future DX10 games start checking to see if you have vista, thats the problem this DX10 not on xp stuff is just a money making scam, dx10 has almost little to no difference at all from dx9.0c. (I was able to play call of juerez and crysis in DX10 mode on xp, and was able to confirm it was INFACT in dx10 mode)

EDIT: I also dont care about ANY of the so called features in vista (how is flip3d nothing more than eyecandy, how the flying **** is wddm helping anything it just makes dual monitor setups lag bad, so if you can name any REAL improvments other than DX9.0D I mean 10 and some powermanagement updates that could have been on xp, let me know)

Edited by FridgeTooFar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Driver problems, eh? = I got all uptodate ATI drivers for motherboard/video, newest everything, and this has happened with old drivers, new drivers and the windows built in drivers, it even occurs with server 08, so please leave the driver problems at the door
To start, no, I'm not leaving driver problems at the door. First, ATI drivers are some of the worst, and Microsoft doesn't make drivers - the inbox drivers are just repackaged/stripped down vendor drivers, for what it's worth. Second, you've not said anything that makes me think this *isn't* a driver problem - just because you have problems across multiple driver versions doesn't mean somehow you've magically tried to fix anything, if the problem exists across all vendor driver packages. Also, since you're the only one here (thus far) that's complained of the problems you have, and since the Vista code on my workstations is the exact same as yours, it would tend to lean towards NOT being a Vista code problem. Your logic is specious, at best.
DX10 does NOT need wddm, how do I know this, becuse vlite took wddm out of my vista install and magically DX10.1 works fine, also you should check your sources becuse DX10 is nothing more than a few extra files and an OS compat check (crysis comes to mind, I can do dx10 in xp, theres 2 other dx10 titles that work with xp as well, and I mean actually IN dx10 mode) the only thing that stops dx10 from being on xp is the fact that the said game checks for vista its just another Microsoft $$$ machine.
As far as "removing" DX10, it "works" after vlite'ing on Vista because you can't remove the kernel or DWM components of DX10 (it's not a monolithic package anymore, it's split into parts into the OS - I've already told nuhi about this, but as it seems he's not updating vlite anymore, it's a moot point). For what it's worth, I do "check my sources", and I'm not saying anything inaccurate.
Funny becuse the IE program and the HTML engine are seperate as well, so your theory on keeping the program files IE directory is wrong.
Not true - the html engine (webbrowser control) comes out of wininet.dll, urlmon.dll, ieframe.dll, and mostly shdocvw.dll depending on what features you're using - all IE binaries. If you *remove* these, you *break* the webbrowser control engine. Please don't argue with me on this, I've actually written code that uses the WBC and I've seen the IE codebase. I know what it is and isn't, and it's obvious you do not.
and once again on dx10, I have 5 games that need DX10 so far and I have gotten DX10 mode enabled on all of them on XP, but thats not the issue future DX10 games start checking to see if you have vista, thats the problem this DX10 not on xp stuff is just a money making scam, dx10 has almost little to no difference at all from dx9.0c. (I was able to play call of juerez and crysis in DX10 mode on xp, and was able to confirm it was INFACT in dx10 mode)
How far back should Microsoft pay to code, test, and maintain features they plan on releasing in newer OSes? Just because you want them, or found a way to hack enough of it on XP to make it "work" doesn't mean it can, or should, be done en masse. Microsoft is a business, not a charity - when it becomes too expensive to dev or maintain a product, they'll kill it off (5 - 10 years based on lifecycle, of course).
EDIT: I also dont care about ANY of the so called features in vista (how is flip3d nothing more than eyecandy, how the flying **** is wddm helping anything it just makes dual monitor setups lag bad, so if you can name any REAL improvments other than DX9.0D I mean 10 and some powermanagement updates that could have been on xp, let me know)
First, we again have another problem you have (lag) that I can only repro on my ATI 3650 machine and not my nVidia 9800 box. Driver issue, whether you want to believe it or not. Second, features like patchguard, WIM imaging, language-neutral binaries, native OS search engine, and yes, the graphical candy are all things that I think a lot of us who use(d) Vista like. I have to reiterate, just because you do not like them doesn't make them suck, or bad, or trash, or any other derrogatory term you'd care to dream up to describe them.

At this point, you're out for what you are - a Vista basher because *you* had problems with it the rest of us don't, and it also seems you're just upset Microsoft doesn't support Windows 2000 anymore or provide Windows for free, including updates, forever. I'm leaving the thread open because I'd rather see the discussion continue, but try to keep things you discuss to areas you actually have knowledge on. Trying to teach me how the IE engine runs, or what DX10 is, is silly. You're free to your opinions, but you're still wrong.

