Grover, you are a sick racist bastard. Seriously, just because someone if from India doesn?t mean they are a dumbass. Go to hell you bigot. Seriously, your opinions look so dumb now (and always have) you are so biased it?s not funny!
You win, you're right. ZDNet India seals it for me.
</strong><hr></blockquote> Of course that wasn't the ONLY link I put down. And of course the US is The ONLY country that knows anything about computers I am sure <strong> [quote]
I can't argue with a group of people about computers that let cows walk around their streets (in some cities).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Are you saying there isn't any town in Texas that does this? Ahahahha all states have towns like this. And I am sure Texas has more than most.
<strong>Grover, you are a sick racist bastard. Seriously, just because someone if from India doesn?t mean they are a dumbass. Go to hell you bigot. Seriously, your opinions look so dumb now (and always have) you are so biased it?s not funny!</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually towards the end of the article it mentions that Indians seem to be happy with Windows 95.
I realize it's not the only article you posted, they all deal with Win2k -> WinXP transition and past that I'm tired of this so I'm going away from the thread. Bye-bye, you win.
GroveRat: those comments did sound racist. If you don't get why, you're more dense than I thought. Go back to Ars. I'm sure you fit there quite nicely with the anti-Mac fanatics(losers) with thousands of posts.
First of all its still a damn mess to configure stuff. There is no centralized place to control such simple things as sounds, colors, etc. Its EXACTLY like 98/ME/2000... its all a pretty skin.<hr></blockquote>
Actually, it's easy by setting up the things you want, double click on the Display Control panel, and click on that little "save as" button in the "Theme" tab. It creates a file which saves all the sounds, the cursor, the desktop wallpaper, etc. at which on a later date you can double click the xxx.theme file, restoring your custom settings back.
[quote]
Its also significanly slowed down everything (coming from ME)<hr></blockquote>
Yes and no. Professional applications run better (Photoshop is faster on my machine than in ME) but games will be a bit slower since there's that hardware abstraction layer in the way. That's a side effect of the stability of the NT kernal.
[quote]
It took a hell of a long time to install (about 40minutes-1 hour) and so far its a mixed ride.<hr></blockquote>
On my RAID setup, it took 22 minutes for XP to install, just 5 minutes longer than WindowsME.
[quote]Although, in the end, its still crap MS sh!t and nobody has anything to fear... OS X is much better (ahem.. just get those damn webcam, scanner, etc etc etc drivers working damn you)[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
My digital camera, USB scanner, and Firewire camera all plug and play in XP. The built in driver support for these items requires no additional software. For me, XP is like having a custom built OS because for both of my home systems (a P4 and an Athlon XP) I need not install not one single additional driver for anything I have, save for PowerDVD.
Now that I've hacked away the Playskool crap called Luna, even the GUI is more tolerable now.
You guys need to get your facts straight before posting nonsense. The upgrade from Win 95/98/ME to XP is *not* a minor upgrade with an interface tweak. What XP is is basically the next version of Windows 2k, which has descended from NT. It has been given alot of usability fixes to make it appropriate for consumers, but the underlying code base is miles ahead of the previous consumer versions of Windows.<hr></blockquote>
True, the upgrade from Win9x to WinXP would be considered a major upgrade, just as it would be to upgrade Win9x to Win2000. Upgrading Win2000 to XP would be minor at best.
The time frame of going from Win 3.1 to WinXP would be equivalent to the advances in the MacOS from System 7 to OS X. Apple just happened to do it more drastically and it won't be long before Intel pushes the PC world to dump all the legacy crap. In fact, ironically, there were reference boards from Intel at Comdex with nothing but USB/Firewire/NIC ports. Interesting concept, no?
....product activation in XP is invasion of privacy (no matter what MS apologists say)....<hr></blockquote>
WPA is not any invasion of privacy since there's no way Microsoft could possibly use the information to track a person down using any sort of identification. In fact, the vast majority of PCs are shipped with WPA already activated, so, the end user will never need to do it unless they reformat or reinstall a larger primary drive. The hash that is created during the activation process cannot identify a unique PC since PCs themselves have no serial numbers in any of the eletronic parts, aside from the Intel processor serial number which now comes disabled by default on all motherboards.
[quote]
But performance on it is actually quite sad. I cannot even get it to play the quicktime trailer for "Fellowship of the Ring" without hiccuping severely the whole time. This is even after rebooting and ending ALL other tasks on the machine. PIII 500, 192 MB ram, and plenty of HDD space. SAD. My iMac 400 plays the same trailer silky smooth under OS X.1.
<hr></blockquote>
I have never gotten any version of Quicktime to perform as well on any PC that I have owned compared to the Macs that I own. I'm sure that WMP for the Mac is just as bad
Actually the MacOS was always touted as being better cause it had a better GUI that flowed instead of flickered.<hr></blockquote>
That's because the routines that handle the GUI are largely hardware based on the Mac. With a PC it's all handled though software. Even on my high end Athlon and P4 systems the windows still flicker.
Proper coding of an application does, however, eliminate the flickering. It has to do with the way the Windows GUI updates the background of the window as it's being resized, moved, etc.
