OS Question

  • Thread starter zeno
  • 26 comments
  • 715 views
350
Which is the best (windows) Operating System? My friend keeps suggesting that I should stick with Win98SE because it is much lighter on the hardware usage than XP or the rest of the OS's, and that "XP is designed for the handicapped who can't even open a program by themselves" (please note the quote, I'm not responsible for that statement. Thanks.)

Is he right? Thanks,

zeno
 
IMO XP is the best. I use to use 98SE. I had nothin but problems (including blue screens of death left and right) with it. I've been usin XP for about 6 months or so now and I havent had any problems.
 
Originally posted by Viper_Maniac
IMO XP is the best. I use to use 98SE. I had nothin but problems (including blue screens of death left and right) with it. I've been usin XP for about 6 months or so now and I havent had any problems.

I dunno I can't stand XP. I like the fact everything runs quicker and opens faster with 98SE.

Such a hard deceision... :irked:
 
XP is more stable than 98 will ever be. I've had been using it since January and the only time it will crash on me is if I'm playing videogames or using quicktime(Why it does that is beyond me...).
 
One more thing (I know this is a minority), but I just can't stand that cheesy look that comes with it. Looks like some kindergarten software with those gigantic buttons and everything being all rounded down and colorful...
 
XPs new GUI (it's new, fancy look) also drains another 3% from your systems performance. Switching it back to Classic makes it run faster.
 
Originally posted by Eddy
XPs new GUI (it's new, fancy look) also drains another 3% from your systems performance. Switching it back to Classic makes it run faster.

And the OS's look is only about 3% of the importance of the OS. It's all about the stability, and XP is a much more stable platform that 98SE. 98SE is probably the worst OS that Microsoft has ever come out with. It's simply dreadful, and the core reason for this is that it's fundamentally incapable of managing itself and its resources.

So what happens is that it runs out of resources and falls over, but at no point has it ever told you that this is imminent. 98SE is rubbish, plain and simple.
 
Originally posted by GilesGuthrie
And the OS's look is only about 3% of the importance of the OS. It's all about the stability, and XP is a much more stable platform that 98SE. 98SE is probably the worst OS that Microsoft has ever come out with. It's simply dreadful, and the core reason for this is that it's fundamentally incapable of managing itself and its resources.

So what happens is that it runs out of resources and falls over, but at no point has it ever told you that this is imminent. 98SE is rubbish, plain and simple.
I wasn't saying don't get XP because it's new look drains performance, that was just something I read and would like to point out for performance freaks.

Anyway, XP is just a spiffy-looking Windows 2000. If you go to the Tour XP option, it even says it was built on the 2000 platform. XP boasts a few extra options (half of which you won't even use might I point out) on a new GUI - that's all.

If 98SE is rubbish, what about 95 and 98? A lot of people recommend 98 for playing games...
 
Originally posted by Eddy
I wasn't saying don't get XP because it's new look drains performance, that was just something I read and would like to point out for performance freaks.

Anyway, XP is just a spiffy-looking Windows 2000. If you go to the Tour XP option, it even says it was built on the 2000 platform. XP boasts a few extra options (half of which you won't even use might I point out) on a new GUI - that's all.

If 98SE is rubbish, what about 95 and 98? A lot of people recommend 98 for playing games...

Ooh no, 95 and 98A are even worse!
 
Originally posted by zeno
One more thing (I know this is a minority), but I just can't stand that cheesy look that comes with it. Looks like some kindergarten software with those gigantic buttons and everything being all rounded down and colorful...

You can change XP's look by running a program like windowblinds. You can get it from www.wincustomize.com
 
Originally posted by Eddy
Or, if you want to go old school - just whack it back to Classic look to get the good ol' 2000 look.

Okie dokie. So that will give me back that 3% loss in performance? :D
 
It's a matter of preference. Rumor has it that Apple is creating an OS for x86 based processors, so that means OSX or something along the lines of that on Intel and AMD machines. I'd rather have Linux though, I just need to decide which distribution I want to have. So many choices....
 
Originally posted by Eddy
What is good about Linux?

It's free, stable, and runs on low-power boxes. Personally I think it's a server operating system and people who use it on the desktop are pretty much kidding themselves that they're going to get a better experience than with Windows. For a lot of people a Linux installation is a technical exercise, and nothing more. I'm building a Linux box (Red Hat 8, by the way) to use as a test/development server.
 
No offence but LINUX is for the slightly more intellectually challenged in society - the nerds.

A guy in my class at school loves Linux he wants to become a authorised Linux technition/administrator person, the whole class mocks him and he is a loser after all - buried in his computers deeply.

I have nothing against people who code (Giles, sorry to point you out) coding is wierd - doesn't it take ages to learn it?
 
Originally posted by ALPHA
I have nothing against people who code (Giles, sorry to point you out) coding is wierd - doesn't it take ages to learn it?

Any decent skill takes ages to learn. Coding isn't that weird, after all, these great web sites don't just appear.
 
Originally posted by ALPHA
No offence but LINUX is for the slightly more intellectually challenged in society - the nerds.

A guy in my class at school loves Linux he wants to become a authorised Linux technition/administrator person, the whole class mocks him and he is a loser after all - buried in his computers deeply.

I have nothing against people who code (Giles, sorry to point you out) coding is wierd - doesn't it take ages to learn it?
I'd love to be able to code my own programs. Hell, the only code I know is HTML and I don't even know that too well (thank God for Dreamweaver). It'd be so cool if I could get hold of the source code for some of these P2P applications and remove the spyware from them...

Originally posted by GilesGuthrie
Any decent skill takes ages to learn. Coding isn't that weird, after all, these great web sites don't just appear.
Ah true. After all, HTML is coding language.
 
Originally posted by GilesGuthrie
It's free, stable, and runs on low-power boxes. Personally I think it's a server operating system and people who use it on the desktop are pretty much kidding themselves that they're going to get a better experience than with Windows. For a lot of people a Linux installation is a technical exercise, and nothing more. I'm building a Linux box (Red Hat 8, by the way) to use as a test/development server.
*caugh caugh*

I'm using Linux on a 200mhz computer. I'm hoping it'll act better than WinME, but strangly, it's not right now...
It sees the network inside my house, but for some reason, it won't go THROUGH the network and into the internet....

But I DO have Appache up and running, and it's a newer version than what Jordan has here!(or should I say, his server has...) I just wish I knew where the directory was to edit the files....
 
That's the problem with Linux: compatibility. For 99% of desktop PC users, Windows is the way to go. XP is the most stable an helpful of any Windows yet. I am running the "Safe" configuration from the site Klos posted. The computer runs all day and all night with no trouble.

The "Classic" appearance setting is virtually indistinguishable from previous editions of Windows.
 
Back