Windows is not any less of an operating system because it's Windows.

[Guest Ramm]

I never said anything about it being an OS war. I said a flame war. Personal attacks are shooting around here...

[Rez.]

That is of course your opinion as a well known MS shill.

 

Well that's not very nice and a tad ironic coming from someone with this in their sig :

 

OpenSUSE, the best desktop OS after OS X.

 

Since 1994

 

To quote JusticeRocks - Have a Mediocre day!

[Zulu.Walker]

Well as far as Pwnage goes ... JusticeRocks : 1 - EFI : 0

 

...JusticeRocks did not add anything informational to the discussion, pwnage is still EFI's. What JusticeRocks did, I call that (suave) trolling.

 

Never touching Vista 'til the completely fixed (not Beta) Service Pack 1 next year. There are a lot of reasons already posted in this thread about Vista's shortcomings, and from a financial standpoint, there's no reason to replace XP with Vista yet.

 

Microsoft has to make amends to fix their subpar OS after a long gestation period in their labs. If they want to sell Vista, it must compete well performance/feature/security-wise, and so far, they have provided no specific advantages (as far as the thread goes) compared to other OS or solutions that are already available to the market today. If their OS lives up to the hype, then goody. But it's not a secret that it's just all that, hype.

 

Keep on discussing guys, just keep your emotions at bay.

[bptba93]

Windows, In my opinion, is a great operating system. Look at all the hardware it has to support, there's tons of software. You can get free software that can do just about anything, and it's awesome at gaming.

[Rez.]

I apologize. It seems I have transgressed on the diety that is EFI. My apologies to his followers. Please forgive my shortcomings.

[EFI]

I apologize. It seems I have transgressed on the diety that is EFI. My apologies to his followers. Please forgive my shortcomings.

 

First of all, sarcasm (in the form of a personal attack on some members) on that level is not going to get your credibility even remotely appreciated, and secondly, I have yet to see you offer a proper rebuttal on my response (if you so rightfully believe that I am wrong)...instead of trolling on the side. I don't need other members to back me up in order to get my facts across. I believe in what I say.

 

If someone states something, and I agree with them....then that's becuase of 2 reasons. One, I have the same views, THAT'S why I agree with them...not because that person is always right, or otherwise. Two, being they were able to justify their response to an extent that it becomes the most plausible solution to the problem at hand. Agreeing with someone just because for the sake of not wanting to sound wrong...is wrong in itself.

[Alessandro17]

Well that's not very nice and a tad ironic coming from someone with this in their sig :

 

OpenSUSE, the best desktop OS after OS X.

 

Since 1994

 

To quote JusticeRocks - Have a Mediocre day!

 

That doesn't make me an openSUSE shill.

Since when Linux distributions need "shills"?

[Rez.]

First of all, sarcasm (in the form of a personal attack on some members) on that level is not going to get your credibility even remotely appreciated, and secondly, I have yet to see you offer a proper rebuttal on my response (if you so rightfully believe that I am wrong)...instead of trolling on the side. I don't need other members to back me up in order to get my facts across. I believe in what I say.

 

If someone states something, and I agree with them....then that's becuase of 2 reasons. One, I have the same views, THAT'S why I agree with them...not because that person is always right, or otherwise. Two, being they were able to justify their response to an extent that it becomes the most plausible solution to the problem at hand. Agreeing with someone just because for the sake of not wanting to sound wrong...is wrong in itself.

 

Sage advice sire

[MadDoggyca]

ps I have no idea how to spell/// thanks for your time...

[apowerr]

ps I have no idea how to spell/// thanks for your time...

No problem Is english your second language?

[Tetrasoft]

I agree, it is a good OS. I did not have any problems with it (apart from getting a bigger hard drive). I can get it to look the way I want for free and it is easy. So many applications out there for it.

 

I think the reason it is hated is that when people hear windows they think back to Windows 3.1 or 95. They were not great.

 

Mabey if Microsoft loose the name "Windows" it may loose the bad reputation.

[EFI]

I think the reason it is hated is that when people hear windows they think back to Windows 3.1 or 95. They were not great.

 

In my opinion, I think that is exactly the reason why people hate Macs and OS X. They think Macs still run OS 8 and 9....and its predominantly the youth community because back in grade school (I can relate) the computers used were the colored iMacs running OS9...and this is what people will tend to remember when the term Mac comes up...they look back at grade school...think of that old OS, and think thats still how Macs are. I will honestly take windows over OS9 anyday, and I think this is why many individuals feel that way.

[sarahbau]

In my opinion, I think that is exactly the reason why people hate Macs and OS X. They think Macs still run OS 8 and 9....and its predominantly the youth community because back in grade school (I can relate) the computers used were the colored iMacs running OS9...and this is what people will tend to remember when the term Mac comes up...they look back at grade school...think of that old OS, and think thats still how Macs are. I will honestly take windows over OS9 anyday, and I think this is why many individuals feel that way.