Basically the only people that it's going to hurt are the honest ones that pay for it. <hr></blockquote>
That's correct because Microsoft realized that not enough people were buying upgrades, so, they came up with a way to force people to upgrade. WPA is that way because it allows Microsoft to disable WindowsXP in the future whenever they decide to.
Furthermore, look at the built-in zip decompression and photo editing tool (which I must say do suck for their lack of ability to do anything), yet these tools aim to take market share away from WinZip and Adobe (respectively).<hr></blockquote>
Actually, the supposed "rip-offs" you speak of were licensed by Microsoft from the very companies you think they are ripping off. Microsoft realized that ALOT of people use ZIP files and the vast majority of PCs ship with CDRW drives now, so, why not include those? It saves a bunch of trouble for the end user, and, isn't file decompression included in OS X? How about CD burning? OS X has an image viewer, doesn't it?
I get a good laugh over how some people criticize Microsoft for including ZIP decompression and CD burning software, yet, others criticize them for NOT including other software.
[quote]Mac OS X is built on XML... Something which is very customizable. Try doing anything with XP, its worthless aside from turning the default child-mode look off.<hr></blockquote>
Actually, XP is built around XML as well, in fact, I just finished my own theme for it to get rid of the annoying Playskool look.
The average users only has it installed on one computer.. and the average user is the one that is stil having to put up with the hassles of WPA that was made to stop piracy. The pirates wont be effected by it. Therefore it's BS.<hr></blockquote>
Yes, the public announcement of what WPA is for is total BS. It has nothing to do with piracy at all.
There will be no more support for Win95 from now on. MS even said as much.<hr></blockquote>
Yep, in fact, next month Microsoft dumps support for Win95. There's a reason why OfficeXP, WinXP, and DirectX no longer support Win95, not to mention more and more hardware coming to market.
WPA is part of the mechanism that Microsoft will use to eventually get everyone to upgrade, like it or not.
Well microsoft being microsoft, WPA is like stating the obvious. M$ business tactics are world famous at this point, so denying it is pointless.
How exactly WPA is going to be incorporated is still sketchy at this point simply like all Microsoft moves, it's like a landslide. You see it coming, but you can't do anything about it because it comes from all sides.
Will it leverage .Net, tighten hold on businesses, pin users into the microsoft regime, massive chain e-mailing, world dominations?
So many possiblities and so many possible moves if the others fails.
The only thing in it's way is the increasing amount of awareness filtering through to consumers.
Comments
<strong>Christ I'm tired of this.
You win, you're right. ZDNet India seals it for me.
</strong><hr></blockquote> Of course that wasn't the ONLY link I put down. And of course the US is The ONLY country that knows anything about computers I am sure
I can't argue with a group of people about computers that let cows walk around their streets (in some cities).</strong><hr></blockquote>
Are you saying there isn't any town in Texas that does this? Ahahahha all states have towns like this. And I am sure Texas has more than most.
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: Sinewave ]</p>
<strong>Grover, you are a sick racist bastard. Seriously, just because someone if from India doesn?t mean they are a dumbass. Go to hell you bigot. Seriously, your opinions look so dumb now (and always have) you are so biased it?s not funny!</strong><hr></blockquote>
grover isn't a racist. He is just a sore loser
I realize it's not the only article you posted, they all deal with Win2k -> WinXP transition and past that I'm tired of this so I'm going away from the thread. Bye-bye, you win.
Fred, how exactly was that racist?
Three whole pages of empty chest-beating without one invocation of Godwin's Law.
I'm impressed.
<strong>Oh yeah, Windows XP is better than MacOSX.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Better,
For me to poop on.
*puts on robe and pointy hat and rides into the night*
First of all its still a damn mess to configure stuff. There is no centralized place to control such simple things as sounds, colors, etc. Its EXACTLY like 98/ME/2000... its all a pretty skin.<hr></blockquote>
Actually, it's easy by setting up the things you want, double click on the Display Control panel, and click on that little "save as" button in the "Theme" tab. It creates a file which saves all the sounds, the cursor, the desktop wallpaper, etc. at which on a later date you can double click the xxx.theme file, restoring your custom settings back.
[quote]
Its also significanly slowed down everything (coming from ME)<hr></blockquote>
Yes and no. Professional applications run better (Photoshop is faster on my machine than in ME) but games will be a bit slower since there's that hardware abstraction layer in the way. That's a side effect of the stability of the NT kernal.
[quote]
It took a hell of a long time to install (about 40minutes-1 hour) and so far its a mixed ride.<hr></blockquote>
On my RAID setup, it took 22 minutes for XP to install, just 5 minutes longer than WindowsME.
[quote]Although, in the end, its still crap MS sh!t and nobody has anything to fear... OS X is much better (ahem.. just get those damn webcam, scanner, etc etc etc drivers working damn you)[/QB]<hr></blockquote>
My digital camera, USB scanner, and Firewire camera all plug and play in XP. The built in driver support for these items requires no additional software. For me, XP is like having a custom built OS because for both of my home systems (a P4 and an Athlon XP) I need not install not one single additional driver for anything I have, save for PowerDVD.
