enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
You people are hilarious
by opus512

Take a pill, people, and wipe the foam from your mouths. I've sen more inspired commentary on nVidia tech forums.

In case you don't know, that's not a complament.

7 is the 'best' MS OS to date, but that's considering previous OS's were of course limited by then technology and hardware.

And Mac's are nothing special compared to PC's, people. Get over your over inflated selves and stop fondling your iPod. Nothing in the computer world is original, everyone stole everything from everyone else.

I bought my first computer in late '91, an AST sx33 w/4MB of RAM and 512k on board video. 250MD HDD and a floppy. Didn't even come with a CD-ROM as they had just come out that year, I got a SoundBlaster Discovery kit, an SB16 and a 2x CD-ROM, installed it myself, never even owned a computer before loads of fun.

I paid something like $800 or so for that computer with a 14" VGA monitor from Radio Shack, was my Christmas present from my parents. I could have gotten that, or I could have paod around $2,500 for the exact same thing from Apple.

I've never liked Microsofts business practicess, railed against their and Intels monopoly in my own ways. The E8400 in my system right now is the first Intel CPU I've owned in my own personal computer since the original Pentium 200. Intel came out with the AGP bus after that, fucking me pretty good on what until then had been actual choice in computer hardware. Didn't own a Intel CPU again until last year.

Conversely, I've not owned an nVida video card in my own personal system for almost 10 years. Didn't like the way they did business either, and I shop my opinions.

Everyone hates Microsoft but everyone wants to be them, too. Microsoft itself fell voctim to this wierd ass hostage like phenomnenon when they becase that which they hated, IBM. nVidia wanted to do the same thing with 3dfx. Apple wants the same thing, so does Linux. They all want to rule the market because that's where the big money is, obviously.

I often wondered what we could have had if MS had not taken over the world like they did, but hey the industry screwed themselvs on that shit with really, really stupid licensing agreements. But that's capitalism, bitchs, get over it.

But then I've also wondered what it could have been like if MS had not taken over and no one did. If IBM had never fucked up and opened up their PC platform and had kept it proprietary like Apple. Would we have the choice we have now, or more choice, or none, I don't know.

Windows brought the computer to the masses, it made computers a consumer product. That's good and bad, both really good and really bad, actually. But if MS haden't of done it, someone else would have, and you can't say it would have been better or worse. It just would have been someone else.

By the by, I've ran every MS OS since DOS 5, as well as other OS's and DOS's, but as far as Windows is concerned, I've had exacly one virus in my entire computing lifetime. And that one, I gave to myself by clicking something in an email I knew better than to click, but did because of who is supposedly came from and other circumstances that clouded by better judgement.

Windows is no more or less secure than Mac or Linux, it just has a lot more stupider people using it. It also owns 90% of the entire world market, so yeah, gee, who you gonna target, the 95% or the 3%? Big freakin' wow that Windows gets more viruses targeted to it.

As for Vista, I got it right after it came out. Beside piss poor initial wireless support and Visioneer deciding to fuck me on my scanner, I had ZERO problems with Vista because I had all newer hardware besides the scanner. Besides, it's not MS's responsibility to make sure their one products works with hundreds of thousands of others in all the millions of possible different configuraitons. It wasn't their fault everyone elses drivers sucked, and again, I had ZERO problems with it.

The way I have Vista set up now it's faster than any XP system I ever had, except maybe a bare bones test system when I owned my computer store. Took me all of three minutes to read how to, and then turn off, the notification bullshit. Wow, that was a real inconvenience. Vista has also been at least as if not more stable than XP ever was to me. Vista wasn't OMG! or anything but it was never the giant POS people made it out to be, Most of those same people will say the same about Windows 7, and alreday are.

My computer is my computer, my stereo, my TV, my game system, I play any movie, run any program, play any game, watch any show or media that exists, often at the same time, without it crashing or hanging up 99.5% of the time, I'm just pulling a number out of my ass, I have no idea, but the system has been up for weeks or even months at a time before. I only started turning it off to save electricity.

And I do it all on a Windows Vista computer. Windows is the VHS of computer OS's; cheaper and good enough. I can do more than I could on Linux, or Mac, that is fact. It's an appliance, people, a platform. It's not even as important as what kind of car I drive, which is not important at all.

Re: You people are hilarious
by todji

Windows is no more or less secure than Mac or Linux, it just has a lot more stupider people using it. It also owns 90% of the entire world market, so yeah, gee, who you gonna target, the 95% or the 3%? Big freakin' wow that Windows gets more viruses targeted to it.

This is just not true. Linux and Mac are both more secure by design. These OSs were designed from the getgo to be mutli-user and networked. Windows was not.

Re: You people are hilarious
by TruetCollins
completely agree with todji. Original poster doesn't understand basic security principles. There is a reason there are basically NO viruses on linux and macs. There would be at least a handful out there if it were possible. There aren't because the OS's are FUNDAMENTALLY secure, unlike windows.
Re: You people are hilarious
by TruetCollins
"It wasn't their fault everyone elses drivers sucked" Yes it was. When you completely change your driver architecture, you can't expect every company will have perfect drivers in time for your OS release. Nvidia's driver problems were directly due to the new display driver architecture. Basically, they made a bunch of companies re-write their entire driver code, a significant task in many cases, and you're saying they are not responsible for the results?
Re: You people are hilarious
by Pingveno

TruetCollins:
"It wasn't their fault everyone elses drivers sucked" Yes it was. When you completely change your driver architecture, you can't expect every company will have perfect drivers in time for your OS release. Nvidia's driver problems were directly due to the new display driver architecture. Basically, they made a bunch of companies re-write their entire driver code, a significant task in many cases, and you're saying they are not responsible for the results?