Colored iMacs in grade school? Damn that makes me feel old. lol. We had Apple IIs when I was in grade school, and the first iMac didn't come out until I was in college. Anyway, I have always felt that most people who hate Macs hated them either because it was the cool thing to do, or because they used one once long ago running educational software they didn't want to use anyway. To me that's like hating Ferrari because you drove one once and the passenger wouldn't shut up about how awesome hair plugs are, and you got into an accident because someone in front of you slammed on their brakes.

 

I know that many people probably do hate Windows just because it's Windows, or just because it's a MS product, or just because it has anything to do with Bill Gates, but while I will agree that XP is definitely much much better than 98 and earlier, it just doesn't cut it for me much of the time. It might be because I've been using mostly Macs for 18 years (and an Atari 520ST before that), but I can never seem to do things that should be pretty simple. "Search for Files" never seems to come up with any useful results, but I can't really complain much about that since Apple has been killing their search engine since Sherlock 2. Spotlight just sucks, and there's no real "find" feature any more. It's all this live searching stuff. Back when I was running OS 9, I preferred it to Windows by far, but today I might actually use Windows if I had to choose between the two - but probably more because of all the now outdated stuff on OS 9 like Netscape 4.7 and IE 5. lol

[apowerr]

In my opinion, I think that is exactly the reason why people hate Macs and OS X. They think Macs still run OS 8 and 9....and its predominantly the youth community because back in grade school (I can relate) the computers used were the colored iMacs running OS9...and this is what people will tend to remember when the term Mac comes up...they look back at grade school...think of that old OS, and think thats still how Macs are. I will honestly take windows over OS9 anyday, and I think this is why many individuals feel that way.

Definently. Macs didnt interest me at all untill they went Intel. And I still dont like their pathetic video card options on the desktops. On the $2500 Mac Pro it comes with a 7300GT. That is complete BS, I can get an identical alienware (same proc and ram as stock mac pro) with an 8800 Ultra for $2,549.

[Guest Ramm]

But, the difference is, Erei33, that the Mac Pro's use completely different hardware. They have special motherboards (Logic) and special styles of RAM. Not only that, but you're paying for the case (which can cost upwards of 300 dollars), the operating system, keyboard, mouse, and all the other components within the Mac Pro.

[MadDoggyca]

EFI no first lang if you don;'t included MSN and 1337 ? ok so I also suck at my own lang... but I have theinter next slang donw pat..

 

the main diffrence between vista and windows is... Vista waz deisgned for it and windows can run it some one makes it.

 

but jsut becuz you can make it run some of vista new feture dson;t mean u spuld becuz xp really wazn;t desiend to run the new fetures that vista has. One really good example is

 

oh and its "Windows Vista: Features Explained: Instant Search" and Googles Desktop

 

If u ever ran googles desktop it plain suck. Its not intreagted and it runs slow and it never fineds ever thing on your pc. as well it show resultes in a webbowser webpage setup.

 

there there also windows desktop Live. withc also sucks becuz its not intergrated but it dose show better resutes and it opens sarches in a semi explore view.

 

Instant Search is intragted ...will show ever thing and works in live mode ..filters in real time and show resultes with out opeing any new window....

 

and NO xp dose not have the filters. Its has what you called Chaning view to like list or detail but thats not a filter.... thats just chaning your way you view your files.

 

Filters just do wthat filter files out fomr one or the other... not list or show them in diffrent ways.. in xp you can sort by name. type and ect but it sitll shows ever file in the folder just in a diffirent order. Vista you type in the filter or u Fiter .doc it will only show .doc in the folder view.... and nothing eles. this is almost close to saying this is instent sarch. sure in xp you can go sarch *.doc and it will show you only .doc files like vista filter will do but its not quite the same.

 

and theres a lot more to Kernal 6.0 they you stated. also sp1 for vista will inculed the new kenral that server 2008 will be using so that even more up on the new kernal.

 

Meta Tags are used more then jsut instant sarch. its more for the end user til orginze there files and rating them and taging them for programs like WMP that can sort bu metatags. and itunes. some picture programs will use metatags to filter images. and what not.

 

Xp^^^dose not do this.

 

but the main reson to run vista over any windeows os is this number one feture "SandBox apps/os operation. Apps are no loger running on system threads and if a app runs off your os dosn;t."

 

^^^ if thats not the reson you sohuld upgrade or run if your a windows user then I don;t knwo what is...... The almost perfect Idea for a protection agest user crash/viruse crash/mal-ware/spyware

 

hell I don;t even run a firewall as I don;t bealive in them

 

 

hell windows 3.1 rules man best non crash windows to date and no viruse for it... sure thers a few dos viruse that woudl take windows down but man it ruled...