Now that I've hacked away the Playskool crap called Luna, even the GUI is more tolerable now.
You guys need to get your facts straight before posting nonsense. The upgrade from Win 95/98/ME to XP is *not* a minor upgrade with an interface tweak. What XP is is basically the next version of Windows 2k, which has descended from NT. It has been given alot of usability fixes to make it appropriate for consumers, but the underlying code base is miles ahead of the previous consumer versions of Windows.<hr></blockquote>
True, the upgrade from Win9x to WinXP would be considered a major upgrade, just as it would be to upgrade Win9x to Win2000. Upgrading Win2000 to XP would be minor at best.
The time frame of going from Win 3.1 to WinXP would be equivalent to the advances in the MacOS from System 7 to OS X. Apple just happened to do it more drastically and it won't be long before Intel pushes the PC world to dump all the legacy crap. In fact, ironically, there were reference boards from Intel at Comdex with nothing but USB/Firewire/NIC ports. Interesting concept, no?
[ 11-19-2001: Message edited by: TheRoadWarrior ]</p>
....product activation in XP is invasion of privacy (no matter what MS apologists say)....<hr></blockquote>
WPA is not any invasion of privacy since there's no way Microsoft could possibly use the information to track a person down using any sort of identification. In fact, the vast majority of PCs are shipped with WPA already activated, so, the end user will never need to do it unless they reformat or reinstall a larger primary drive. The hash that is created during the activation process cannot identify a unique PC since PCs themselves have no serial numbers in any of the eletronic parts, aside from the Intel processor serial number which now comes disabled by default on all motherboards.
[quote]
But performance on it is actually quite sad. I cannot even get it to play the quicktime trailer for "Fellowship of the Ring" without hiccuping severely the whole time. This is even after rebooting and ending ALL other tasks on the machine. PIII 500, 192 MB ram, and plenty of HDD space. SAD. My iMac 400 plays the same trailer silky smooth under OS X.1.
<hr></blockquote>
I have never gotten any version of Quicktime to perform as well on any PC that I have owned compared to the Macs that I own. I'm sure that WMP for the Mac is just as bad
Actually the MacOS was always touted as being better cause it had a better GUI that flowed instead of flickered.<hr></blockquote>
That's because the routines that handle the GUI are largely hardware based on the Mac. With a PC it's all handled though software. Even on my high end Athlon and P4 systems the windows still flicker.
Proper coding of an application does, however, eliminate the flickering. It has to do with the way the Windows GUI updates the background of the window as it's being resized, moved, etc.
Basically the only people that it's going to hurt are the honest ones that pay for it. <hr></blockquote>
That's correct because Microsoft realized that not enough people were buying upgrades, so, they came up with a way to force people to upgrade. WPA is that way because it allows Microsoft to disable WindowsXP in the future whenever they decide to.
Furthermore, look at the built-in zip decompression and photo editing tool (which I must say do suck for their lack of ability to do anything), yet these tools aim to take market share away from WinZip and Adobe (respectively).<hr></blockquote>
Actually, the supposed "rip-offs" you speak of were licensed by Microsoft from the very companies you think they are ripping off. Microsoft realized that ALOT of people use ZIP files and the vast majority of PCs ship with CDRW drives now, so, why not include those? It saves a bunch of trouble for the end user, and, isn't file decompression included in OS X? How about CD burning? OS X has an image viewer, doesn't it?
I get a good laugh over how some people criticize Microsoft for including ZIP decompression and CD burning software, yet, others criticize them for NOT including other software.
[quote]Mac OS X is built on XML... Something which is very customizable. Try doing anything with XP, its worthless aside from turning the default child-mode look off.<hr></blockquote>
Actually, XP is built around XML as well, in fact, I just finished my own theme for it to get rid of the annoying Playskool look.
The average users only has it installed on one computer.. and the average user is the one that is stil having to put up with the hassles of WPA that was made to stop piracy. The pirates wont be effected by it. Therefore it's BS.<hr></blockquote>
Yes, the public announcement of what WPA is for is total BS. It has nothing to do with piracy at all.
You've failed to answer, how in the hell will WPA affect a legal user?<hr></blockquote>
Because WPA gives Microsoft the ability to remotely turn off the spigot and begin to force the subscription based services on the consumer.
If you can't get a WPA code, you can't use Windows after 30 days.
There will be no more support for Win95 from now on. MS even said as much.<hr></blockquote>
Yep, in fact, next month Microsoft dumps support for Win95. There's a reason why OfficeXP, WinXP, and DirectX no longer support Win95, not to mention more and more hardware coming to market.
WPA is part of the mechanism that Microsoft will use to eventually get everyone to upgrade, like it or not.
Jeez, it never ends.
How exactly WPA is going to be incorporated is still sketchy at this point simply like all Microsoft moves, it's like a landslide. You see it coming, but you can't do anything about it because it comes from all sides.
Will it leverage .Net, tighten hold on businesses, pin users into the microsoft regime, massive chain e-mailing, world dominations?
So many possiblities and so many possible moves if the others fails.
The only thing in it's way is the increasing amount of awareness filtering through to consumers.
~Kuku