A
from 
JoeUser Forums
JoeUser Forums
.
A
96,520 views
41 replies
WinCustomize Forums
Those few times I had problems with XP was when I loaded faulty software into it and then had to clean up the mess. Some windowblinds can make certain things hard to read, but that most likely has its roots in my failing eyesight, lol. Hardware problems also have a way of pissing windows off, but XP seems more tolerant than the previous versions were. I noticed that a small number of people had problems with the installation of Service Pack 2, ranging from simple freezes to outright boot failure; usually associated with firewall services and third party software incompatabilities. For the most part, I have had no serious problems here, but then again, my rig is only a few months old; time will tell me more. I've never tried Linux yet, but I've heard good things. Maybe someday... 
| I don't know why everyone is waiting for Longhorn. Have you all heard what that minimum system requiements are going to be? I've heard stories that they will be a 3 GHz CPU and 2 gigs of RAM with a 128 Meg HDD. I'll have to look it up as it has been posted on the boards before. My point? If I have to upgrade my system system to run Longhorn than no thanks I don't want it. Not everyone has money lying around to use for computer upgrades. |
That is if you are running Longhorn with all the effects and such. I think most of it is if you are running Aero (don't quote me on that).
Longhorn is designed for new and future hardware in mind.
I will have to say that most problems with XP that I have had is caused by myself, and I agree with that fact, but that doesn't stop people from trying to infect my system with Viruses, Spyware, Malicious code that does nothing, and all of these problems or at least most are stoppable, you need a good firewall and popup blocker to help you with that, but I did have one problem on my laptop, it told me to insert a new means of power, the Battery wasn't even in the laptop and I was running it off the mains, so when it asked me for a new power source I was to say the least a bit shocked. 
| Viruses, hackers, spyware and other menaces |
Interesting since all of these are user problem, user problem, user problem. Do you have A/V software? A Firewall? Not quite sure how you'd avoid other menaces, maybe use a password to keep your little brother off the computer?? As far as crashes, 9 out of 10 are caused by faulty software. Install a clean XP install with only certified drivers (usually not the latest but an example of how well tested drivers can work) and just let it run, You'd be surprised just how stable it is. I find that my computer only slows down when I load it up with tons of software that claims to keep me safer, in reality it just ticks me off because it makes Windows run slower. To be honest, I have no A/V software, no firewall and no spyware scanner running and I have no problems whatsoever.
I'm with everyone here in asking those who would start these threads to maybe do a little digging before blaming their woes on the OS. Just because the OS is the base of all software installs on your system doesn't mean it's the base of all your problems.
Stardock Forums
There are 3rd party tweaking programs that will make WinXP's menus immediately pop-up, rather than slowly appear. (In regards to Paxx's post.)
I've used Windows XP since they released the final version a couple years back, and for the most part the problems I've had were caused by me. I keep all my software that I have collected over the years starting back at windows 3.11. Yes I had that cluncker also, as a mater of fact I had a version 2.2 of windows and it was on about 6 disks. I try to get this old software to run on windows XP and most of the time it'll cause XP to crash, but when you pay out good bucks for an app; you expect it to work for more than a few months or a year. Anyway since I stopped doing that, XP has worked just fine. Now as far as Linux goes, I've used 2 flavors of that over the years. Redhat and Mandrake both good in their own settings. A little bit of info for Citizen Chasbo if you have used MAC OSX you have used Linux as I belive that OS was built on Linux.
I've never had XP completely crash before, but I have had the system completely lock up plenty o' times. Part of that could be hardware, but at 2.0 GHz and 384 MB, I shouldn't have as many problems with that as I have had. I have a memory manager, and the average free RAM I have is in the 160 - 180 MB range, and after discounting the programs always running (virus scan, ObjectDock, etc) I come out with the figure that Windows XP itself eats up about 170 - 180 MB of RAM on its own, which I think is a bit excessive.
As to viruses, a proper virus scanner and firewall will take care of them, as well as a good Email client configuration that won't open attatchments automatically. You can complain about the fact you have to have and pay for said virus scanning, and perhaps said firewall, if you want but keeping viruses off the computer is fairly simple. Responsible Internet usage is another great defense.
As to ad/spy/malware, that's fairly easy to keep off too. Keep your system patched; don't download pirated material, kazaa, or anything from sketchy websites; use free prevention/removal tools like Spybot, Adaware, Spyware Blaster, or MS Anti-Spyware beta; and if you want, stop using IE in favor of Firefox or Opera. This stuff doesn't even cost money like a virus scanner. Once again, responsible Internet usage will carry the day.
I have my computer set up to dual-boot Windows XP and Linux. Linux distros require you to update frequently whenever new packages come in (usually every day or every other day), and doing that it not much different from keeping a virus scanner, spyware tools, and Windows itself up-to-date. In my experience, many distros will not do any combination of recognizing your harware correctly, setting up the bootloader correctly, or setting up the Internet connection correctly. Some run slower than Windows, others crash more frequently than Windows due to a high volume of bleeding-edge software. It can be a mixed bag, and finding the right one for your computer can take a lot of trial and error, patience, and a spool of CD-Rs.
There are pros and cons to both Linux and Windows (KDE uses a little more than a third of the RAM that Windows does, for instance), and Mac OS X too. Keeping a dialogue going about them will only lead to improvement of all and better computing for everyone. Posting flamebait probably doesn't contribute to that end.
Not quite. The base of it is BSD, another Unix clone in the same sort of way that Linux is a Unix clone. There are some base differences between Linux and BSD that I am nowhere near tech-savvy enough to explain or that I'd guess anyone would want to go into.
As to viruses, a proper virus scanner and firewall will take care of them, as well as a good Email client configuration that won't open attatchments automatically. You can complain about the fact you have to have and pay for said virus scanning, and perhaps said firewall, if you want but keeping viruses off the computer is fairly simple. Responsible Internet usage is another great defense.
As to ad/spy/malware, that's fairly easy to keep off too. Keep your system patched; don't download pirated material, kazaa, or anything from sketchy websites; use free prevention/removal tools like Spybot, Adaware, Spyware Blaster, or MS Anti-Spyware beta; and if you want, stop using IE in favor of Firefox or Opera. This stuff doesn't even cost money like a virus scanner. Once again, responsible Internet usage will carry the day.
I have my computer set up to dual-boot Windows XP and Linux. Linux distros require you to update frequently whenever new packages come in (usually every day or every other day), and doing that it not much different from keeping a virus scanner, spyware tools, and Windows itself up-to-date. In my experience, many distros will not do any combination of recognizing your harware correctly, setting up the bootloader correctly, or setting up the Internet connection correctly. Some run slower than Windows, others crash more frequently than Windows due to a high volume of bleeding-edge software. It can be a mixed bag, and finding the right one for your computer can take a lot of trial and error, patience, and a spool of CD-Rs.
There are pros and cons to both Linux and Windows (KDE uses a little more than a third of the RAM that Windows does, for instance), and Mac OS X too. Keeping a dialogue going about them will only lead to improvement of all and better computing for everyone. Posting flamebait probably doesn't contribute to that end.
| A little bit of info for Citizen Chasbo if you have used MAC OSX you have used Linux as I belive that OS was built on Linux. |
Not quite. The base of it is BSD, another Unix clone in the same sort of way that Linux is a Unix clone. There are some base differences between Linux and BSD that I am nowhere near tech-savvy enough to explain or that I'd guess anyone would want to go into.
| In February on RSA security conference, Richard Ford from Technology Institute of Florida and Herbert Thompson from Security Innovation Company made a research (they both say they are Linux fans) and concluded that Windows 2003 Server is more secure than Red Hat Server. After reporting a security problem, a patch is available after 30 days for Windows and 71 for Linux (in average). |
It was discovered about a month afterward that the study that the two guys did was funded by Microsoft, just like every one of Microsoft's "Get the Facts" studies. I'm not saying these guys or any of the other people who did the studies are unscrupulous, but I'm saying that there's a reason "Don't bite the hand that feeds you" is a well-known cliche. So far, every independent study (not funded by anyone with a financial interest in either camp) *that I've seen* has said that security of Windows Server and a Linux server is about a wash.
