windows rant

[pwaring]

You could argue that Linux is useless because it doesn't support a lot of hardware, or because it's relatively difficult to install (in comparison with Windows 2000), installs uneccessary services etc. Also, Linux isn't 100% stable - in fact I've probably had as many crashes on my laptop running RedHat 9 as I have had with Windows XP on the same box.

Yes, Windows sucks in a lot of respects, but you have to criticise it in a balanced manner and in comparison with Linux.

Originally posted here by .: Shrekkie :.
That is just not possible.

Actually, it is. I've got Windows XP on my laptop and I've never had a BSOD (admittedly it's crashed a few times, but usually I've been able to kill whatever process is causing the problem and more or less recover). On the other hand, not getting a BSOD whilst using Windows 98 would be somewhat unusual.

[nihil]

Regarding XP Pro.

I built a box for it when it first came out, well almost.

I had a lot of problems because:

1.It was unfamiliar, and I had a lot of experience of things that worked differently. All of a sudden a fair bit of my "intuitive knowledge" was obsolete.
2. I made a cardinal error of changing the computer specs on the fly. It did not like that

It has now run for almost a year without a BSOD. OK I have had hangs and crashes, but due to software that I have loaded, not to XP Pro per se.

pwaring:

On the other hand, not getting a BSOD whilst using Windows 98 would be somewhat unusual.

I see where you are coming from, but that is not quite fair. If you give Win98 256Mb of RAM and 384Mb to Win98se and Me they are extremely well behaved. They just happen to be total resource pigs, very prone to memory leaks. I always run a RAM manager with them and have found them very stable with the levels of RAM I just mentioned. But be careful, they are unstable if you give them more than 512Mb!!!

Cheers

[hexadecimal]

u guys are right
windows is probably better then linux but i love linux just the same
the reason for this thread was pure anger
i had been working on my sisters laptop for days trying to find drivers and get the wifi working and my sis was riding my ass and i was getting discouraged and pissed off and my shrink said to express my feelings so i thought ide give it a shot
pwaring ur right this thread was pritty much useless

[pwaring]

I see where you are coming from, but that is not quite fair. If you give Win98 256Mb of RAM and 384Mb to Win98se and Me they are extremely well behaved. They just happen to be total resource pigs, very prone to memory leaks. I always run a RAM manager with them and have found them very stable with the levels of RAM I just mentioned. But be careful, they are unstable if you give them more than 512Mb!!!

Fair point, but 256Mb of RAM wasn't the standard amount that shipped with PCs when Windows 98 was released - in fact it was probably more like 64Mb. So, for the PC environment at the time Win98 was new, it would cause at lot of BSODs. Obviously, if you pump some memory in that may stablise things, but then the requirements for Win98 didn't include a minimum of 256Mb of RAM.