Lastly, your personal attacks to my post and lack of respect for others on these boards (in clear violation of the forum rules) have drawn my ire, so consider yourself warned in accordance with said rules. I did not call you out directly in any way, just answered your questions concisely and completely as I could - yet, you felt the need to make personal remarks about my knowledge, even though you have no idea who I am, what I do, or what my experiences are, so you couldn't possibly make the judgements you have. Tone it down or you'll find yourself banned without further warning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:wacko: Ok since I specifically said that I had an INTEL machine and a amd machine obviously since I know nothing and your the god of Microsoftian products I would use an ATI card with an Intel CPU? no of course not I had an Nvidia card with my Intel CPU and an INTEL CHIPSET so it would be entirely impossible for my memory leak to be a driver issue unless some how the newest nvidia driver and the newest ATI and the newest intel driver had the same leak :blink:

Also do you want an award for writting "some" code, you dont even know what I do, but as mentioned above im just a simple peasant, I know nothing so we will leave it at that.

Oh yes microsoft is a business that happens to have complete control of the pc gaming market so yeah I expect some charity from a $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ company that has 90% of the US economy (exageration)

Also once again you didnt read my posts you just strapped on your MS-FANBOI flame "retarded" vest and came in screaming, I obviously said in 2 posts that I VLITED and same result......lag, so vlite = no ugly fat

of course I expect another broken record response that involves no less of the following:

Defense of Microsoft (I even refrained from using dollar symbols yea! me!)

Its ALWAYS a driver issue........even if its been tried on 2 different platforms

and also I expect to be treated like I know nothing...

Also you think im a vista basher, right I am I wouldve been really p***ed had it not been given to me by microsoft (have fun figuring out why microsoft gave it to me the night before its release im sure youll either figure it out or say im lying),

Without all of those above mentions it just wouldnt be a fun debate

Edited by FridgeTooFar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok since I specifically said that I had an INTEL machine and a amd machine obviously since I know nothing and your the god of Microsoftian products I would use an ATI card with an Intel CPU? no of course not I had an Nvidia card with my Intel CPU and an INTEL CHIPSET so it would be entirely impossible for my memory leak to be a driver issue unless some how the newest nvidia driver and the newest ATI and the newest intel driver had the same leak
Or it may not be a video driver leak issue at all - again, you've not shown me ANY data, at all, to back up your claims. What process is the leak in? Is it private bytes, working set, virtual bytes? How quickly or slowly? I asked these before, and yet you've not answered or provided any data.
Also do you want an award for writting "some" code, you dont even know what I do, but as mentioned above im just a simple peasant, I know nothing so we will leave it at that.
second personal attack. Banned. And yes, I replied with some further info because you write thinking you know what you're talking about, but it's obvious you've never actually seen source code or written any, let alone for Windows or IE.
Oh yes microsoft is a business that happens to have complete control of the pc gaming market so yeah I expect some charity from a $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ company that has 90% of the US economy (exageration)
Then you're an id*** (yes, I'm attacking you now, but only in self-defense), because Microsoft is a BUSINESS in a CAPITALIST economy. Go to college and take economics 101 and read up on "profit" and "shareholders" for starters.
Also once again you didnt read my posts you just strapped on your MS-FANBOI flame "retarded" vest and came in screaming, I obviously said in 2 posts that I VLITED and same result......lag, so vlite = no ugly fat
Yes, I read your drivel. I even replied to your quoted sections in my post, and the fact you can't see it even more shows your lack of logic. Also, you again show your lack of ability to post with a sense of politeness, respect, or even veiled "I'm trying to fake it" sincerity in pretending to be polite, but I've already banned you considering you were warned to tone it down.
of course I expect another broken record response that involves no less of the following:

Defense of Microsoft (I even refrained from using dollar symbols yea! me!)

Its ALWAYS a driver issue........even if its been tried on 2 different platforms

and also I expect to be treated like I know nothing...

Because you've shown YOU DO know nothing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hardly just a bunch of small fixes and unimportant things. There's a HUGE difference.

Agreed! The new stuff are important for the majority probably, but just not for me and others who have an alternative and simplistic approach to how an OS should look, feel and function.

Most of the new features in the new OSes I have no need for and will disable, and those that are actually usefull, I can get much better 3'rd party replacements for!

Also, I need Windows Installer v3.1 for some installers, and NT4 only supports up to v2.0, but i don't need v4.5, and as a non-gamer, then DirectX 9.c works perfect enough, as H264 and DXVA is fully supported there also, and i've read that you can get evr support on pre-vista OSes, by taking evr.dll from .NET 3 and registering it, but personally i don't care about evr, as i prefer overlay mixer on bad GPUs and Haali's on good GPUs...

Finally, i acknowledge that you have had alot of problems with Win2k and where glad to change to XP, but as you yourself admitted, then you had big driver problems at the time, so i don't think that it's fair blaming those issues on the OS itself... Most ppl i would think would agree that Win2k is a very stable OS, and that XP also is, as it's built on the same proven codebase(and as you now, the kernel changes weren't that big from v5 to v5.1).

Back when i used XP, then my PC crashed all the time, but that were because of buggy soundcard drivers, but i wouldn't dream of blamming that on the OS itself and saying that XP isn't stable, as i think that XP is very stable!

Edited by Martin H
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...