XP

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dick
  • Start date Start date
Actually I run XP. However I do have 1 machine that dual boots 98se and
XP. I have 1 program from my work that requires 98, so I keep it around
(at least until that program is upgraded or dumped).
 
Have you tried the aplication compatibility settings accessible via
Properties when you right click on the exe?
- Tim
 
Yes I have tried that. The program works in XP, but it works best in 98.
Since it's critical for me to have this program not give me any trouble
I have a dual boot setup and run it in 98.

Dick
 
What a Troll !
Yet, I feel the urge to say XP is not for me.
Windows 2000 Professionnal is a more decent OS. Win98 is still excellent if you don't need
the latest hardware or software, but go for gaming and must continue with old quality softwares.

Linux still rules for most personnal applications. XP is a 'gimmick', even though it works fine.

My advice.
TRY LINUX at least once in your lifetime.
Then dual boot good'ol Win98/Win32/NT kernel to support some great software you
don't want to upgrade again.

XP is a resource hog anyway.
http://distrowatch.com/
http://linuxquestions.org
 
Be careful with the 'Troll' label Mr. Bald, James. I use Mandrake 10 on
my personal machine and think open source is great.

Dick
 
Dick said:
Be careful with the 'Troll' label Mr. Bald, James. I use Mandrake 10
on my personal machine and think open source is great.
Click to expand...


How I'd wish _any_ software, be it application or OS, ruled.

Alas, my wishes have been void for the last twenty years.

And they will be - for the years coming, no matter if they include
"windows" or "linux" or "whatever" junk I put on my PC or laptop.


--
CeeBee


EMH Mark I: "Stop breathing down my neck."
EMH Mark II: "My breath is merely a simulation."
EMH Mark I: "So is my neck. Stop it anyway."
 
What a Troll !
Yet, I feel the urge to say XP is not for me.
Windows 2000 Professionnal is a more decent OS. Win98 is still excellent if you don't need
the latest hardware or software, but go for gaming and must continue with old quality softwares.

Linux still rules for most personnal applications. XP is a 'gimmick', even though it works fine.
Click to expand...

OH, PUHLEEESE, give me a damned break! When is this goofy
Linux-Windows confrontation ever going to end?? There's room for
BOTH. We NEED BOTH.
But XP is the STANDARD, whether you like it or not. Viewed up close,
it has a lot of warts, but it's the standard and comes closer to
giving the average user easy access to all devices and program types
than any OS in the history of the industry. Whatever it is, it is NOT
a gimmick.

Linux, is really neat in conception and implementation. I have
Xandros Linux 2 installed on one of my machines, and I am amazed at
how powerful it is, especially considering I paid nothing for it. It
is rock stable. However, I must tell you that I regard it as a
GIMMICK. I play with it to learn something about it, but it's a
GIMMICK because you have to work for hours or days to get sound from
the single most common audio card in the world, the SB Audigy. You
cannot access many devices, such as DAT tape drives, for example,
without days or weeks of tedious Usenet postings and laborious
deciphering of arcane manuals. You can access other machines on your
Windows network, but let's see you get output from printers slaved to
them. Let's see a lay user without a computer-science degree extract
a tarball and actually successfully install a new program without
mucking up the whole setup. Let's see a home user's kid run his games
on that Linux box his dad provides for him.

So Linux is great. Where would the world be without Apache servers?
I hope it has billg scared shitless.
But let's NOT be so damned confused over which one of these operating
systems is the gimmick and which one is the real deal for Joe
Sixpack's desktop computer. You say "Linux still rules for most
personal applications." I say that's dead wrong and simply flies in
the face of reality.

My advice.
TRY LINUX at least once in your lifetime.
Click to expand...
I agree
Then dual boot good'ol Win98/Win32/NT kernel to support some great software you
don't want to upgrade again.
Click to expand...
If you want to dual boot with obsolete operating systems which very
soon will no longer be supported.
XP is a resource hog anyway.
Click to expand...
And practically NO one can afford HD space at current prices of 60 US
cents/GB, right? Or RAM at 20¢/MB???
Please give me a damned break. Please.
http://distrowatch.com/
Click to expand...
Which lists ONE HUNDRED currently-used distributions of Linux -- a
HUNDRED!! And this kind of fragmentation of effort with a hundred
different lists of dependencies is supposed to lead us out of the
Windows desert into the promised land???

Don't get me wrong, now, Linux is all right.
But it WON'T keep me warm in the middle of the night.
(Apologies to Shania)


Ron
 
Milleron said:
OH, PUHLEEESE, give me a damned break! When is this goofy
Linux-Windows confrontation ever going to end?? There's room for
BOTH. We NEED BOTH.
But XP is the STANDARD, whether you like it or not. Viewed up close,
it has a lot of warts, but it's the standard and comes closer to
giving the average user easy access to all devices and program types
than any OS in the history of the industry. Whatever it is, it is NOT
a gimmick.

Linux, is really neat in conception and implementation. I have
Xandros Linux 2 installed on one of my machines, and I am amazed at
how powerful it is, especially considering I paid nothing for it. It
is rock stable. However, I must tell you that I regard it as a
GIMMICK. I play with it to learn something about it, but it's a
GIMMICK because you have to work for hours or days to get sound from
the single most common audio card in the world, the SB Audigy. You
cannot access many devices, such as DAT tape drives, for example,
without days or weeks of tedious Usenet postings and laborious
deciphering of arcane manuals. You can access other machines on your
Windows network, but let's see you get output from printers slaved to
them. Let's see a lay user without a computer-science degree extract
a tarball and actually successfully install a new program without
mucking up the whole setup. Let's see a home user's kid run his games
on that Linux box his dad provides for him.

So Linux is great. Where would the world be without Apache servers?
I hope it has billg scared shitless.
But let's NOT be so damned confused over which one of these operating
systems is the gimmick and which one is the real deal for Joe
Sixpack's desktop computer. You say "Linux still rules for most
personal applications." I say that's dead wrong and simply flies in
the face of reality.
Click to expand...
Which lists ONE HUNDRED currently-used distributions of Linux -- a
HUNDRED!! And this kind of fragmentation of effort with a hundred
different lists of dependencies is supposed to lead us out of the
Windows desert into the promised land???

Don't get me wrong, now, Linux is all right.
But it WON'T keep me warm in the middle of the night.
(Apologies to Shania)
Click to expand...

Agreed. Linux is a serious tool for doing serious work. It's a very well
designed OS. However, it is hard to use.

A lot of the distributions do a good job of simplifying things, but which
distro to choose? I've played with Red Hat and Gentoo. I like the OS but
have a hard time with the learning curve, it just so much easier to drop
into Windows because I know how to do it there. There is so much inertia
for using Windows that outside of select groups, people simply don't use
anything else. The groups are growing, and there are becoming more groups,
but it's such a minority that even care.

To top it off, Linux is about choice, but there is simply too much choice
for many users. The very nature of Linux development encourages this type
of behaviour. People like being told what they should use in those types of
circumstances. To tell you need to advertise, to advertise you need money.
Thats why Microsoft have the mainstream and not Linux, despite it being a
better OS.

Err... rant over :-p

Ben
 
Back
Top