 

also windows 3.1 is not a OS its a program. it required Dos 5.0 to run... or if your running windows any windows DosBox can run windows 3.1 inside it

[EFI]

Colored iMacs in grade school? Damn that makes me feel old. lol. We had Apple IIs when I was in grade school, and the first iMac didn't come out until I was in college. Anyway, I have always felt that most people who hate Macs hated them either because it was the cool thing to do, or because they used one once long ago running educational software they didn't want to use anyway. To me that's like hating Ferrari because you drove one once and the passenger wouldn't shut up about how awesome hair plugs are, and you got into an accident because someone in front of you slammed on their brakes.

 

I know that many people probably do hate Windows just because it's Windows, or just because it's a MS product, or just because it has anything to do with Bill Gates, but while I will agree that XP is definitely much much better than 98 and earlier, it just doesn't cut it for me much of the time. It might be because I've been using mostly Macs for 18 years (and an Atari 520ST before that), but I can never seem to do things that should be pretty simple. "Search for Files" never seems to come up with any useful results, but I can't really complain much about that since Apple has been killing their search engine since Sherlock 2. Spotlight just sucks, and there's no real "find" feature any more. It's all this live searching stuff. Back when I was running OS 9, I preferred it to Windows by far, but today I might actually use Windows if I had to choose between the two - but probably more because of all the now outdated stuff on OS 9 like Netscape 4.7 and IE 5. lol

 

I agree with you lol. It was later on in my grade school (6th grade +) that we started using the colored iMacs, before that, that I do remember using the original Macintosh 128K, but that was as old as we got in my time. Ah, brings back old memories of using Kid Pix. lol, those were the good days, had nothing to worry about. Sometimes I think that it was Kid Pix that got me interested in graphic design...and now into Photoshop. What a way.

 

 

Xp^^^dose not do this.

 

Yep, XP does not do this, by default...however I was not talking about default from the start. I was meaning adding features through 3rd party addons. The kernel 6 features that I mentioned were some of the more noticible ones out of the entire bunch of kernel implementations. Yes there are more, however those are even more of less importance that the once mentioned before. I got those from Microsoft's own NT 6.0 webpage btw. Also windows desktop search, while providing an integrated experience within the window structure itself, still can be replicated in third party addons. Applications that work doing background meta-tagging and searching are avaliable for XP as well. One great example is Colibri for Windows...it's kind of like QuickSilver for OS X...except with a crappy UI, and a lot less addons, but it is still comparable Windows desktop search, and can be activated by using an key command combination. It too has meta tag searching features, and is actually better than Google desktop, and Windows Live Search from my experience. What I am trying to say is...there are numerous backups under XP to replicate or mimic the features of Vista for the most part. The true difference will only come when Direct X 10 goes mainstream and is implemeneted heavily from applications to games.

 

About the filters you were talking about...it basically displays the same information in different views. This is done through altering the shell style on the fly. While the entire layout of windows/menus/toolbars/sidebar etc can be changed in XP to mimic exactly that of Vista...it cannot be done on the fly, however to get the look is very much possible. Also in terms of sandboxing the application, I have seen the video card driver bring the operating system down. So while the frequency of OS crahes are lowered in Vista greatly...it still does not mean that no application can bring it down.

 

Yep, when I used windows, I never used a firewall either...too much trouble for traffic.

[Darwin x86]

MS-DOS is a great operating system.XP is a great operating systemVista is a great operating systemOS 7 is a great operating systemOS 8 is a great operating systemOS 9 is a great operating systemOS X is a great operating systemUnix is a great operating systemLinux is a great operating system Solaris is a great operating systemOS2 is a great operating systemApple Computer Unites them all.This is why Apple is the Mac Daddy of em all.All OS's have their strengths. With Apple, you can use each OS for what you want, when you want.I have two triple boot drives with 6 different OS's to choose from in my Mac Pro. (Hot swap FW SATA enclosure gives me one OS per Master Drive if I want)Yes, Windows is a great OS.So are the rest.Apple gives us Unity.Now you have a platform that you can run all of your favs on for a long long time to come. Now Stop! Hammer Time!You can pick one OS over another if you want, but for me, I will take all of the above, thank you.

[EFI]

I have.......6 different OS's to choose from in my Mac Pro.

 

Whoa! I'm guessing you have the 1+ TB of HD space?

[sarahbau]

Whoa! I'm guessing you have the 1+ TB of HD space?

I can't think of an OS that uses more than 10GB for the OS files themselves. Documents can be stored elsewhere. He could just have two 80GB drives each with 3 10 GB partitions and one 50GB partition and still be fine. I'm sure he has bigger than that since it's a Mac Pro though. lol.

[MadDoggyca]

thats the problem 3rd party apps.

 

why use 3rd party apps to bring down your system resorues and cpu when its intergrated into the os it self with out bring down all the above.?? apple as spotlight but os9 did not.. how ever ucan get os9 to run a spotlike program but why woudl u want to if osx has it intergated??

 

the main difrences form xp to vista is intragtion it self. thats them main feutures that are worth talking about

 

Thats why osx rules soo much is whast not 3rd party aobut it but what comes out of the box in the first place and what intergated to tie ever thing together....

 

Sure xp can get windows defender if u want to spend hte time todownlaod and confiure but vista has in intergated to work tighter with the os as a core then a branch of 3rd party apps.

 

same with IE7 sure xp has it but its actulyl tied into vista unlike xp being considered a 3rd party app

 

"Yep, when I used windows, I never used a firewall either...too much trouble for traffic. "

 

for any os I never use firewall ...I jsut don;t bealive in slowing or saping my ports to block people out.. I torrent way to much to consider such belifies...

 

I have over 139 Diffrent Distors of linux. over 10 Unix BSD and all windows verions as well as osx 6.0 to osx 10.5.0 Leaks....

 

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

 

Why osx rules the desktop OS

 

Its not that it a just a tight os. or the lack os 3rd part apps.. its all aobut intergation. If windows tied there OS to there own hardware I think it would infact beat OSX just cuz of the more apps it has but since there 333333333 diffrent hardware setup out there no wonder why the OS panics a lot... its all about driver issues with windows... to many diffrent makes for the same hardware. and too many bad drvies that makers don;t put time into ... OSX intergrates into there hardware having contral of there hadware and software to work flawlessy between each other..... and for that OSX and Macs JUST WORK......another example...Ipod and Itunes there just ment to be togher.

[sarahbau]

I have over 139 Diffrent Distors of linux. over 10 Unix BSD and all windows verions as well as osx 6.0 to osx 10.5.0 Leaks....

There's no such thing as OS X 6.0. The first OS X client was 10.0 (OS X Server started out at 1.0 before the client came out, but once 10.0 was released, OS X Server had the same numbering scheme).

[MadDoggyca]

sryI ment os 6.0 to osx 10.5.0

 

witch remined me any one have a copy of skyos ???? fomr www.skyos.org I belaive? witch is NON-Nix Non-UNIX Non Apple and Non-MS os? its a one of a kindy closed sorces os..

 

 

and i know in the image it showes termanl but once agian its not unix or linux

 

1. Is SkyOS a Linux distribution? Is SkyOS a *nix? Is SkyOS BeOS?

 

No, no, and no. SkyOS is an operating system written from scratch. It isn’t based on any other operating system out there. On the other hand, SkyOS is of course influenced by many operating systems, while retaining its uniqueness.

 

WHY LINUX SUCKS AND IS NOT GETTING ANYWERE???

 

3. Is SkyOS open-source?

No. SkyOS is a closed source operating system. The creators have chosen to keep the source closed because this would ensure that they would keep control. Also, this prevents forking and splintering.

 

4. Does SkyOS use GPL'd code?

No. SkyOS uses no GPL'd code in the kernel/system.

Note:

Asking this question over and over again does not magically change the answer.

 

All OS sohuld be like ^^^^^ such as skyos apple and windows

[EFI]

@ MadDoggyca

 

Mate, I was strictly talking about 3rd party apps. Why did I talk about 3rd party apps rather than initial integration? Because Windows XP was released in 2001...a 6 year gap until the next iteration of Windows. Within that 6 year time period, what all XP regained in 3rd party app is what makes it competitive today, and still have enough power to stand against Vista. If Windows vista was released a mere 2 years after XP was (as per the original plan with Longhorn), then your idea of viewing the benefits of integration would stand true and could be held for higher importance...however, becuase of this gap, there will be too much lost in the process of say if you have a computer with XP set up perfectly the way you want it...with the themes and everything.

 

That was my point from the start. I was not talking about integration...I was talking about avaliability to make it near equal to Vista in the majority of the aspects.

 

I can't think of an OS that uses more than 10GB for the OS files themselves. Documents can be stored elsewhere. He could just have two 80GB drives each with 3 10 GB partitions and one 50GB partition and still be fine. I'm sure he has bigger than that since it's a Mac Pro though. lol.

 

Oh woops, I meant to say a combined space of all the HD's would be 1TB. My mistake, I never meant it as a single HD is 1TB. . However your right...1Tb still sounds a bit extreme.

[sarahbau]

Oh woops, I meant to say a combined space of all the HD's would be 1TB. My mistake, I never meant it as a single HD is 1TB. . However your right...1Tb still sounds a bit extreme.

I didn't mean he had one 1TB drive either. lol. He could though, since they're out. I have XP, Vista, Ubuntu and Solaris on one 80GB drive since I rarely use any of them, and OS X gets the 500GB drive all to itself.