In addition, that only compares Windows Server with a Red Hat server. What about Novell's Linux server? What about any of the other kinds of Linux servers? It's like saying a Mustang is better than a Corvette. Okay, you made one comparison, but what about that Mustang against a BMW, Chrysler, Mercedes, etc? Besides, a lot of Windows servers out there are older than the very stable and secure 2003 version, so a Red Hat server would be an upgrade in stability and security just like 2003.
Google uses Linux servers and they seem to be doing just fine. Microsoft uses Windows servers and they seem to be doing just fine. I don't think there ever will be one server that can satisfy everyone's needs and wants (or one desktop platform that will satisfy everyone's needs and wants), so that's why marketplace diversity is a good thing. Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.
The only problem I've had with XP is that when you do a system reapair it wipes out all of your system restore points.
The thing is though, once, Bill Gates did a conference with a PowerPoint presentation and, guess what, he faced the blue screen of death face on, how embarrassing must that be, his own OS let him down, thats an example of windows' bugs!
| he faced the blue screen of death |
Keep in mind that often the software displayed at conferences such as the CES are beta versions, meaning all their logical memory addresses aren't properly configured or mapped (address binding). Since a process initiated by any application runs on the memory, all necessary and corresponding files/data needed to execute a set of instructions sucessfully must also be loaded onto the memory. Data in memory is usually accessed in a sequential manner, meaning it's read off from beginning to end. It may be that during a demo suddenly the CPU finds that the required data to complete a operation isn't available on the physical memory address of the RAM, and that's when the blue sparks fly.
Personally, I've never had much trouble with Windows XP, except when I try to run 'shady' software, or run memory intensive app's, cuz I've only got 256 MB or RAM.
Each OS has it's own strength and weaknesses, so how a person views XP depends on how they use it. Allegedly, Linux has better CPU scheduling, process and memory management, but since I've never used it, I can't comment on it.
| guess what, he faced the blue screen of death face on |
The BSOD really doesnt happen very often. It's happened to me only once when it wasn't BootSkin problems.
Shaman47, by now we understand that you dont like Windows, and you've posted amany threads about how bad Windows and computers can be. Really, it's filling up the board with stuff that there is no reason for. So you donmt like Windows. Fine. Don't go posting five threads about it. Keep it to yourself.
I've never had a single problem of any kind with XP.
It's the best OS Microsoft ever developed IMHO.
It's the best OS Microsoft ever developed IMHO.
| Personally, I've never had much trouble with Windows XP, except when I try to run 'shady' software, or run memory intensive app's, cuz I've only got 256 MB or RAM. |
Oh, come on....that's like saying....."I don't smoke, except when I smoke"....
It seems to me that if one uses some common sense when using Windows XP, as well as gaining some experience and understanding of how it is designed to work with: (1) Hardware, (2) Compatible applications, and (3) Networks - all goes rather well and remains stable.
People want tools to work correctly, and if one takes into account the fact that Operating System designers must accommodate a great variety of needs and demands from society to be successful - Microsoft has done fairly well.
Any group or individual that stands out can become an easy target for people who always want to focus on the problem and not the solution.
I remember my first computer (a hand-me-down), ran Windows 3.1, and Office 4.2 with a small hard drive, a floppy drive, and I think a 28K modem. I was ecstatic to have something other than the 8088 running DOS that I was learning on at the time.
Though Microsoft plays tough in a very competitive field, they nonetheless provide a very versatile tool for us to use. Perhaps tempering the complaints with a bit of common sense would be good.
We all have a choice - unless of course someone is holding a gun to your head saying "use this OS, or else".
People want tools to work correctly, and if one takes into account the fact that Operating System designers must accommodate a great variety of needs and demands from society to be successful - Microsoft has done fairly well.
Any group or individual that stands out can become an easy target for people who always want to focus on the problem and not the solution.
I remember my first computer (a hand-me-down), ran Windows 3.1, and Office 4.2 with a small hard drive, a floppy drive, and I think a 28K modem. I was ecstatic to have something other than the 8088 running DOS that I was learning on at the time.
Though Microsoft plays tough in a very competitive field, they nonetheless provide a very versatile tool for us to use. Perhaps tempering the complaints with a bit of common sense would be good.
We all have a choice - unless of course someone is holding a gun to your head saying "use this OS, or else".
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting and posting on the forums.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!