really the only thing i like about that mouse is the red button that slows your dpi only while its held for sniping. but i think that won't be such a unique feature in upcoming mice once the rest realize what a good idea it is
Quite a few nice have a feature like that.pirana6 wrote:
really the only thing i like about that mouse is the red button that slows your dpi only while its held for sniping. but i think that won't be such a unique feature in upcoming mice once the rest realize what a good idea it is
for a fatty you're a serious intellectual lightweight.
I fell out of the mice market about a number of months ago, right about when the rat7 was coming out and was "all" the hype. Clearly I'm behind the game. But this just goes to prove my point that I would never buy that mouse, especially now that the single feature I like on it is on other mice.
I did just get a new mouse so I'm not in the market, but this little guy is being made by Thermaltake in connection with BMW (yes, the car manufacturer) to compliment their case they cooperatively made. Though obviously the case isn't a necessity. Looks neat.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/03/bmw- … evel-10-m/
http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/03/bmw- … evel-10-m/
"Raise the flag high! Let the degenerates know who comes to claim their lives this day!"
I upgraded my cousin's processor the other day in his Dell Dimension E521 from an Athlon 64 3200+ Orleans to an Athlon 64 X2 6000+ Brisbane. The AM2 socket was fucking awesome, lol
Huge performance increase, he went from Very Low to High settings in ArmA II and still had a huge framerate improvement
It had some cooling issues at first where it got so hot the computer shut down after 5 minutes in-game, but after hitting everything with some compressed air, it all works fine now. I forgot how much of a difference dust makes for making a computer overheat
Huge performance increase, he went from Very Low to High settings in ArmA II and still had a huge framerate improvement
It had some cooling issues at first where it got so hot the computer shut down after 5 minutes in-game, but after hitting everything with some compressed air, it all works fine now. I forgot how much of a difference dust makes for making a computer overheat
So what does everyone think of Windows 8?
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously. ♥
total crap. unless you need exactly that version for some specific task (personally, i can't come up with one) - skip it.Finray wrote:
So what does everyone think of Windows 8?
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
Says the guy still stuck on XP.Shahter wrote:
total crap. unless you need exactly that version for some specific task (personally, i can't come up with one) - skip it.Finray wrote:
So what does everyone think of Windows 8?
I'm going to wait and see about Win8, too. Win7 fulfills all of my needs and unless Win8 really is amazing, then I'm stick with it this time around.
there, i fixed it for you.CapnNismo wrote:
Says the guy still stuck on who understands that 7 offers nothing useful for all the resources it consumes over XP.Shahter wrote:
total crap. unless you need exactly that version for some specific task (personally, i can't come up with one) - skip it.Finray wrote:
So what does everyone think of Windows 8?
orly? what "needs" doesn't XP fulfill?I'm going to wait and see about Win8, too. Win7 fulfills all of my needs and unless Win8 really is amazing, then I'm stick with it this time around.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
Meh it's fine. The UI is a huge change but whiners will get used to it. Every body hates change etc.Finray wrote:
So what does everyone think of Windows 8?
As far as the "next" windows (excluding the UI): it's just as decent a jump as that from XP to 7.
I personally like it, I've seen a visible performance increase on both my computers from 7 and I'm starting to get used to Metro already. I'm recommending it to all the power users/gamers I know who could get used to it and genuinely enjoy all the nice new little things about it but for the average user it's just going to be too confusing and drastic of a change to get used to without any real benefit for them.
For anybody that has a computer with XP or newer(anything made in almost the entirety of the last decade afaik unless they were still selling 2K comps for a time after XP came out) you can get 8 at the highest edition(Professional) for $40 online or buy the upgrade discs from brick & mortar stores for $80. All this goes until January. There's even a free 90-day trial for the Enterprise edition that anybody can get to see if they really like 8 in its final form, that's what I'm using on my desktop right now on my old 500GB hard drive.
I think people aren't giving it a genuine try and are just believing what all the tech sites and MS app store competitors are saying about it sucking, then again as I've said before I think I was sold as soon as the W8 Release Preview made Half-Life 2 playable on my ThinkPad X61 Tablet where it wasn't on Windows 7, lol. Metro is still a little bit confusing but the "All apps" option when right-clicking brings you to what pretty much is the start menu. It's a bit inefficient but the function is still there in a few extra steps.
1a. Software support for many other things in XP won't be around forever. Whatever it is, they'll keep making it for 7 long after they stop making it for XP since 7 has pretty much become the new XP for at least the early part of this decade if 8 doesn't catch on so well
2. Having a x64 version that's just as compatible and well-supported as the x86 version; x64 is definitely becoming more necessary as time goes on, 3GB of RAM isn't very much anymore and it's only going to get worse, x64 makes the sky the limit again and DDR3 is unbelievably cheap now at 4GB for $20 USD. Unless you still run 16-bit programs for some reason, there's no reason not to go to x64 on a modern OS if your hardware is compatible with it.
