So? Shall I?
Printable View
So? Shall I?
personally i'd say no, i had Millenium installed for a while and wasn't to impressed, I ended up having alot of crashes, I'd say go with Windows 2000 Pro, i've found it to be a much more reliable OS.
Just an opinion mind you
Do yourself a good and leave Win98 SE, the best windows yet IMHO!
Assuming you have win 98 se, and not win 98, stick with it. It is much more compatible. I have quite a few programs that won't run under win me AT ALL!!!!
and quite a few others that the graphics are screwed.
WIN ME SUCKS. If you don't need dos, then go the win2000 route. it is proven faster in benchmarks.
the ONLY reason i use it is that win 95se doesn't support multiple monitors. And if i ever get a dual-head card, then that will be solved too.
If you insist on using an MS OS, then you need to look at why you are using it. I only have it around for games. All of the games I play run just fine under W2KPro (or Linux), and it has better network support than 98. As to Mellinium? Well, that isn't a new OS. There aren't enough changes. It isn't even good enough to be called 98 Third E. Stay with 98SE, or move to W2K. There is no in between.
I'm glad you asked that, I was wondering myself. I'm gonna put both on mine I think.
Windows2000 - hate the bloody thing :mad:
I've been running Windows ME on my machine at home for about 6 months and I haven't had any problems with it. I also haven't noticed many differences between it an Win 98...
Euh.. IMHO? What's that? This seems to me a stupid question, but better ask it than stay ignorant.:pQuote:
Originally posted by Fox
Do yourself a good and leave Win98 SE, the best windows yet IMHO!
Not certain but i think IMHO stands for In My Humble Opinion, i could be wrong though
I have ME on a couple of machines, not much of a change from Win 98SE. A few nice touches, but not worth upgrading for.
I have Windows 2000 Advanced Server on development machines and it's very good, but too expensive to buy myself (company bought for me).
As for the anti-microsoft OS posts. I use unix extensively and it is very good for a number of things, but it is not completely without fault either. In the businness world, a stable NT/2000 setup running software is far preferable to a Linux setup. as there is a certain amount of lack of accountability when dealing with Linux (who is responsible when it all goes Tits up). Also developers and support staff are far easier to find.
If I am using Unix on a project I will buy Digital Unix or some other professional version. This is not because of some snobby atitude towards Linux, but realise that the cost of the operating system is peanuts compared to the cost of developing software.
Thats just my two pennies worth. What do the rest of you think?
Cheers,
SD
Agreed. It isn't worth it.Quote:
Originally posted by SurfDemon
I have ME on a couple of machines, not much of a change from Win 98SE. A few nice touches, but not worth upgrading for.
heh... I have never, will never pay for an MS OS. There are enough copies floating around.Quote:
I have Windows 2000 Advanced Server on development machines and it's very good, but too expensive to buy myself (company bought for me).
It is preferable by who? Managers who make their decision based on stock value, TV adds? The same people who use AOL? The same people who buy Eddie Bauer Edition sport utilities?Quote:
As for the anti-microsoft OS posts. I use unix extensively and it is very good for a number of things, but it is not completely without fault either. In the businness world, a stable NT/2000 setup running software is far preferable to a Linux setup. as there is a certain amount of lack of accountability when dealing with Linux (who is responsible when it all goes Tits up). Also developers and support staff are far easier to find.
Maybe I should explain the last bit. They buy a large off-road type vehicle, but live in suburbia. That car will never see off road. And it has leather and power everything. It is a Lincoln Towncar on steroids. Oh, wait, that is the Navigator, same difference.
Anyway... I'll tell you who is accountable. The company employees who oversee it. Even if it is an MS OS, you don't weasel out and blame a crash on MS. You find the bug, and you either fix it, or you make a bug report.
Oh wait, with an MS OS, you can't fix it. You don't have the source. You have to make a bug report. In either case, I can't respect a company that looks to point the finger.
Yes, support staff is hard to find. And for that I'm sorry. But they would be easier to find if there were more jobs. I understand this is a Catch-22. But no one is going to bother learning a more challenging OS when they can take the easy way out and still get a job.
That is acceptable, along with Ultrix, Solaris, SunOS, HPUX, AIX. Well... actually, I'm not a fan of HPUX. But, I don't see anything lacking in Linux or BSD.Quote:
If I am using Unix on a project I will buy Digital Unix or some other professional version. This is not because of some snobby atitude towards Linux, but realise that the cost of the operating system is peanuts compared to the cost of developing software.
The fun thing is... if you develop software on any of the OS I just mentioned, porting it over to one of the other, is simple. In some cases, you don't have to do anything. In other cases, you change a little bit, or you have to rebuild the GUI from Motif to OpenView. But atleast it is portable.
It is like using Java, but without the hype.
Anyway, like I said, I keep MS OSes around for games. And games have traditionally had more appeal on MS OS not just because people use that in their homes, but because games work better in environments where they can run real-time, without interruption. In other words, if you OS uses premptive multitasking it will make games unhappy.
I was very happy they were able to port over the Quake engine, though.
Ha Ha Ha, you are unbelievably perceptive...
I have an Eddie Bauer Expedition!
However in my defense I will say that I bought it because we live in Calgary. It gets pretty nippy here in the winter (about -35 degrees celcius), infact we had 2 feet of snow fall last night. So although technically we don't go off-road, the roads are pretty much impassable at times without a 4x4. In addition, I have a young family, and if we ever get into a crash, I want them to be in something big enough to protect them (every one else up here drives trucks).
As for the electric everything, believe me, I sing praise to the individual who invented heated seats every morning when I get into that truck.
Anyway, I seem to have rambled a bit there! Certainly off the thread, if not off-road :)
Back to the plot. Yes, unfortunately, these companies are ran by people who look at stock reports etc. We might not like it, but they pay our wages and they are in charge.
And as long as that's the corporate attitiude, that's who will end up making these decisions (for right or wrong). As for finger pointing, I'm afraid that goes on in all large companies. It annoys the hell out me as well, but there isn't really much either of us can do about it. These are corporate animals who get into positions of power by making sure they don't screw up (not by actually being successfull!!). Every large corp I work for seems to be filled with pointy haired bosses (ala Dilbert)
Cheers,
SD
Cool, two people who have a reason for EB SUVs. You, who wanted a snow friendly Towncar, and a guy I used to work with who was simply too tall for a Towncar.
I don't know how to explain the rest.
'Course, going from tangent to tangent.
I've complained that Subaru wouldn't put their 6 cyl in their Forrester or their Legacy. They finally put it in the Legacy, but only in the LL Bean Edition. ***? I'm telling you, in the South, you don't want leather seats. They are freakin' hot!
Eh... guess I'll just forget getting more hauling power in a small, stable, fuel-efficent, AWD, and drool over the American WRX.
Come here, Mustang. I gotta bone to pick with you. :>
Oh Yeah, that was another reason for the expedition. I'm 6'6". I tried an Explorer and a GMC Jimmy, but even with seat fully adjusted, I had to sit with my head bowed forward.
Now my wife is only about 5'5" and It's a bit of a pain for her to climb in and out of.
Would love a soft top mustang (or viper), no problems with headroom there, but digging all the snow out of the car before I get in would quickly become annoying :D
The other thing to consider is that I'm a recent immigrant from Scotland (3 years). The price of cars in Canada is approx 1/3 that of the cost in Scotland. So what everyone in Canada considers to be a lot of money for a car, in Scotland it would barely buy me a normal family car (like a Taurus). And don't even get me startred on the price of petrol/gas!!!
Cheers,
SD
I will upgrade Windows if and only if they make a version without the API code FatalExit or illegal operation box :rolleyes:
I drive a Suburban.....best SUV and definitely the coolest......after all the CIA agents drive them! I'm 5'3" but I have running boards so I can climb in and out without having to pole vault.
Don't let being small keep you down...I was short for a while :( Until I was 15 and then I put nearly a foot on in a year :eek:
I am pretty used to it by now....my boys just like to give me a hard time about it.....kids!!!!:rolleyes:
If this was the Post Race, that comment would have resulted in something absolutely beyond sick from me, but convention prevents me from putting it here :(
Everyone is changing their avatars :(
me too :rolleyes:
I liked the animal :(
I like the laughing skull you have right now!
SD
i stole it from Planescape: Torment. Its one of the player's companions.