Pages: 1 2 3

 

2010-10-27 10:37:19
Ilocano
buuuurrrrrrppppp.......
+341|6911

SenorToenails wrote:

burnzz wrote:

SenorToenails wrote:


Why would you want to cling to an old OS?  If MS stuck with XP, you'd be working with a 'has been' OS that's stuck in with a 32bit architecture.
i got a batch of workstations from Dell that had XP x64 pre-installed, from Dell. normally they do pretty well for driver support, but these particular machines didn't have any drivers installed, out of the box
LOL!  I had XP x64 on my computer for years...I loved it!  But it wasn't really Windows XP...I know that one was a workstation-esque version of Server 2003.  Once I got drivers for all the supported peripherals for that OS, it was pretty kickass.  But nVidia put some shit drivers out for their chipsets back in 2005...it was rough.
XP-64 was my primary gaming rig for ages.  It was my Bf2 rig.  Awesome OS and solid through and through.

I have a feeling Windows 8 will be Zune'ish, like the latest Windows Mobile.  All touchy/feely/stretchy.  Microsoft might finally push there touch technology.
2010-10-27 11:52:02
presidentsheep
Back to the Fuhrer
+208|6206|Places 'n such

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I hope they give it a big cat's name just to pull Apple's chuff.
Windows Kitteh.
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
2010-10-27 11:54:40
presidentsheep
Back to the Fuhrer
+208|6206|Places 'n such

Uzique wrote:

no im implying that windows 7 is a step towards OSX

and i bet win 8 will be, too

purely aesthetically speaking
Nothing wrong with that, macs have always looked better and windows pc's have always functioned better in my opinion
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
2010-10-27 20:53:03
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|7016|PNW

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Its been a steady trend since day one, Microsoft is yet to innovate.
Really since Win95. That's when everyone started squawking about the similarities. Major differences being the bloat and bugginess of Windows as compared to Mac's OS. They appear to be growing closer together, though...
Me and (both) my friends were squawking about it from Windows 3.1 onwards.
Where were the squawkers when Apple robbed (well, kinda) Xerox of their interface concepts?
2010-10-27 20:55:43
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|7016|PNW

presidentsheep wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I hope they give it a big cat's name just to pull Apple's chuff.
Windows Kitteh.
I have the loading screen right here:

2010-10-28 05:10:13
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6655|'Murka

SenorToenails wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:


Really since Win95. That's when everyone started squawking about the similarities. Major differences being the bloat and bugginess of Windows as compared to Mac's OS. They appear to be growing closer together, though...
Me and (both) my friends were squawking about it from Windows 3.1 onwards.
Not sure why you might do that!!! 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … esktop.png
vs.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e … kspace.png

And to make it worse, the MacOS version is from 1984 while Windows 3.1 was released in 1992.  lol
I say 95 because that was the first version of Windows where you could put shortcuts on the desktop a la Mac. Yes, 3.1 looked similar to MacOS, but the functionality wasn't there (ish) until 95.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2010-10-28 05:18:40
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6350|eXtreme to the maX
Which makes it worse, 3.1 was a facsimile, not even a working copy.
Fuck Israel
2010-10-28 07:17:05
Kurazoo
Pheasant Plucker
+440|6929|West Yorkshire, U.K
If it's as good as the new Windows Live Messenger I won't buy it.
2010-10-28 07:42:20
presidentsheep
Back to the Fuhrer
+208|6206|Places 'n such

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

presidentsheep wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I hope they give it a big cat's name just to pull Apple's chuff.
Windows Kitteh.
I have the loading screen right here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Bmhjf0rKe8
I'd buy it.
I'd type my pc specs out all fancy again but teh mods would remove it. Again.
2010-11-15 12:47:41
Taten
Member
+4|6453|Good Old Blitey

CC-Marley wrote:

Most people hate Vista. I've never had a problem with it.
i just installed Vista Home Premium last week, intiall installment was roughly 8 Gb, it took 3 days too complete all the updates downloads, and now i have 54 Gb of hard drive space used up with the operating system alone and havent even started installing games yet, holy shit 54gig for an operating is bad, but as you said! no problems
2010-11-15 12:52:08
DUnlimited
got any popo lolo intersting?
+1,160|6708|cuntshitlake

presidentsheep wrote:

First to say that this one is going to suck balls. Really badly.

'98 - Good.
ME - Terrible
XP - Good
Vista - Terrible
7 - Good

Therefore 8 will be crap
you miss win2k which was quite an improvement over ME / 98.

Last edited by DUnlimited (2010-11-15 20:05:42)

main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg
2010-11-15 14:58:44
FloppY_
­
+1,010|6530|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

DUnlimited wrote:

presidentsheep wrote:

First to say that this one is going to suck balls. Really badly.

'98 - Good.
ME - Terrible
XP - Good
Vista - Terrible
7 - Good

Therefore 8 will be crap
you miss
Win2k ?
­ Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
2010-11-15 16:38:35
alexb
<3
+590|6184|Kentucky, USA

Taten wrote:

CC-Marley wrote:

Most people hate Vista. I've never had a problem with it.
i just installed Vista Home Premium last week, intiall installment was roughly 8 Gb, it took 3 days too complete all the updates downloads, and now i have 54 Gb of hard drive space used up with the operating system alone and havent even started installing games yet, holy shit 54gig for an operating is bad, but as you said! no problems
Disable System Restore.
2010-11-15 16:55:48
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,815|6350|eXtreme to the maX

FloppY_ wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:

presidentsheep wrote:

First to say that this one is going to suck balls. Really badly.

'98 - Good.
ME - Terrible
XP - Good
Vista - Terrible
7 - Good

Therefore 8 will be crap
you miss
Win2k ?
Win2k = ME?
Fuck Israel
2010-11-15 17:19:12
jsnipy
...
+3,277|6767|...

Dilbert_X wrote:

FloppY_ wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:

you miss
Win2k ?
Win2k = ME?
they were different

Vista wasn't great but was certainly not the total train wreck ME was
2010-11-15 17:26:35
FloppY_
­
+1,010|6530|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

Dilbert_X wrote:

FloppY_ wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:

you miss
Win2k ?
Win2k = ME?
nope.jpg

Wiki wrote:

Windows Me was released seven months after Windows 2000 and one year before Windows XP, but Windows Me was not intended to be, nor did it serve as the successor to Windows 2000. Windows Me was designed for home use, while Windows 2000 was designed for business.
ME was a catastrophe while Win2k was rather brilliant...

Last edited by FloppY_ (2010-11-15 17:33:47)

­ Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
2010-11-16 08:26:04
ghettoperson
Member
+1,943|6894

Dilbert_X wrote:

FloppY_ wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:


you miss
Win2k ?
Win2k = ME?
Nah, 2k was pretty decent.

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard