For those of you whining about WinXP, why don't you stick with Win2k and leave us alone!!!

[NFS4]

My gawd, it seems that whenever someone tries to give praise to WinXP, there are always people hopping in the thread calling it a bloated piece of crap with a gay GUI.

I personally had some problems with WinXP (would hard lock, then upon reboot tell me that my nv_disp.dll was the cause). This would happen with the default drivers and the latest NVIDIA drivers. Well, I simply went to Asus' site and downloaded the latest V7700 drivers and problem solved. I had some problems with screeching sound with my Santa Cruz. I went to TB's website and they have new XP drivers out. Problem solved.

There is always gonna be a few bugs in products when they first come out as seen by what happened to me above. But my system is fully stable now with no lockups or any problems whatsoever. I love the GUI and it has made me more productive.

So if people like the OS, please don't go bashing it or exclaiming what crap it is. Stick with Win9x or Win2k and be happy. The rest of us will move on.

 

[jamester]

NFS4

Thank you!

It amazes me the capacity of people to spit on things they don't use just because they don't like them. If you don't like them, that's fine, but let others try to find support! This is the OS forum. Some people actually try to help others with technical problems here.

I don't use Linux at home. I have, but don't. But I don't go bashing every Linux thread I ever see here. It's just not my style. If others enjoy Linux, great, they can use it. I'll stick with what I use.

*shrug* Maybe these are just "old skool" ethics. Thank goodness I've got 'em.

James

 

[Psychoholic]

I myself just don't see what all the XP bashing is about. Granted, I myself, will probably not move from W2K to XP unless I can find a good reason that I haven't seen yet. I do see XP as the next logical step for the Win9x refugees. There doesn't seem to be a lot to offer the W2K crowd unless you want the new GUI or the integrated CD-burning. However that's no reason to bash a the product. People should also wait for the final product before comparing about the speed to other versions of Windows.

If you don't like the GUI, turn it off or don't use XP, it's that simple.



<< Stick with Win9x or Win2k and be happy. >>


<Bobby McFerrin>Don't Worry, Be Happy</Bobby McFerrin>

 

[bonkers325]

<< My gawd, it seems that whenever someone tries to give praise to WinXP, there are always people hopping in the thread calling it a bloated piece of crap with a gay GUI.

I personally had some problems with WinXP (would hard lock, then upon reboot tell me that my nv_disp.dll was the cause). This would happen with the default drivers and the latest NVIDIA drivers. Well, I simply went to Asus' site and downloaded the latest V7700 drivers and problem solved. I had some problems with screeching sound with my Santa Cruz. I went to TB's website and they have new XP drivers out. Problem solved.

There is always gonna be a few bugs in products when they first come out as seen by what happened to me above. But my system is fully stable now with no lockups or any problems whatsoever. I love the GUI and it has made me more productive.

So if people like the OS, please don't go bashing it or exclaiming what crap it is. Stick with Win9x or Win2k and be happy. The rest of us will move on. >>



amen to that

 

[Noriaki]

I don't get it either.
I've found WinXP RC1 to be an extremely stable and compatible OS.
But every time I try to say something good about it, all this little &quot;Holier-than-thou&quot; linux freaks come parading around telling me how much of a stupid sheep/MS zealot I am.

Newsflash: I have evaluated WinXP from my personal experience and found it to be an excellent OS. I don't care if it's from Microsoft, or Linus Torvalds or anyone else. It's well supported, it runs all my programs, it's easy to use, and it hasn't yet crashed on me.

I like Linux, especially from an academic view, and I would consider using it as my main OS someday. But so far WinXP offers me everything I could want from an OS. Stability and Compatibility mainly.
Will it run for 10 months straight like my Linux box, no probably not. But that's not that important to me, for the time frames that I normally run my PC it works well.

As much fun as it might be to hack around in my Kernel, it's not something I really want to do. I don't really want to have to bend over backwards each time I want to set up a new game to run.

I place a value on my time. The time Windows saves me on average taks will quicly pay for it's retail $$$ cost. It is a very well supported OS. It may not be the most stable OS in the world, but under my average usage it doesn't crash, nor does it waste a ton of resources (less than 100MB running ICQ, my TV-Tuner and one IE window).

One day when I'm working full time I hope to fully build a second rig that is Linux only so I can spend time playing with it, and learning it. And perhaps one day when it's a bit simpler to do average tasks like launch a game I will use it as my main OS.

And don't think I'm a dumb end user. I'm a Computer Science honours student with lots of practical experience on Linux, Unix (Solaris and AIX mainly) and OS/400. Just when I sit down to run a game, I usually just want it to run.

Take your TV for example.
When you want to watch a show, you just want to press the power button, and watch it.
At other times it may be enjoyable to take that TV apart and learn how it works, and see if you can program your own channel tuner.
But usually you just want to watch it.

For me my PC is the same way.
Most of the time I just want to use it.
Sometimes it's fun to get really down low and pick apart your kernel, but usually I just want to use it.

As I've said before, I'm sure in a couple weeks I could get used to Linux's desktop, but the biggest issue is games. Running a game through Wine just isn't worth the effort IMO when there is a much simpler alternative available.

My main point is, I like XP, it meets my needs/wants even better than Win2000 did, and certainly better than Win98 does. It's also better in that way than Linux.
It has very few true negatives that I can see, activation isn't a problem* if you actually pay for the OS. It doesn't crash daily like Win98 can do if you get a bad program, it feels a little more polished than Win2k, just a bunch of little things, though nothing major.

Etc etc...

Anyways....I'll stop ranting now.

The above is 100% MY OPINION. If you disagree and prefer Win9x, Win2k, or Linux to WinXP. Then please use that OS, we all have freedom of choice. I will respect your opinion and won't label you a Linux-Zealot, a backwards dumbass using a dilapidated OS, or anything of the sort. Please respect my opinion and extend me the same courtesy, I chose Windows XP for good reasons, and it's not because I'm a microsoft sheep, please respect my decision, I don't think it's that much to ask.


*: I stand by this belief. On my PC I've completely rearranged my IDE devices, including pulling out my Promise Card and moving my boot drive to a new location and a new physical drive, and swapped video cards.
The only things that are the same are my Mobo, CPU, RAM and NIC.
And activation hasn't given me a single issue yet.

 

[JackBurton]

I think these people should just f*cking stick with DOS! God damn, these are the types of people that complain about EVERY release of a new MS product because the newer version is slower! I'm not going to buy Quake 4 when it comes out because it will run slower than Quake 3. WTF? New products usually mean extra feature which translates to extra CPU cycles and memory used. Is that so freakin' hard to understand?!

 

[Commish]

<< New products usually mean extra feature which translates to extra CPU cycles and memory used. Is that so freakin' hard to understand?! >>



For some, yes.

 

[NesuD]

Of everything i have heard about xp so far the only thing that gives me pause is the validation scheme. while i have no problem registering the first time the idea that I may have to do it over and over each time i do a reinstall or make any kind of real hardware upgrade i find to be an annoying prospect. Like many of the people here I am always tinkering with my system and every now and then screwing my os up beyond all recognition. I Definately like what i have seen so far it's just that validation scheme that i find inconvenient. I will just stick with 2000 for now and see what the problems really are before i jump.

Just read your post Noriaki if the activation feature is that lenient than i see no reason not to use it if the new features are of use to you. I am even more interested now than i was before.

 

[Noriaki]

Yeah I was worried about Activation for the same reason you are (btw it takes like 2-3 seconds if you have a NIC w/ Cable modem).

But I've had no problems pulling and swapping cards or shifting drives around. I haven't tried changing mobo or CPU, but for me anyways that is a less frequent change, than just pulling cards or swapping drives about.

I'm going to swap video cards again tonight or tommorow, I'll let you know how it goes

I'll probably post it as an update to that thread I had before.

 

[Cenalian]

errr..... wrong thread, sorry

but I do agree. Everyone has thier own choice for an O/S, and whatever they choose probably has the best solution available for them. Don't bash it because its not what you use, thats just childish. Present some REAL facts, none of this &quot;its just better&quot; crap.

I myself use Win2k and HATE it when all the 2k users bash XP or ME for no reason whatsoever.

 

[Psychoholic]

Moved to where Cenalian moved his post.

 

[JellyBaby]

And some people just want to find justification for not upgrading. It's hard to break the upgrade habit because most of us remember the time when you automatically upgraded because the update was always better and made your computing experience more enjoyable. So these people have Win 2K and they bark and cry about XP convincing themselves and all who'll listen to stick with Win 2K.

The thing is MS already helped us break the automatic upgrade cycle conditioning with Win ME. It blew chunks. People (like me) stuck with Win 9x and felt empowered by that move. XP looks better. XP will be a great upgrade for me, a 9x user, but Win 2K folk are fully justified in staying pat, too. Just shut up about it.

It'll be tough, though. In the next year you'll be bombarded with &quot;Win XP this&quot;, &quot;Win XP that&quot;. Can you withstand the pressure to upgrade? Do you have it in you?

 

[skace]

*wonders if he is one of the bashers*

If so then I will say that I never meant to bash. I only wanted to inform others just like people who herald WinXP are doing. If everybody only posted on things that were good, you would get the notion that every OS, App, and Game is good as long as it got mentioned once. The entire point of a forum is to inform people of the good and the bad (in a perfect world you would do this with unbiased facts only).

One of the main reasons I post against WinXP is that some people are telling everyone to ditch Win2K and waste (yes waste) their money on a Win2K Upgrade under the false allegations that it somehow makes games and apps run faster, is more stable, and has better drivers. These are false - as long as you have setup Win2K correctly and patched it with the compatibility patches/etc, the only difference will be a few minor changes and the GUI.

Like everything else in this forum, when something better comes out people feel the need to rip on something older and make it sound like it had all sorts of problems (in this case Win2K). Take a look at the SBLive, EVERYONE had one now everyone is trashing it and heralding the Santa Cruz. Granted that case is different because the drivers in SBLive were seriously lacking updates and the Santa Cruz is a better card all around - it is a shame to see the extents to which some people will trash the older product. I for one would like to stand up for Win2K and make sure people who are running it at least know the truth about XP: that it is Win2K with a new GUI that you can only run on 1 PC. Hell if you need a $199 GUI that badly I can make litestep look 4x better than the XP GUI.

Maybe I feel guilty and you weren't referring to me when you said bashers, but I just think the term bashers gets thrown around too loosely now. Anyone who argues any mass-point of view is instantly a troll or a basher, it seems.

Just remember, for every person that calls the GUI neat there will be someone who calls it gay. You don't see me starting a thread saying &quot;For those of you complimenting about WinXP, why don't you stick with WinXP and leave us alone!!!&quot;. Mind you, if someone makes a thread saying WinXP is crap then the first reply will be someone telling them how they did something wrong or how you can turn the GUI off or how they must have broken something.

It goes both ways people.

Edit: The funniest thing is, the way you people voice your opinions and then tell OTHERS to shut up about it. Like &quot;I love XP for this, this and this but I don't give a flying crap what you like so just shut up&quot;. Hypocritical. If you truly don't want people voicing their opinions then don't voice your OWN. We will have a world filled with robots and we can all happily bounce and walk into walls. <---- Noriaki cleared this up for me.

And to the person who compared XP to Quake 4, If MS put half the effort into Windows products as Id software does in rebuilding their graphics engine from the ground up every time - I would buy 30 copies to support them. Everything from the 9x series was still using dos, you didn't see Quake3 load up wolfenstein first to run the sprites from it. It all comes down to whether the changes put in were worth the slow down/speed up. From the standpoint of the fact that XP doesn't add much over 2K except a GUI and considering it is supposed to be a completely new OS - it should run DAMN FAST (assuming they spent all their time optimizing already in place code), but we don't use these expectations on MS, they get special treatement.

Ah well... guess I am bashing eh?

 

[Noriaki]

Skace:

There is nothing wrong with presenting you opinions as to why you think Win2k is better than WinXP. As long as you have facts to base you opinions on (such as, the drivers and kernels being essentially the same), then you aren't really bashing.

There is always (at least) two sides to any dicussion.

What gets annoying is when we are called Zealots, MS-Fanboys, or Sheep because we happen to like Windows XP.

For example, I don't remember which post exactly and I won't name the user (though I remember who it is), posted something to the effect of:



<< Baaaaaaaaaaaaah Baaaaaaaaaaaaah Baaaaaaaaaaaaah, anyone feel like sheering some sheep? >>

Because we were talking about how much we like Windows XP.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with expressing your opinion as to why you think Win2k or Linux is superior to WinXP, people trying to make a decision need both sides of the debate to make a proper informed decision. And as you said, that's what forums are for.

What gets nerve racking and tedious is when people do things like the above or our all-time favourite lucidguy, who just spews pure lies, and even if we demonstrate that his information is false, he just moves to a new thread and spews the same BS (I've personally refuted the same point from him in sometimes as many as 6 or 8 different threads).

We need people that support Linux, and people that prefer Win2k so that other people trying to make a decision or gain knowledge of the differences can get that. Just lets try to do it in a civilized manner rather than flaming each other to death.

I personally wouldn't consider you one of the bashers Skace. Disagreeing with us doesn't make you basher. Flaming us for no good reason or posting things about WinXP (ie: WinXP encrypts all your digital music so you can't use it anymore) is bashing.

*gets down off his soapbox*

 

[onelkid]

well, in response to these GUI issues: I'd imagine that it'll be customizable in the final release. I would be very surprised if MS didn't include that feature eventually, since non-savvy have come to expect that functionality. actually, does anyone know if this feature will be included in the final release?

 

[DeeK]

<< well, in response to these GUI issues: I'd imagine that it'll be customizable in the final release. I would be very surprised if MS didn't include that feature eventually, since non-savvy have come to expect that functionality. actually, does anyone know if this feature will be included in the final release? >>


The classic Windows UI is still there if you don't like Luna. AFAIK anyway, Luna is just a different look for it. The UI itself is no different (button locations, etc).

 

[onelkid]

no, I mean will it be possible to customize Luna?

 

[DeeK]

<< no, I mean will it be possible to customize Luna? >>


Ah. That I can't answer, since I don't use XP.

 

[Noriaki]

I think Luna will be customizeable insofar as Winamp is.

You can't really change the location of anything, just the colouring schemes and &quot;texturing&quot; to buttons, bars and other widgets.

But DeeK is correct, the default Luna isn't really any different than the standard windows desktop except in the ways I just mentioned, and I think you can make your own, but no more than that. It's not as customizeable as say litestep I don't think.

 

[ozziegn]

first things first...

1. if you dont like WinXP, then stay the hell away from it. how hard is that to understand?

2. WinXP does NOT have any bloatware. the bloatware is in the WinXP basher's head!

3. this OS is the most STABLE OS that MS has ever put out...

..... i've been reformatting and reinstalling my machine every other day just to test and see if MS gives me any crap about it. and so far, no problems at ALL from MS. if you're an honest person and you havent pirated any software, then why would you be worried about having it activated? (unless you have something to hide.)

 

[Davegod75]

Praise NFS4. I've noticed this big time.

First of all, yes the OS is big but how many of us own <10gb hard drives these days? I'm sure those of you crying about it's size can spare a gig or two.
Am I the only one not noticing any speed slow downs at all? I think the OS seems to run quite good.

As things are now i can't wait to see what RC2 and RTM will look like.

 

[NFS4]

<< Praise NFS4. I've noticed this big time.

First of all, yes the OS is big but how many of us own <10gb hard drives these days?
I'm those of you crying can spare a gig or two.
Am I the only one not noticing any speed slow downs at all?
I think the OS seems to run quite good. >>


Exactly! And it's not that I'm out to silence all of you that DON'T like XP, but why must you pester everyone (especially those who like the OS) with comments about how much crap it is, how slow it is, and what an evil empire Microsoft is? Get over it.

What really gets me is people that have problems with the beta and then proclaim Windows XP to be the biggest piece of crap out there b/c their sound card won't work or the colors are &quot;fruity&quot; Give the OS a chance, it hasn't even been released.

But as for me, in everyday operation, in games, and in everything else it feels just as fast as Windows 2000.

 

[onelkid]

okay, well, admittedly the colors are kind of fruity. I'm not sure that that's really an arguable point. =) but am I a bad person for not minding that in the prerelease? part of me says yes...

but I still like the OS.

 

[Davegod75]

<< What really gets me is people that have problems with the beta and then proclaim Windows XP to be the biggest piece of crap out there b/c their sound card won't work or the colors are &quot;fruity&quot; Give the OS a chance, it hasn't even been released. >>




Yep, MS still has 103 days 23 hours and 25 min to fix all their bugs, clean up the GUI and speed up the thing. Give it a chance people.

 

[NFS4]

<<

<< What really gets me is people that have problems with the beta and then proclaim Windows XP to be the biggest piece of crap out there b/c their sound card won't work or the colors are &quot;fruity&quot; Give the OS a chance, it hasn't even been released. >>




Yep, MS still has 103 days 23 hours and 25 min to fix all their bugs, clean up the GUI and speed up the thing. Give it a chance people. >>


And to have 103 days left to completion, I still think that it is a DAMN solid OS. And it's ultimately up to the hardware manufacturers to develop solid purspose-built drivers for their OWN products. MS is doing them a favor by having a lot of drivers already installed (the only thing it didn't pickup was my SC, USB CF/SmartMedia reader, and Hauppage TV tuner..and even then, the Win2k drivers for the card reader and Hauppage card worked and I downloaded the XP drivers for the SC).