Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

********************How do you like WINDOWS XP?********************
From me ^ | 27 Oct 01 | Democrats are liars

Posted on 10/27/2001 11:16:24 AM PDT by Democrats are liars

Well, I just finished installing Windows XP on my computer. It did not go nice and smooth. I ended up reformatting my hard drive and starting from scratch. I know Windows XP sure does not like AOL 6.0. I am in the process of downloading AOL 7.0. I am still installing all my old software. Yes Windows XP locked up on me many times today and last night. Well, I guess I just would like to know how every one else is doing with Windows XP.


TOPICS: Editorial; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340341-359 next last
To: Knitebane
A virus, in computer terminology, is a self-replicating piece of code, usually damaging to the system that it infects.

The GPL, in computer terminology, is a self-replicating license, usually damaging to the intellectual property that it infects.
301 posted on 10/29/2001 7:05:23 AM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: Lee'sGhost
I can't for the life of me figure out the problem with Windows Me. I know it was hardly a "chart buster" as versions of Windows go.

In fact, my wife's machine--an HP Pavilion--came preloaded with Windows 98, and was reasonably stable in that configuration. I upgraded it to Windows 98SE, and again, it seemed to work o.k. that way.

But when I installed a new sound card in the machine, it just would NOT recognize the card, and I couldn't find the drivers it needed. That's when I upgraded to Me just couple of months ago. Oh, the sound card worked all right, but soon after installing, we started experiencing regular system hangs. I tried tweaking and adjusting, but could never figure it out.

It got so bad that when Windows XP was imminent, I decided to go ahead and upgrade to the Home Edition. Now, it doesn't hang--but we're back to the sound card not working! AARGH!

As far as Tombraider III, that's a pretty old version of the game isn't it? Was it made for Windows 95? That may be part of the problem.

302 posted on 10/29/2001 7:07:40 AM PST by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 299 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline
XP, as we have been told, has to be loaded system-at-a-time.

Not true. You aren't allowed to use the retail version to install multiple copies; however, you can use the volume-licensed media to do so. Read and educate yourself:



As for Linux..........you brought it up.

That's a blantant fabrication. I have no reason to even discuss Linux on a Windows XP thread. It doesn't even belong here.
303 posted on 10/29/2001 7:13:52 AM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 285 | View Replies]

To: TechJunkYard
Only if you decide to publish your changes.

That's a pretty insidious restriction. Whatever happened to the notion that free source code is free source code?!? Look, you and I both know that the GPL is one of the open source community's most criticized points of contention. Frankly, I think that when you make something free, it should be free ... as in, no strings, no requirements, etc.
304 posted on 10/29/2001 7:16:59 AM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 283 | View Replies]

To: TechJunkYard
Seriously, I can wait for the dust to settle and check the reviews in a few months; I've heard the "bad" stuff and I'm just curious about the "new" stuff and wondered if someone could tell of the virtues without reviewing what everyone else has said.

Thank you for that clarification. I've become a bit cynical in the face of ongoing, hit-and-run attacks on XP from OSX and Linux sycophants. Personally, I don't think there's any one feature in XP that would compel you to upgrade from Windows 2000, if you are satisfied with it. There are a lot of little nice-to-have features, such as "fast user switching" (which allows you to maintain multiple simultaneous logged-in users), an improved image acquisition, cataloguing, and display architecture in the Shell (Twain+), better performance, improved reliability, remote assistance (aka Terminal Server), simplified network setup, etc. All in all, these are things that you (as a pro) can live without. But they make the average person's life easier.

Windows is getting better with each release. Some people would question that but I don't think it's even debatable. Now that the Windows 9x and Windows 2000 teams have essentially been united into a single source tree, I think you're going to see even better releases. There won't be the same distractions of working on separate products anymore. They can focus on improving security, etc. Of course, even I have to question how much you can improve an operating system before people will decide that an upgrade isn't worth the cost. This is undoubtedly the reason that Microsoft is moving toward a subscription model.
305 posted on 10/29/2001 7:26:44 AM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: Citizen of the Savage Nation
Any advice for this Linux virgin on how to do this, helpful links or such? I was toying with the idea before, I've got a new system with Win ME and wouldn't mind having Linux on there, too, as a dual boot system but lack the necessary experience.

One suggestion: I wasn't willing to mess around with LILO in order to get my dual boot system running Linux. So I use a boot diskette. Works great. Doesn't impact my other partitions at all. Consider it.
306 posted on 10/29/2001 7:29:12 AM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: Atlantin
God! I hate these "know it all responses" from Microsoft "experts" who NEVER have used a MAC in their lives spout off about MACS v. PCs.

God! I hate these "know it all" responses from Mac "experts" on Windows XP threads when their opinions weren't solicited in the first place.
307 posted on 10/29/2001 7:31:25 AM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: Tornado
XP was my first MS, first-edition upgrade. I had to lose ME - too unstable. After a couple of days, the cd-rw driver didn't work. XP could find nothing better, so I did a revert to the day of install and the system was repaired. At least that feature is handy.
308 posted on 10/29/2001 7:48:14 AM PST by Sgt_Schultze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
I have an alternate way of dual-booting a Win-NT or 2K system. Can probably be used with XP if it uses the NT-style boot loader.
309 posted on 10/29/2001 7:57:29 AM PST by TechJunkYard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000; innocentbystander
The GPL, in computer terminology, is a self-replicating license, usually damaging to the intellectual property that it infects.