3. Smarter, easier, faster re-installation with most if not all drivers pre-installed right from the disc or downloaded from the internet while installing and still taking less time to install than XP does even after that
3a. Being able to change AHCI and RAID without having to reinstall the OS
It really is a dinosaur of an operating system now, you should at least think about upgrading to 7 sometime soon
For anybody that has a computer with XP or newer(anything made in almost the entirety of the last decade afaik unless they were still selling 2K comps for a time after XP came out) you can get 8 at the highest edition(Professional) for $40 online or buy the upgrade discs from brick & mortar stores for $80. All this goes until January. There's even a free 90-day trial for the Enterprise edition that anybody can get to see if they really like 8 in its final form, that's what I'm using on my desktop right now on my old 500GB hard drive.
I think people aren't giving it a genuine try and are just believing what all the tech sites and MS app store competitors are saying about it sucking, then again as I've said before I think I was sold as soon as the W8 Release Preview made Half-Life 2 playable on my ThinkPad X61 Tablet where it wasn't on Windows 7, lol. Metro is still a little bit confusing but the "All apps" option when right-clicking brings you to what pretty much is the start menu. It's a bit inefficient but the function is still there in a few extra steps.
1. Battlefield 3 and any other DirectX 10 or higher only games, not quite so much of a need if you don't game much anymore but if you do, then this is very steadily becoming a hindrance for XP users, and once the next generation of consoles come out in the next year or so and everybody adopts at least DirectX 11 hardware for them, you can kiss most new cross-ported games goodbye.Shahter wrote:
orly? what "needs" doesn't XP fulfill?
1a. Software support for many other things in XP won't be around forever. Whatever it is, they'll keep making it for 7 long after they stop making it for XP since 7 has pretty much become the new XP for at least the early part of this decade if 8 doesn't catch on so well
2. Having a x64 version that's just as compatible and well-supported as the x86 version; x64 is definitely becoming more necessary as time goes on, 3GB of RAM isn't very much anymore and it's only going to get worse, x64 makes the sky the limit again and DDR3 is unbelievably cheap now at 4GB for $20 USD. Unless you still run 16-bit programs for some reason, there's no reason not to go to x64 on a modern OS if your hardware is compatible with it.
3. Smarter, easier, faster re-installation with most if not all drivers pre-installed right from the disc or downloaded from the internet while installing and still taking less time to install than XP does even after that
3a. Being able to change AHCI and RAID without having to reinstall the OS
It really is a dinosaur of an operating system now, you should at least think about upgrading to 7 sometime soon
Last edited by _j5689_ (2012-09-25 23:55:12)
all of those "needs" are artificially manufactured to coerce people into buying so called "never operating systems". lack of support - yeah, that i understand perfectly well. what Nismo's been continuously bugging me about is that 7 is, supposedly, vastly superior to XP by itself in some way and not by means of exclusion by microsoft and those riding its marketing dick - that is totally not so. XP was and still is a lot faster, and at least just as safe and functional as anything else produced by microsoft._j5689_ wrote:
1. Battlefield 3 and any other DirectX 10 or higher only games, not quite so much of a need if you don't game much anymore but if you do, then this is very steadily becoming a hindrance for XP users, and once the next generation of consoles come out in the next year or so and everybody adopts at least DirectX 11 hardware for them, you can kiss most new cross-ported games goodbye.Shahter wrote:
orly? what "needs" doesn't XP fulfill?
1a. Software support for many other things in XP won't be around forever. Whatever it is, they'll keep making it for 7 long after they stop making it for XP since 7 has pretty much become the new XP for at least the early part of this decade if 8 doesn't catch on so well
2. Having a x64 version that's just as compatible and well-supported as the x86 version; x64 is definitely becoming more necessary as time goes on, 3GB of RAM isn't very much anymore and it's only going to get worse, x64 makes the sky the limit again and DDR3 is unbelievably cheap now at 4GB for $20 USD. Unless you still run 16-bit programs for some reason, there's no reason not to go to x64 on a modern OS if your hardware is compatible with it.
3. Smarter, easier, faster re-installation with most if not all drivers pre-installed right from the disc or downloaded from the internet while installing and still taking less time to install than XP does even after that
It really is a dinosaur of an operating system now, you should at least think about upgrading to 7 sometime soon
Last edited by Shahter (2012-09-26 00:03:00)
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
I think like me, he doesn't understand why you stay so glued to XP. XP's forced obsolescence, and 7's marketing and slightly more resource usage aside, why wouldn't you want to upgrade? It's not better in every single way obviously but it is overall better in most ways, especially in ease of use, convenience and compatibility.