From what I understand, part of the problem with changing their driver architecture wasn't just that manufacturers weren't ready. In many cases the manufacturers weren't going to make any more money off of products they had already sold, so they didn't bother making drivers.

Re: You people are hilarious
by opus512

Pingveno:

TruetCollins:
"It wasn't their fault everyone elses drivers sucked" Yes it was. When you completely change your driver architecture, you can't expect every company will have perfect drivers in time for your OS release. Nvidia's driver problems were directly due to the new display driver architecture. Basically, they made a bunch of companies re-write their entire driver code, a significant task in many cases, and you're saying they are not responsible for the results?

From what I understand, part of the problem with changing their driver architecture wasn't just that manufacturers weren't ready. In many cases the manufacturers weren't going to make any more money off of products they had already sold, so they didn't bother making drivers.

This is exactly where I got screwed by Visoneer. Too often hardware companies use a new MS OS as an excuse to force people into upgrading whether they need to or even want to. While discontinuing support for my scanner for Vista, they introduced a new Vista 'compatible' scanner that was tagged with one single extra letter in it's model number and had a slightly more curved body style, other than that it was exactly the same scanner as mine. They simply rebadged it and called it Vista compatible. A deep search online found I could Micky Mouse something up to use the scanner as a basic TWAIN device, which proved the hardware was fine. I decided to simply give it to a friend of mine that needed one, and though I've yet to buy a replacement, I will never own a Visioneer again.

As to the rest that replied *ppppbbbbtttttt*

What, Windows is designed to be unsecure? You can't compare Windows to Linux any more than you can compare a Lambourghini to a freaking KIA. I played with Linux some when I owned a small computer store. I hosted web pages and email, for my business as well as a service for a freidn if mine who did web development. I have some pretty good but admitedly basic knowledge of Linux, and to be honest that limited knowledge is dated. But it still applies in a larger sence, and the fact is, is Linux is a lot fucking harder to deal with than Windows.

Granted part of that fact is due to the prevalance of Windows and people already being generally aware of it, plus a shitload bigger use base to ask for help from friends and family. But no, Linux is *not* as easy to use as Windows. Period, not to the average consumer.

And this is what you're forgeting; computers are now consumer appliances. I don't like it anymore than you do, but that is the reality that Microsoft has begat us. Personally, I think people should have to take a test and get a license before they can even buy a computer, instead idiots own computers like friggin' cell phones or TV's.

Computers are not, of course,e really consumer appliances, they're a lot more complicated, but that's what people use them as. If Windows gets more viruses it's because it owns the entire world market, and a lot of really stupid people use them. That's hardly Microsofts fault.

And in the end, I'd rather have cheap ass lousy Windows computers than propietary single platform over priced Macs costing two to five times as much as comparable Windows machines.

And if yo uwant to blame anyone, blame IBM. If they hadn't of fucked up and opened up their PC platform in the first place, Microsoft likely wouldn't even exist as a company anymore. Of course than we'd be even more screwed than we are now because we'd have competing closed systems, and alone IBM probably would have stomped out Apple long ago.

Re: You people are hilarious
by todji

I don't know what version of Linux you tried opus512, but if you haven't seen it you should take Ubuntu for a test drive. It really is as easy to use as windows. I help out a technophobic friend with her laptop. After reinstalling windows on two different occaions because of virus and malware problems, I switched her over to Ubuntu. She's had absolutely no problems.

For most users, Ubuntu can do everything Windows can do just as easily, if not easier. Web browsing and office applications are the mainstay of most users computer use and Firefox and Open Office will work for them just fine.

Browsing for and installing new software via the application manager is a snap. In a matter of minutes I can find and install software to do pretty much any task I can think of. Upgrading to the newest version of the OS takes minutes and is achieved with the touch of a single button.

Even the driver issues have greatly improved over the last couple of years. I've now done 6 different installs of Ubuntu and have had almost no issues [on my friends machine I had to download new firmware for the DVD player].

I made the switch a year ago and rarely need to go into the command line. When I do, its usually because I'm doing stuff that casual users wouldn't attempt.

Re: You people are hilarious
by todji

Was windows designed to be unsecure?

Yes. Microsoft makes its decisions for business rather than technological reasons. . In an attempt to win the browser wars they made several design decisions that have created serious security problems. The perfect example is bundling IE in the OS. Another is allowing ActiveX controls to run in the browser.

Microsoft strategy of interoperability between their programs along with feature creep of both the OS and at the application level is also a business decision that has created big security holes.

Finally, to restate my original point and the root of the reason why linux is more secure- Linux and before it Unix were designed to be multi-user machines running in a networked environment, while Windows was not.

Re: You people are hilarious
by TruetCollins
"If Windows gets more viruses it's because it owns the entire world market" --- Thats what you don't seem to understand, since you clearly don't have much or any experience with linux or macs... It's not that they have FEWER viruses, it's that they don't have ANY viruses (with the exception of a few minor exploits in a few of the linux distros). Mac has almost 10% of the home-user computer market now. You think no want wants to write the FIRST virus for the Mac? Sorry, security by obscurity is a myth. If anything people are more inclined to want to write viruses for linux and mac due to their cockiness about their own security.
Re: You people are hilarious
by todji

If anything people are more inclined to want to write viruses for linux and mac due to their cockiness about their own security.

Deserved cockiness.

View as RSS news feed in XML