Windows XP ...

RIV@NVX · Oct 10, 2002, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Smoothdrive
Installed Win XP last week..it's better than expected i think..driver rollback is a nice one, lack of custom install is indeed a bad one.

"New" interface is good, will be easier again for people to start using a pc under XP than it used to be under 98.

Like the ability to turn of the "standard" desktop items, takes some getting used to but at least the desktop is less crowded..

Like the quick boot, lot better than NT, W2k of 9x haven't timed it yet but it looks faster anyway..

NT4 sucks. Win9X suck big time, really crappy.

Booting XP - It is similar to W2k on my machine...

HsuGotaQ · Oct 10, 2002, 10:32 PM

XP = bloatware (also known as wannabe-aqua-ware)
2K = confusedware (also known as coporate-gone-gamer-ware)
NT = corporateware (also known as good-for-work-ware)
ME = tryingtobeware (also known as filling-ms-pockets-ware)
98 = retroware (also known as vintage-gamer-ware)

But they have all one thing in common, if your computer doesn't like the OS beeing used, it will crash one way or another. Either the problem is A) Hardware conflicts, B) Bad drivers (for a particular OS), or C) You are the one badly testing your own rig. I've seen sites showing that on a stable system, every os (except NT) performs pretty much the same (gaming wise).

bah... if the gear you bought don't work well under the OS you run then get a refunded and buy another combination of hardware equipment and try again. (sucks but it's pretty much the best bet)

Smoothdrive · Oct 11, 2002, 08:10 AM

It really think it's kinda silly just flaming against windows..i've read here that about every windows version sucks..well why use it than ? buy a mac if you're so against windows..get linux for all i care..

A Mac will be more stable since mac also selects the hardware for you..if MS would only sell windows complete with pre-selected hardware than it would run smooth as silk.

Linux..well let's face it, the majority of the windows users can not even install it..let alone use it

Of course it's the thing to do bitching about windwos..but it makes no sense..

Windows made the pc accesible for much more people, thus more pc's where sold, more money was available for development speeding up the proccesors, graphics, memory , prices of pc's went down, internet became widely available..that would never have happened if we were still fooling around in DOS or PS2.

Especially silly are the people flaming away at windows while they never used anything else..they should just stop regarding the pc as sort of a tv and see it for what it is..a complicated piece of machinery that will not work correctly if you don't know what you're doing with it.

So windows sucks because it won't run as smooth on just every combination of hardware..well what system does run on such a wide range of hardware possibilities without requiring in-depth skills ??

FuNsTeR · Oct 11, 2002, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Smoothdrive
It really think it's kinda silly just flaming against windows..i've read here that about every windows version sucks..well why use it than ? buy a mac if you're so against windows..get linux for all i care..

Especially silly are the people flaming away at windows while they never used anything else..they should just stop regarding the pc as sort of a tv and see it for what it is..a complicated piece of machinery that will not work correctly if you don't know what you're doing with it.

So windows sucks because it won't run as smooth on just every combination of hardware..well what system does run on such a wide range of hardware possibilities without requiring in-depth skills ??

i just flamed XP as it's a massive heap of donkey droppings i dual boot with Win Me (clean install not the ultra buggy upgrade) and Mandrake 8.2 as both os are lean and mean

RIV@NVX · Oct 11, 2002, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by HsuGotaQ
XP = bloatware (also known as wannabe-aqua-ware)
2K = confusedware (also known as coporate-gone-gamer-ware)
NT = corporateware (also known as good-for-work-ware)
ME = tryingtobeware (also known as filling-ms-pockets-ware)
98 = retroware (also known as vintage-gamer-ware)

But they have all one thing in common, if your computer doesn't like the OS beeing used, it will crash one way or another. Either the problem is A) Hardware conflicts, B) Bad drivers (for a particular OS), or C) You are the one badly testing your own rig. I've seen sites showing that on a stable system, every os (except NT) performs pretty much the same (gaming wise).

bah... if the gear you bought don't work well under the OS you run then get a refunded and buy another combination of hardware equipment and try again. (sucks but it's pretty much the best bet)

XP and 2K rule really good over anything else...
Maybe .NET can join that club and become trio... once it is finalized.

e-Seeker · Oct 11, 2002, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ryoko
thats the thing... that win98 machine is our server and an overflow workstation. i'm keeping it on all the time because it is also folding. the reason why i posted the uptime was to show that win98se is very stable if you know how to use it.

uptime is now...

