November 4th, 2001 12:13 AM
Having read what a lot of people think about XP, I felt I had to add my own opinion:
If you're not very good at finding your way round computers, XP is great. However, its interface is a bit basic for more advanced users.
I use XP Pro (a copy without product activation, so I haven't experienced the trauma of Product Activation) on one computer at home. I have Windows 2000 Pro on another computer, Windows NT4 Server on another computer, Windows 98 SE on a faster computer for gaming purposes and a Linux Mandrake 7 server for the whole network thingy and dealing with network web sites etc. (Apache is the best web server I've ever seen, and the Linux version is more stable than the Windows version, Plus linux is more useful generally anyway.)
Anyway, the point is, XP makes a nice addition to the network, it gives me a computer I can use the internet, do word processing, graphics, CD burning etc. in no problem - without the advanced OS stuff being obvious. The rest of the computers are there still for serious use, so XP just provides a "main" computer for general use... and does it rather well.
Therefore, if you have only 1 PC, don't put XP on it unless you don't want to have any control... If you have more than one, by all means try XP out... It's got a nice interface really for "normal" use... but anything advanced or demanding of the system won;t work well in it!
Just my [perhaps too long?] opinion.
What i'm saying... is that XP is OK, its the most stable Windows I've ever seen, but its too basic for any serious users, unless you also have win NT/2000 on your network [Or linux... Linux is good. I Like Linux... Hey, Linux is kool!]
November 4th, 2001 01:08 AM
Very good opinon thread I thought, you seemed to not target anytype of operating system specifically and put it down. I would have to agree with you on the most part about XP pro I have a copy and used it till my cobol compiler wouldn't work on it and I had to switch back to 98. The only drawback I'm really seeing is that there is not alot of software that is compatible with it but that may also be because it's only been out for a little while in which software companies will, should fix that problem.
November 4th, 2001 04:24 PM
I think XP is a wolf in sheep's clothing. Yes, it makes the user's job much easier, but for administration, it sucks. I tried to get it to communicate with the other machines on my network (NT4 and 2000), and it was a total bitch. I eventually got them talking, but only one way. The regristration process is completely unreasonable. What's this about having to activate the key with Microsoft before being able to run it? The pro version has all the same user features as the personal edition, such as the included instant messenger. I wonder what effect this will have on employee productivity....
But since Microsoft markets to the user, everybody is tripping over themselves to get themselves a copy, and Bill Gates is watching over this, and laughing.
Wait one month, and see if you say the same thing. All Microsoft OSs work just great at first. In a month, it will start to show its true colors.
November 4th, 2001 05:59 PM
Microsoft requires you to register, or activate, the XP Home Edition either online or by phone. The Professional version, though, does not require you to activate as I would assume because the target consumers for that version is business users. Microsoft says during the activation, the product sends out special BIOS information pertinent to only that system. My bet is, though, that there are already ways around this all over the net.
While we are on the subject, I would just like to slam the stupidity of Microsoft for not including the Remote Assistance feature in the Home Edition of XP. They made such a big deal about being able to finally help friends and family right from your house with XP. This will only be the case if friends and family are willing to dish out an extra $100 for the Pro upgrade rather then the Home Edition. It's too bad VNC doesn't use compression...
November 4th, 2001 07:47 PM
i will never ever upgrade to XP until they remove the user privileged raw sockets feature, a hackers nirvana...
you think code-red was bad wait till you see what's coming down the pike....not to mention the activation crap...
I\'d rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.....
Cyanide cocktail anyone? (with a pineapple twist, of course..)
November 5th, 2001 10:30 AM
I do not hate microsoft. I am just a poor college student who thinks that paying $100 dollars to get a system thats only benefit is added stability seems wasteful. If I had to have a microsoft OS in a new computer that I bought it would have to be 98 SE since I have had almost no problems with it in the 2 years that I have used it. The only time my computer crashed there was a hardware problem caused by my inexperience at the time with peripherals. However my mother has the original windows 98 and it is the most problematic operating system I have ever seen in my entire life. It crashes almost everyday and continues to annoy me. The other benefits of using 98SE are that all of your old and new software will work on it, and with the release of Windows ME, and XP the price has dropped dramatically.
Wine maketh merry: but money answereth all things.