Re: I give up on Vista! Going back to XP.

Onideus Mad Hatter turned on the Etch-A-Sketch and wrote:

On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 13:41:53 -0700, PerfectReign
<theperfectreign@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Onideus Mad Hatter turned on the Etch-A-Sketch and wrote:

On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 06:40:12 -0700, PerfectReign
<theperfectreign@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Onideus Mad Hatter turned on the Etch-A-Sketch and wrote:

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 23:27:13 -0500, "dracosilv" <dracosilver@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Uncle Monster wrote:
PerfectReign wrote:
Uncle Monster turned on the Etch-A-Sketch and wrote:

PerfectReign wrote:
Uncle Monster turned on the Etch-A-Sketch and wrote:

PerfectReign wrote:
Uncle Monster turned on the Etch-A-Sketch and wrote:

PerfectReign wrote:
Rev Turd Fredericks turned on the Etch-A-Sketch and wrote:
Yeah there are, but what is special about pcbsd as, say,
compared to win/lin/osx? or are you suggesting it as an
alternative?
PC-BSD was put together to be a workstation or desktop
version of BSD rather than a server. It's very easy to
install, use and update. I had it on this Compaq box on
drive 1 along with Win2k on drive 0 and it seemed to be
faster than 2k with the same hardware. I want to load it
up again on another bigger drive with multiple partitions
and several 'nixes to compare it to. More fun for me and
my bro.

I see.
AFAIK, BSD doesn't get the updates as often as OSX or even
Wintendo.

PC-BSD gets updates all the time. I suggest you give it a try.
If I still had it loaded on this box, I'd be using it right
now.
One of my staff members uses it. I had heard from some others
that the kernel is outdated, though, and doesn't get the same
attention as the Linux kernel.


I had Ubuntu loaded then PC-BSD and I liked both of them.
I hope you're not thinking of Free BSD, it's different.
Oh, my bad!

I was thinking of Free BSD. I didn't know there was a
difference.

I'll look it up.


I running Win 2K on this box right now because it just
plain works without complaining. No crashes, no Blue
Screen of Death, no nothing. It just keeps plodding along.
Honestly, I have to give it to Win2K. I seriously liked that OS.
It wasn't until XP that Windows really turned me off.

My wife's machine (four years old) has Win2K. I still get updates
and still get Avast! to keep it clean.


It's my understanding that Steve Gibson of Gibson Research
never switched from 2K to XP. Anyway I've a lot of software
that was written for 98 and older and it all seems to run
without problems on 2K. You can find PC-BSD at the main site:
http://www.pcbsd.org/ Point your staff member at it and get
his opinion of it. It's incredibly easy to install and update.
The only problem is that there is no Flash support because
of the exclusion of BSD in the Flash EULA. Very stupid.

Well, I tried it out and can't say much.

I first off downloaded the VMWare image and tried to boot that. No
dice.

I then loaded Virtual Box and installed. However, it won't boot
after the install. I get stuck in the boot: prompt.

I'll stick with Linux for now. Maybe for shits and giggles I'll
download Solaris.


This box is an old Compaq Evo 930mhz P-III with 256mb memory.
It runs Win 2K, Ubuntu and PC-BSD flawlessly without complaint.
I downloaded the PC-BSD ISO and installed it over Ubuntu on
an old Seagate 8.6 Gig drive and it worked great. I would suggest
that you load from the ISO onto an old drive that has been
wiped clean. Let PC-BSD format the drive and install. It was
easier to install than XP. It detected and loaded drivers for
everything.

[8~{} Uncle Monster

The issues I have with dual operating systems is the booting of them.
e.g.
the bootloader program. I think if I *DO* do a dual boot system, I'm
going
to go with multiple drives. The only issue is, what bootloader
program would *YOU* suggest?

The issue I have with dual operating systems is...what's a reboot?
LOL, pretty much unless the power goes out my system is NEVER
restarted and NEVER crashes. Plus, why bother with multiple operating
systems? I mean, Windows XP can ruin pretty much everything, so why
would you need it? I mean unless you've just got a hard on
for an inferior desktop environment like Wintdows...yeah, not much
point.
Linux is great for a lot of things, especially a desktop environment.


Fixed your poast.

Yeah you fixed it alright, fixed it stupid.

Let me know when the seven bazillion programs that can't run under
Linux suddenly can...and shity emulators are shity, so you don't get
any whine or snit points for that failed argument.


No problem.

As soon as I see the seven bazillion programs that can't run under Windows
suddenly can.

:)

Keep dreamin, Cupcake. For every ONE program that you can manage to
list that won't run under Windows (if you even can list one) I bet I
can list over a DOZEN similar applications that will run on Windows,
that coincidentally will offer moar functionality, more support and
greater flexibility.

Any application that's developed for Linux is developed BEHIND
applications that are developed for Windows. That means Linux is
ALWAYS trying to play the "catch up" game. Why would you want a
deficient operating system liak that? I mean unless you've got a lot
of *** hurt from Mr. Gates cause yer all jealous 'n *** that he's
got money and you don't...yeah, there's no legitimate reason for
trying to use Linux as a desktop environment. Stupid Linux users are
stupid any way you wanna try and argue yer idiocy.


Let's see....

sed? (just used that yesterday to solve a nasty programming issue)

KTorrent?

Amarok?

KNode?

Digikam?

KDVDAUthorWizard?

That's what I can think of in ten seconds. I know there are other apps which
more or less work in Wintendo such as Gaim, Firefox, GIMP, VirtualBox,
VMWare, Google Earth, Netbeans and VLC.

I choose Linux simply because it is better suited for daily use than
Windows.

Prior to reading this I was connected to my Vista and XP boxes at work
through VPN. There was some awful *** I had to do in order to simply copy
files from one location to the other. In KDE, I'd just use Konqueror and
open a few tabs.

Trust me, I've been a Windows user since '92. I have old copies of 1.3 and
NT 3.1 (on 5 1/4" floppies) and ran that *** on old 386/486 boxes. I even
advocated Windows networks over Novell - particularly when 4.0 came out and
fucked up everything. I did test OS/2 3 against Win95 and - even though OS2
was faster, it wasn't as usable. I have personally installed several
hundreds of Windows NT Servers during the '90s. I did try Linux back
in '97 - '99 but found it not usable enough.

Now it has far surpassed Windows in all respects. I don't say these things
lightly.

As for Bill Gates - I don't really give a *** about him one way or another.
Yes, I'm happy he wrote the BASIC compiler for my TRS-80, which I used in
6th-8th grades to learn programming. I don't have anything against him or
MS. I just use what works best.

--
www.perfectreign.com || www.filesite.org

powered by the lizard: www.opensuse.org
.