54 days...

Speaking of uptime... Have any of you noticed the uptime being added to the one recorded in last session after returning from hibernation? Kinda stupid, don't you think?

UberLord · Oct 12, 2002, 01:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by RIV@NVX
XP and 2K rule really good over anything else...
Maybe .NET can join that club and become trio... once it is finalized.

What exactly do you mean by .NET?

We have.......

1) Visual Studio .NET (I use this at work) which requires......
2) .NET Framework (my Parhelia uses this - lol)
3) .NET Services (Passport, etc)
4) .NET Server (next Windows server OS)
5) .NET vision (all of the above)

Basically, .NET is a fancy word for "upgrade" or "new version" which was brought into being by every company having to have an Internet product.

Seriously, what actualy benefit does any .NET product actually bring to the table that we don't already have in some form? The only thing I can think of is the new language C# - which from what I've seen sucks royally.

UberLord · Oct 12, 2002, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Smoothdrive
Linux..well let's face it, the majority of the windows users can not even install it..let alone use it

The majority of Windows users can't even install Windows. And most of them don't want or need to as it comes ..... wait for it ...... PRE INSTALLED!

Now, stick a a pre installed Linux box in front of em with a nice GUI - say RedHat 8 - and I'll bet they find it just as easy to do simple tasks such as browsing the 'net, doing email and typing a document.

RIV@NVX · Oct 12, 2002, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UberLord
What exactly do you mean by .NET?

We have.......

1) Visual Studio .NET (I use this at work) which requires......
2) .NET Framework (my Parhelia uses this - lol)
3) .NET Services (Passport, etc)
4) .NET Server (next Windows server OS)
5) .NET vision (all of the above)

Basically, .NET is a fancy word for "upgrade" or "new version" which was brought into being by every company having to have an Internet product.

Seriously, what actualy benefit does any .NET product actually bring to the table that we don't already have in some form? The only thing I can think of is the new language C# - which from what I've seen sucks royally.

3) .NET Standard Server (next windows NT based OS - NT 5.2)
Maybe it will be good.

RIV@NVX · Oct 12, 2002, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RIV@NVX
The thing I hate the most at XP is integrating drivers into it, but drivers which are not complete and do not work good. F***ing Radeon 8500 Series driver that is automatically installed - it would be better without any drivers - size of whole OS installation would be smaller, and integrated drvs are usually useless (except for Vortex/Vortex2).

Also, one nicer thing that I forgot to mention. When I was reinstalling XP, I used default driver for MBUltra133 - it had BSOD when booting into XP.

When I used Promise driver, it worked excellent. "But it is recommended to use one that comes with windows" Setup said.

AND SAID WRONG.

Smoothdrive · Oct 14, 2002, 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dEykeé
Speaking of uptime... Have any of you noticed the uptime being added to the one recorded in last session after returning from hibernation? Kinda stupid, don't you think?

No i don't think so, windows is recoring windows up time, when hibernating you do not shut down windows..you do sort of a freeze frame and power down your hardware.

Hardware starts at 0 with uptime, windows continues where it left off so it's fair to continue the uptime count.

Smoothdrive · Oct 14, 2002, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by UberLord
The majority of Windows users can't even install Windows. And most of them don't want or need to as it comes ..... wait for it ...... PRE INSTALLED!

Now, stick a a pre installed Linux box in front of em with a nice GUI - say RedHat 8 - and I'll bet they find it just as easy to do simple tasks such as browsing the 'net, doing email and typing a document.

XP will be more of a problem for most windwos users yes..but surelly anyone can install win9X or ME. insert cd, boot system, enter enter enter, license #, wait, finished.

So they have pre-installed linux, than what ? even installing software in Linux is too difficult for the average windows user..(and yes they can install programs under windows)

Not saying Linux is bad..but why on earth would anyone want Linux pre-installed instead of windows when they buy their all-purpose home pc ??

RIV@NVX · Oct 14, 2002, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Smoothdrive
XP will be more of a problem for most windwos users yes..but surelly anyone can install win9X or ME. insert cd, boot system, enter enter enter, license #, wait, finished.

So they have pre-installed linux, than what ? even installing software in Linux is too difficult for the average windows user..(and yes they can install programs under windows)

Not saying Linux is bad..but why on earth would anyone want Linux pre-installed instead of windows when they buy their all-purpose home pc ??

XP is not so hard to install.

/me doesn't even know how to install RAID drivers during any 9x setup.

e-Seeker · Oct 14, 2002, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Smoothdrive
No i don't think so, windows is recoring windows up time, when hibernating you do not shut down windows..you do sort of a freeze frame and power down your hardware.

Hardware starts at 0 with uptime, windows continues where it left off so it's fair to continue the uptime count.

oK... so I can put my rig into hibernation, power it up after three months and then brag 'bout the uptime

As for the fairness... Hmmm... Since the system's based on HW I think it should keep with it and count the uptime in corelation with hardware...

Ryoko · Oct 14, 2002, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dEykeé
Speaking of uptime... Have any of you noticed the uptime being added to the one recorded in last session after returning from hibernation? Kinda stupid, don't you think?

hibernation? you mean standby?

and no, the server doesn't go into standby

Ryoko · Oct 14, 2002, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RIV@NVX
/me doesn't even know how to install RAID drivers during any 9x setup.

you don't install raid drivers during win9x setup. you wait until the install is finished, then setup the raid drivers as you would set up any driver. that's one of the benefits of win9x. if your raid driver doesn't work with the os, you can still use your raid array in 16 bit mode.

e-Seeker · Oct 14, 2002, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ryoko
hibernation? you mean standby?

and no, the server doesn't go into standby

No, I mean Hibernation!

Ryoko · Oct 14, 2002, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dEykeé
No, I mean Hibernation!

no computer that i've ever seen has any modes or anything to do with hibernation.

e-Seeker · Oct 14, 2002, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ryoko
no computer that i've ever seen has any modes or anything to do with hibernation.

I guess now you've heard of something like that...

RIV@NVX · Oct 14, 2002, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Ryoko
you don't install raid drivers during win9x setup. you wait until the install is finished, then setup the raid drivers as you would set up any driver. that's one of the benefits of win9x. if your raid driver doesn't work with the os, you can still use your raid array in 16 bit mode.

But I need to install Windows on RAID array. Do they use some generic or what?

Kelsenellenelvian · Oct 15, 2002, 03:14 AM

Or you could just go to winXP and solve that problem...

Smoothdrive · Oct 15, 2002, 08:03 AM

If you configure your raid controller properly you can just install windows 9x without problems and install the win 9x driver afterwards. Don't see the prob there.

RIV@NVX · Oct 15, 2002, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kelsenellenelvian
Or you could just go to winXP and solve that problem...

I have WinXP, and I don't use 9x, read my sig.

UberLord · Oct 15, 2002, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RIV@NVX
But I need to install Windows on RAID array. Do they use some generic or what?

No.

What happens is that during the boot sequence of the CD you're prompted to press F6 for a 3rd party storage driver. In this case, press F6 and insert the WinXP RAID driver floppy. If you don't do this then WinXP will not "see" the RAID array, thusly not able to install to it. This actually applies to any devices hanging off the RAID controller regardless of if they're in a RAID array or not.

NB: Also applies to Win2K and possibly future MS operating systems.

Smoothdrive · Oct 15, 2002, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RIV@NVX
I have WinXP, and I don't use 9x, read my sig.

Your first quote was

Quote:

XP is not so hard to install.

/me doesn't even know how to install RAID drivers during any 9x setup.

Under XP is just the same as under w2k and NT4..look at the bottem of the screen at the beginning of the setup.

Only bugger is that you will need a floppy to install the drivers, alternate location is not a possibility..but now you knwo that it won't be a bugger anymore

PS read your sig..tell me what's the diff between Pro and Corp. edition ?? Home and Pro is mostly the ability to join a domain bit as far as i know.But haven't heard what corp. brings extra yet..

UberLord · Oct 15, 2002, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Smoothdrive
tell me what's the diff between Pro and Corp. edition ?? Home and Pro is mostly the ability to join a domain bit as far as i know.But haven't heard what corp. brings extra yet..

Corp is exactly the same as Pro except it doesn't have any nasty product activation

RIV@NVX · Oct 15, 2002, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UberLord
No.

What happens is that during the boot sequence of the CD you're prompted to press F6 for a 3rd party storage driver. In this case, press F6 and insert the WinXP RAID driver floppy. If you don't do this then WinXP will not "see" the RAID array, thusly not able to install to it. This actually applies to any devices hanging off the RAID controller regardless of if they're in a RAID array or not.

NB: Also applies to Win2K and possibly future MS operating systems.

Know that, installed it million times...
I was talking about 9x and using generic raid driver, and also you can see upper post about WinXP integrated MBUltra133 driver.

Ryoko · Oct 15, 2002, 09:24 PM

hard drives/controllers don't need a driver if they run @ 16 bit. nt, 2k, and xp all run 32 bit only so they need the drivers to install. win3x, win9x, and winme (

) all can run @ 16 bit, so drivers are unneccesary. you install the drivers after windows is installed to enable 32 bit drive access.

Smoothdrive · Oct 16, 2002, 07:56 AM

Riv@ you need to be more clear...

You ask Win9x we tell you, you say i don't need win9x i got xp, we tell you again for xp and now you again ask win9x..

We've explained both already so i won't bother anymore

Oct 11, 2002, 08:10 AM	#33
Smoothdrive Foolish Genius Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 455 Rep Power: 0	It really think it's kinda silly just flaming against windows..i've read here that about every windows version sucks..well why use it than ? buy a mac if you're so against windows..get linux for all i care.. A Mac will be more stable since mac also selects the hardware for you..if MS would only sell windows complete with pre-selected hardware than it would run smooth as silk. Linux..well let's face it, the majority of the windows users can not even install it..let alone use it Of course it's the thing to do bitching about windwos..but it makes no sense.. Windows made the pc accesible for much more people, thus more pc's where sold, more money was available for development speeding up the proccesors, graphics, memory , prices of pc's went down, internet became widely available..that would never have happened if we were still fooling around in DOS or PS2. Especially silly are the people flaming away at windows while they never used anything else..they should just stop regarding the pc as sort of a tv and see it for what it is..a complicated piece of machinery that will not work correctly if you don't know what you're doing with it. So windows sucks because it won't run as smooth on just every combination of hardware..well what system does run on such a wide range of hardware possibilities without requiring in-depth skills ?? __________________ GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Oct 15, 2002, 03:14 AM	#51
Kelsenellenelvian Master of my own Destiny Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: EverDawn Kingdom,TruEarth Posts: 1,394 Rep Power: 0	Or you could just go to winXP and solve that problem... __________________ [color=#0000ff] Download Windows Post-Install Wizard v4.3.8 and WPI Lite v1.2 Here [/color][color=red][color=blue][/color][/color]

Oct 15, 2002, 08:03 AM	#52
Smoothdrive Foolish Genius Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 455 Rep Power: 0	If you configure your raid controller properly you can just install windows 9x without problems and install the win 9x driver afterwards. Don't see the prob there. __________________ GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Oct 16, 2002, 07:56 AM	#59
Smoothdrive Foolish Genius Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 455 Rep Power: 0	Riv@ you need to be more clear... You ask Win9x we tell you, you say i don't need win9x i got xp, we tell you again for xp and now you again ask win9x.. We've explained both already so i won't bother anymore __________________ GA-7VRXP, AMD2000+, 256MB PC-2700 DDR, Radeon 8500LE, 2x Maxtor 740 (40GB) stripe set, AGNeovo X-150.

Oct 10, 2002, 10:32 PM	#32
HsuGotaQ Hydrogenated Dumbass Join Date: May 2002 Location: Canuckland Posts: 755 Rep Power: 0	XP = bloatware (also known as wannabe-aqua-ware) 2K = confusedware (also known as coporate-gone-gamer-ware) NT = corporateware (also known as good-for-work-ware) ME = tryingtobeware (also known as filling-ms-pockets-ware) 98 = retroware (also known as vintage-gamer-ware) But they have all one thing in common, if your computer doesn't like the OS beeing used, it will crash one way or another. Either the problem is A) Hardware conflicts, B) Bad drivers (for a particular OS), or C) You are the one badly testing your own rig. I've seen sites showing that on a stable system, every os (except NT) performs pretty much the same (gaming wise). bah... if the gear you bought don't work well under the OS you run then get a refunded and buy another combination of hardware equipment and try again. (sucks but it's pretty much the best bet)

Oct 15, 2002, 09:24 PM	#58
Ryoko American Soldier Join Date: May 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA Posts: 1,725 Rep Power: 0	hard drives/controllers don't need a driver if they run @ 16 bit. nt, 2k, and xp all run 32 bit only so they need the drivers to install. win3x, win9x, and winme ( ) all can run @ 16 bit, so drivers are unneccesary. you install the drivers after windows is installed to enable 32 bit drive access.