Good one. Send it to SteveB!

Keep up the good fight!

310 posted on 10/29/2001 8:06:17 AM PST by Incorrigible
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Only if you decide to publish your changes.

That's a pretty insidious restriction. Whatever happened to the notion that free source code is free source code?!? Look, you and I both know that the GPL is one of the open source community's most criticized points of contention. Frankly, I think that when you make something free, it should be free ... as in, no strings, no requirements, etc.

So don't use that license. The BSD systems use a truly free license that allows you to do whatever you want with your code, including publishing, and using in closed-source projects--exactly what you wished for.

Now, you're criticizing (sp?) the GPL, when the users/developers/maintainers of Linux have chosen that particular model to control their IP. Yet you do not say the same about Microsoft and it's method of controlling their IP? They chose the GPL because that is how they wanted to control their IP. Don't we still have an illusion of free choice in regards to our own IP in this country?

I know you are a big proponent of Microsoft on these threads, and that's fine. Criticize Linux all you want--it can handle itself. But resorting to attack of the license is somewhat underhanded, and bears no point of the quality of Linux itself.

311 posted on 10/29/2001 8:13:29 AM PST by ShadowAce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
I know you are a big proponent of Microsoft on these threads, and that's fine. Criticize Linux all you want--it can handle itself. But resorting to attack of the license is somewhat underhanded, and bears no point of the quality of Linux itself.

That's all he has left. Being a shill for Micro$oft is getting harder and harder, and when major corporations start looking at the bottom line, and the impact the Micro$oft merry-go-round software development has on it... it will only get harder.

Think about it CEO's, CFO's, CTO's... the millions of dollars in savings to your bottom line by dropping M$ Windows/Bloatware Orafice etc... THe ability to hang onto your hardware investement longer because there's no pressure on your software to constantly change everything and add more bloat just to keep the competetors at bay, and hold on to a monopoly. Not only that; add the ability to make changes to said software to fit YOUR NEEDS, not the needs of Micro$oft.

312 posted on 10/29/2001 8:29:33 AM PST by AFreeBird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: ShadowAce
Now, you're criticizing (sp?) the GPL, when the users/developers/maintainers of Linux have chosen that particular model to control their IP. Yet you do not say the same about Microsoft and it's method of controlling their IP? They chose the GPL because that is how they wanted to control their IP. Don't we still have an illusion of free choice in regards to our own IP in this country?

I had really wanted to avoid a discussion of Linux and the GPL on a Windows XP but ... you've got to realize, I'm going to respond to attacks on MS licensing and point out issues that developers should know about Linux and the GPL. That's simply the way the game works: You attack, I respond. I attack, you respond. Don't like it? Choose a different opponent.

I know you are a big proponent of Microsoft on these threads, and that's fine. Criticize Linux all you want--it can handle itself. But resorting to attack of the license is somewhat underhanded, and bears no point of the quality of Linux itself.

No, but the GPL does bear on the basic question of whether I, or other developers, would consider writing software for it.
313 posted on 10/29/2001 11:17:17 AM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird
That's all he has left. Being a shill for Micro$oft is getting harder and harder, and when major corporations start looking at the bottom line, and the impact the Micro$oft merry-go-round software development has on it... it will only get harder.

Nice orthogonal attack. Didn't have the balls to confront me directly.
314 posted on 10/29/2001 11:18:34 AM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 312 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Do you know of any discussion groups (not ones hosted by MS) that are discussing XP? Specifically I am looking for ones aimed at the corporate IT professional.

There are enough things missing (DLC protocol), added (Messenger, Remote Desktop) and changed that I am concerned about future versions of Windows now. I had already planned to stay with Win2k for our desktops but this new version is giving me some Maalox moments.

315 posted on 10/29/2001 12:36:55 PM PST by oc-flyfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: TechJunkYard
Thanks for the info.
316 posted on 10/29/2001 1:09:55 PM PST by Citizen of the Savage Nation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: oc-flyfish
http://www.openitx.com/g/Microsoft/WINDOWS-XP-L.asp

http://passport.devx.com/reg/signin_step1.asp?ru=http%3A%2F%2Fwindowsxp%2Edevx%2Ecom%2Fdiscussions%2Fdefault%2Easp

http://access.globalknowledge.com/

http://www.compinfo-center.com/compinfo/tt.nsf/infoform?OpenForm&Topic=Windows+XP&Type=NG

http://www.ntsecurity.net/Articles/Index.cfm?TopicID=1052

http://discussions.virtualdr.com/cgi-bin/forumdisplay.cgi?action=topics&forum=Windows+XP&number=5&DaysPrune=10&LastLogin=
317 posted on 10/29/2001 1:32:11 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: Bush2000
Thanks dude! Just found out that Exchange 5.5 Administration tools, and Win2k Administration tools can't be loaded on XP. :-(
318 posted on 10/29/2001 1:46:55 PM PST by oc-flyfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: Dale 1
Has anyone with 128 or less had any luck with XP?

I built a machine for my daughter running XP on a 533 Celeron with 128 mb of RAM. Runs fine.

That having been said, when you can buy 256MB of RAM every Sunday in the paper for $29.95, why be stingy with it?

319 posted on 10/29/2001 1:48:19 PM PST by Leroy S. Mort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Comment #320 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340341-359 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson