WINDOWS RG - New windows demo!

Discussion in 'After Hours Lounge (Off Topic)' started by Eric_L, Feb 4, 2005.

  1. Eric_L

    Eric_L Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2002
    Messages:
    1,994
    Likes Received:
    1
  2. Ricardo C

    Ricardo C Producer

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,059
    Likes Received:
    0
    Too close to the truth to be a proper parody [​IMG]
     
  3. BrianW

    BrianW Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 1999
    Messages:
    2,563
    Likes Received:
    38
    Real Name:
    Brian
    Ah, those were the days. Daily-to-hourly BSoDs and a constant stream of GPFs. I'm SO glad I'm running Linux now.
     
  4. John Watson

    John Watson Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,937
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hilarious !

    [​IMG]
     
  5. Mary M S

    Mary M S Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,544
    Likes Received:
    0
    and will the Really Best Edition fix those tiny Really Good Edition issues, but have something incredibly important to force us to upgrade.

    That was very funny. Be sure and type in the Word Program. [I hate that paperclip]
     
  6. Craig S

    Craig S Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2000
    Messages:
    5,727
    Likes Received:
    199
    Location:
    League City, Texas
    Real Name:
    Craig Seanor
    Ah, those were the days. Daily-to-hourly BSoDs and a constant stream of GPFs. I'm SO glad I'm running Windows XP Pro now. [​IMG]

    Seriously, the anti-Windows crowd is stuck back in the Win 3.x/9x days. GPFs & BSODs are a thing of the past for anyone using XP. I haven't seen a GPF since moving to NT in 1998, and in the 500 computers I manage at work, there has been only ONE BSOD reported since we moved to Windows 2000 and then XP Pro.

    There are still a lot of things to complain about Windows, but this stuff is so 1990s. [​IMG]
     
  7. ThomasC

    ThomasC Lead Actor

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2001
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    0
    Continuing what Craig said, XP got rid of BSoDs and GPFs. Windows works just dandy for me.
     
  8. Seth--L

    Seth--L Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    0


    Exactly. I'm no fan of Windows, but XP runs very smoothly.

    IE though, remains a horrible program. Even worse is outlook.
     
  9. Dalton

    Dalton Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,198
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    Rhode Island
    Real Name:
    Dalton

    That's why i use Maxthon. So much better than IE.
     
  10. BrianW

    BrianW Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 1999
    Messages:
    2,563
    Likes Received:
    38
    Real Name:
    Brian
    My complaints stem from my use of Windows 2000, not Win 3.x/9x. To be fair, I've seen lots of machines on which Windows 2000 and NT (even 3.5-SP4) are rock solid, but my home machines -- even my newest machines with Intel 2.4GHz Pentiums on Intel motherboards, which I purchased for "enhanced Windows compatibility" -- have never been able to run Windows 2000 without daily BSoDs and spontaneous reboots. Blame the hardware or third-party drivers if it makes you feel better, but don't deny the problem exists. There truly are some of us for whom Windows is too much of a pain in the butt to put up with. As for XP, I'm sure it's even better and more stable. But why should I even try it? Since switching to GNU/Linux, my hardware has never performed better or been more stable. I don't even have to reboot to install software. Do you know of any Windows 2000 machine that has gone 18 months (and counting) without a reboot? Can even an XP machine do that?
     
  11. ChuckSolo

    ChuckSolo Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sorry to rain on your parade, but in NO way is XP immune to the problems that plagued WIN2000 or NT. Windows is still prone to memory leaks and even Microsoft admits the security structure is wanting. My beef with Windows XP and all the other flavor is the constant need for patches. It is an expensive proposition to have to download the damn patches on every machine whenever they are released. Although the patches are "free" the time lost in productivity and IT hours is ridiculous. Especially if you have 2-3 hundered machines in your organization like I do. That doesn't even include the servers. My opinion as an IT professional is that Windows is OK as a desktop solution for your organization, however, I will NEVER trust a Windows server to run an enterprise database (we have over 13 million records in there). I currently have 7 servers on site 5 of them run NetWare 6 and 5.1 and 1 is Windows 2000 server (e-mail gateway and firewall)and 1 IBM AS/400. I run my Oracle 9i database on one of the NetWare servers and will soon port it over to Linux. There is NO WAY IN HELL I will ever put any kind of mission critical database or similar application on Windows. BTW - Active Directory is the most pain in the butt directory service there is to manage for a Sys Admin. I use Novell eDirectory at work and manage the whole thing from the comfort of my Windows 2000 PC located in my office. Windows, sure, keep it on the desktop, but keep it out of the server room.[​IMG]
     
  12. Seth--L

    Seth--L Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    0


    Something is clearly wrong with your computer.
     
  13. ChuckSolo

    ChuckSolo Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Seth, you're right. So in essence your opinion is: Windows is a great "little user" interface, but pretty much crap for large businesses. Heck, I use Windows at home, even though I detest the darn thing. I agree XP is more stable than any other iteration, BUT it will still give you errors, give it time. The more hardware/software you install the more flaky it will get, trust me.

    Brian I agree with you too. It is hard to switch to a newer version (and pay the price) if you are fed up with Win2000. However, XP is heads above 2000 in stability. The one place Win XP really shines is in the hardware compatability area. I installed an ancient 3Com NIC (3C509) in my niece's Win XP PC and the OS recognized the card immediately and she was on Cox Internet service in minutes. For the average user, Win XP is a boon compared to the other flavors. Power users will always find ways to bring out the bugs in any OS, especially Windows. If you are getting as many errors as you say, there IS something wrong with the hardware as far as Win2000 is concerned, no doubt about it. On the LINUX side, I also agree with you there. At my previous job we had an INFORMIX database that ran on an IBM RISC server running UNIX (LINUX is a subset) and we only rebooted that thing twice in the three years I was at that job. Once because we needed to do an upgrade to the database software and once because a hard disk controller failed in the machine. As far as the LINUX OS goes, that is one helluva stable OS. That is why I am in the process of migrating our Oracle 9i database from the NetWare 5.1 server it's on to a brand new Dell running LINUX.[​IMG]
     
  14. BrianW

    BrianW Cinematographer

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 1999
    Messages:
    2,563
    Likes Received:
    38
    Real Name:
    Brian
    Seth, if something is clearly wrong with my computers (five of them since 2000, three still in active use), then why do they all run Linux so brilliantly? There's nothing wrong with my computers except that they are incompatible in some way with Windows 2000. I believe I've already conceded that. I'm sure a run-of-the-mill DELL with an OEM version of Windows 2000 (if you can find one anymore) runs just fine. But as a software engineer who develops automation software, I require quite a bit more for development and testing of my software. As far as I'm concerned, if the operating system won't work just because I have a J-TAG interface plugged into the parallel port, or a logic analyzer plugged into the USB port (or whatever the hell makes Win2000 BSoD), then something is clearly wrong with the operating system. "Fixing" my computers so that they could run Win2000 would necessarily mean that I could no longer do my job.

    Even so, I've seen Win2000 refuse to run reliably on no fewer than four of even the most mundane PCs just because they had ATI graphics cards. Is something "clearly wrong" with these PCs as well? Linux ran fine on them, so I can't blame the hardware. But changing the graphics cards (or motherboards, while keeping the ATI graphics cards--go figure) also allowed Win2000 to run just fine on them, so I guess blaming the hardware works, too. Whatever.

    I believe I've even conceded, and Chuck seems to agree, that I probably wouldn't have the same problems with XP that I had with Win2000 because of its superior hardware compatibility. But with my hardware working so perfectly with Linux, why on Earth would I ever take a chance with XP?
     
  15. ChuckSolo

    ChuckSolo Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    True Brian, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." There is a reason that Win2000 came with a hardware compatability wizard. When I got my first DEll PC I remember putting in a new sound card/Faxmodem and the 2000 hardware wizard told me the new card wasn't compatable. Well, I went ahead and took the card out and installed 2000 and then found out what cards were compatable. What a pain in the butt. See, that is what I am saying, Brian is typical of the "non-average" user that Microsoft seems to care nothing about. for the average "schlep" Windows XP, with all it's cutesy interface icons (read cartoonish) is fine. I use XP at work only because we have plain vanilla DEll PCs networked via NetWare, and because the Dells came with the OS already installed. Brian is an extraordinary poweruser so I can see how he pushes the machine and OS. Don't you think that Windows owes power users like Brian an OS that is gonna satisfy him as well as the "average joe" type. Absolutely it does. That is one reason I despise Microsoft so much, it engineers its products solely for the masses with sales being the driving force, not technical superiority. Brian is right to go with LINUX it's much more an OS for the "professional" than Windows, XP or otherwise, will ever be.
     
  16. Seth--L

    Seth--L Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    0


    I don't know, I'd have to look at your computer. I've worked for companies that exclusively run Win 2000 on hundreds of computers, and have never heard anyone experience the problems you describe, such as random reboots. I couldn't imagine any company tolerate such a problem.
     
  17. ChuckSolo

    ChuckSolo Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    0
    If LINUX runs so reliably on Brian's PC and it has problems with Windows 2000 it IS Windows' fault. There is obviously something going on with Brian's hardware that Windows doesn't like. That is what I am saying. I don't doubt that Your (Seth's) PC runs without issues since you are probably running off the shelf software. It's only when you begin to deviate from Windows' software "comfort" zone that things begin to go awry. Blaming third party "drivers" for Windows issues isn't the problem, it's Windows' lack of support for devices it deems non-conforming that is the problem. Microsoft should get off its fat a** and start supporting stuff (software/hardware) that hard core "professionals" will use. Until then the true pros will go to alterntives like LINUX. No one is disputing that XP is fine for the average desktop. It's when you start relying on it to reliably run "mission critical" applications and hardware that its shortcommings becaome alarmingly apparent.
     
  18. Seth--L

    Seth--L Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    0


    Or something wasn't setup right or he had a virus. The last time I heard anyone having random reboots was Win 95 and sometimes 98. Even for Windows that's unusual.
     
  19. Tony-B

    Tony-B Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2002
    Messages:
    3,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now to move back to the flash file that was in the first post. [​IMG]

    I saw this thing a long time ago, but I forgot about how good it is. Still funny stuff! Thanks for posting it.
     
  20. Dave Poehlman

    Dave Poehlman Producer

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2000
    Messages:
    3,813
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, who'd a thunk this thread would start a big OS debate. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page