I'm probably misinterpreting but you almost make it seem like you feel wronged that they left XP behind to try to make newer much better operating systems instead of just continuously upgrading and updating XP forever and you hold on to it out of stubbornness, lol. Either that or you bought one of the millions of OEM pieces of shit that came underspecced with Vista and felt severely burned by that and don't want to take a chance with 7 now.
I'm probably misinterpreting but you almost make it seem like you feel wronged that they left XP behind to try to make newer much better operating systems instead of just continuously upgrading and updating XP forever and you hold on to it out of stubbornness, lol. Either that or you bought one of the millions of OEM pieces of shit that came underspecced with Vista and felt severely burned by that and don't want to take a chance with 7 now.
dude, relax. i'm an IT specialist, i've been supporting microsoft' stuff for longer than some of those who visit these forums have been alive. i know exactly what i'm talking about. there's zero useful stuff in post-xp systems, the only real difference comes from lack of support. colorful interfaces and all the bells and whistles don't make something more functional or easy to use - in many cases, it does quite the opposite. tell me, would you - hell, would anyone - buy vista or seven if XP had a well supported x64 version and directX 10 and later?
and no, i'm not actually sticking with XP. i've got 7 on all of my machines at home, and i'm quite used to it. i just never boot into my windows partition unless i want to play games anymore. linux mint does it well enough for me.
and no, i'm not actually sticking with XP. i've got 7 on all of my machines at home, and i'm quite used to it. i just never boot into my windows partition unless i want to play games anymore. linux mint does it well enough for me.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
XP is vastly more insecure than Windows 7, lack of support, yada yada yada. And for me, this is the biggest caveat for Win7 over XP: a functioning x64 OS that IS NOT Linux or OSX. Pre-Win7 you had to try to find a x64 Windows PC on the consumer market and now that's all you can find. Then the improved performance for multi-threaded processors is also pretty nice.
If you're also a power Microsoft Office user (like me), then Office 2010 and later is soooooo much better (iirc, Office 2010 does not run on XP at all) than Office 2003/2007. When our company finally made the jump from XP and 2003 to Win7 and Office 2010, my productivity skyrocketed. So many things that used to be such a pain in the ass in Office 2003 are now a cinch in 2010.
Then there is also all the extra media support in Windows 7 that you don't have in XP. Home networking is perfect in Windows 7 now with Homegroups. Trying to set up shared printers and folders and everything in XP was so tiresome and annoying that it often wasn't worth trying. Windows 7 is a few clicks of the mouse and a passcode. Done.
If you're also a power Microsoft Office user (like me), then Office 2010 and later is soooooo much better (iirc, Office 2010 does not run on XP at all) than Office 2003/2007. When our company finally made the jump from XP and 2003 to Win7 and Office 2010, my productivity skyrocketed. So many things that used to be such a pain in the ass in Office 2003 are now a cinch in 2010.
Then there is also all the extra media support in Windows 7 that you don't have in XP. Home networking is perfect in Windows 7 now with Homegroups. Trying to set up shared printers and folders and everything in XP was so tiresome and annoying that it often wasn't worth trying. Windows 7 is a few clicks of the mouse and a passcode. Done.
Last edited by CapnNismo (2012-09-26 01:08:20)
wrong.CapnNismo wrote:
XP is vastly more insecure than Windows 7
wrong. and even if it was true, it would too fall into lack of support category.Office 2010 does not run on XP at all
wrong.Then there is also all the extra media support in Windows 7 that you don't have in XP.
you don't know what you are talking about. just stop it already.Home networking is perfect in Windows 7 now with Homegroups. Trying to set up shared printers and folders and everything in XP was so tiresome and annoying that it often wasn't worth trying. Windows 7 is a few clicks of the mouse and a passcode. Done.
lack of support - that, and dubious bells and whistles, is the sole difference between XP and what came after. sorry, but none of that makes a new operating system worth another two hundred bucks to me.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
lol, you're paying $200 for a new version of Windows...
Not more secure? Really? http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20063220-83.html
Nice going on taking it out of context - I said "iirc". I wasn't sure. Ass.
Home networking is so buggy in Windows XP, dude. I'm sorry, but if you're not a pro at it and you're just a regular Joe Schmo, getting everything working perfectly on XP on your first try is extremely difficult. I can't count the amount of time I wasted in the past trying to get shit to work between two laptops. Windows 7, however, was ready to go in less than 5 minutes with Homegroups.
More to the point, overall general user friendliness in Win7 is simply better. No more spending time getting drivers to work on new devices - Windows 7 does this better than XP does. Sorry, but it does.
Dude, just drop it. Sure, you may be this big tech support guy and know all the technical details but what a lot of people like yourself forget is that to the average consumer, the technical details mean simply dick. What matters is the question, "Does it work?" Why do you think Apple has been so successful? They've made their systems very transparent to the user. The user doesn't have to muck about with things behind the scenes. They turn it on, press a few buttons and it all works. That's what people want. XP didn't provide this. Windows Vista attempted to and fell short. Windows 7 improved on it and Windows 8 is taking it a step further.
You see the same kind of development in Ubuntu. I remember the earlier days of Ubuntu and how much of a PITA it was. Now running Ubuntu on a machine is a piece of cake and you really never need the command line. Virtually everything in the last few generations of Ubuntu simply works.
Certainly a lot of people, like myself, can get something to work and can hack around an issue or put up with it. But frankly, I've reached the point in my life where I just don't have the time or desire to do it. If I am using a computer or program and I have to invest my limited time into making it work the way it should, then it's not a good product, hands down.
Not more secure? Really? http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20063220-83.html
Nice going on taking it out of context - I said "iirc". I wasn't sure. Ass.
Home networking is so buggy in Windows XP, dude. I'm sorry, but if you're not a pro at it and you're just a regular Joe Schmo, getting everything working perfectly on XP on your first try is extremely difficult. I can't count the amount of time I wasted in the past trying to get shit to work between two laptops. Windows 7, however, was ready to go in less than 5 minutes with Homegroups.
More to the point, overall general user friendliness in Win7 is simply better. No more spending time getting drivers to work on new devices - Windows 7 does this better than XP does. Sorry, but it does.
Dude, just drop it. Sure, you may be this big tech support guy and know all the technical details but what a lot of people like yourself forget is that to the average consumer, the technical details mean simply dick. What matters is the question, "Does it work?" Why do you think Apple has been so successful? They've made their systems very transparent to the user. The user doesn't have to muck about with things behind the scenes. They turn it on, press a few buttons and it all works. That's what people want. XP didn't provide this. Windows Vista attempted to and fell short. Windows 7 improved on it and Windows 8 is taking it a step further.
You see the same kind of development in Ubuntu. I remember the earlier days of Ubuntu and how much of a PITA it was. Now running Ubuntu on a machine is a piece of cake and you really never need the command line. Virtually everything in the last few generations of Ubuntu simply works.
Certainly a lot of people, like myself, can get something to work and can hack around an issue or put up with it. But frankly, I've reached the point in my life where I just don't have the time or desire to do it. If I am using a computer or program and I have to invest my limited time into making it work the way it should, then it's not a good product, hands down.
it's okay to have views. really, it's totally fine. it doesn't change the fact that nobody would buy a post-XP system if not for the lack of support for XP. if you remember, they didn't have to resort to the forms of coercion like no dx10 and stuff back when XP succeeded win2k, and it kinda says it all, imo.CapnNismo wrote:
<'ere be 'Nismo's personal views on what is "easy to use", "okay to call an operating system" and stuff>
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
/facepalm
nothing left to say, kiddo? i thought so.
anyway, i made my case. let's get back to the steaming pile that is windows 8. i've yet to see one person who likes it - not even some of my friends working for microsoft do. go figure.
anyway, i made my case. let's get back to the steaming pile that is windows 8. i've yet to see one person who likes it - not even some of my friends working for microsoft do. go figure.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
This guy should have his own show on Comedy Central.Shahter wrote:
wrong.CapnNismo wrote:
XP is vastly more insecure than Windows 7wrong. and even if it was true, it would too fall into lack of support category.Office 2010 does not run on XP at allwrong.Then there is also all the extra media support in Windows 7 that you don't have in XP.you don't know what you are talking about. just stop it already.Home networking is perfect in Windows 7 now with Homegroups. Trying to set up shared printers and folders and everything in XP was so tiresome and annoying that it often wasn't worth trying. Windows 7 is a few clicks of the mouse and a passcode. Done.
lack of support - that, and dubious bells and whistles, is the sole difference between XP and what came after. sorry, but none of that makes a new operating system worth another two hundred bucks to me.
My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.
Another thing about 7 being better than XP is supporting it. I used XP For a number of years. Certainly longer than I've used 7 for, yet I struggle to support users who are still on XP. I can't remember where certain things in XP are, whereas I can guide them easily in 7.
for a fatty you're a serious intellectual lightweight.
That's essentially saying that 7's better just because you use it and you forgot how to use XP, so therefore 7 is a better operating system. I know exactly what you're talking about and I've had my rustiness with XP show through recently when working on somebody's computer but it's not a valid reason that 7 is better, lolCamm wrote:
Another thing about 7 being better than XP is supporting it. I used XP For a number of years. Certainly longer than I've used 7 for, yet I struggle to support users who are still on XP. I can't remember where certain things in XP are, whereas I can guide them easily in 7.
Anybody that properly supports their stuff on both of them will figure out how to do things and test things on both of them and possibly even configure guides for both