Linux vs Windows vs Mac vs Unix

Brian · Post by **Brian** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 1:46 am

Whatever it is - it's more than I have.

I drool over them every time I look at the page and it makes me sad.

BtEO · Post by **BtEO** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 2:05 am

Araxian necro'd because he was directed here from another thread. Where I was mauling him for displaying the lamest reasons possible to knock windows.
I was pointing out that fact rather than attempting to initiate more useless "My OS is better than yours!!!!!!" discussion.
There are plenty of good reasons to dislike any OS.. so it's your own choice really.

grassmunk · Post by **grassmunk** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 2:35 am

and several pirated cdkeys for office and stuff

How hard is it to remember 1112 - 1111111

Mauahahahah!

I still use that sometimes.

Araxian · Post by **Araxian** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 2:47 am

How hard is it to remember 1112 - 1111111

actually I've never heard that one before.
98 and ME are not basically the same. ME will always crash and burn after regular use for a while. that's why Microsoft discontinued it.
I have never had 98 crash on me. the only time I've ever seen the blue screen is with ME/2K/XP.
And I wasnt saying that 98 is all powerful. I was saying that I know how to use it and can manipulate it well.
Oh by the way did my monkey teach you about computers?

Brian · Post by **Brian** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:15 am

The only major difference between 98 and ME is that ME is actually purely 32-bit code. Technically Win98se and all below it had some old 16-bit code floating around in the GUI mgmt. Microsoft didn't discontinue ME because it sucked, they actually still support it. Support for Windows 98, however, is on its way out soon. While ME is still supported, however, they recommend purchasing XP instead because it's a hell of a lot more stable. If you've never had 98 crash, then you must be playing nothing but solitaire and never running more than one application at a time.

grassmunk · Post by **grassmunk** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:16 am

I used to have explorer crash on me constantly. Which in win98 meant a reset ( not a hard/fast rule but that happened all the time ) but by changin the shell i NEVER had that problem again.
Heres some links:
http://www.shellfront.org/
http://www.geoshell.com/index.asp
http://www.labyrinth.net.au/~mosses/rob/liteshell/
http://www.litestep.net/
http://www.lowdimension.net/ <- down right now, but the best in my opinion

Shell front is pretty good as a source for all the sites.

Kinda funny you mention monkey and there was the green monkey on lowdimensions when i went there. Heh.

Brian · Post by **Brian** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:07 am

I've always meant to check into something like litestep, just never bothered. heh. Maybe I should look into it now.

Araxian · Post by **Araxian** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 11:22 am

I never had IE crash on me when I was running 98. it was obvously a problem with something of yours. and just today on a callout I had, there were serious issues with XP. You know the reason for the error reports that I'm sure anyone running XP for a week at most will have seen, it's because Microsft released a buggy unfinished Operating system and updated it with patches for everything they got error reports on. the first lot of people to buy XP were an unpaid part of the team.
and as for windows XP's reliability, we had one small issue with an XP running machine and we had to reinstall it.
also under my expierence and the opinions of others I know windows ME always gives out after time. crashing badly and generally buggering up.
I have never had 98 crash on me because I dont go over it's capabilitys or my RAM's.

7on · Post by **7on** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:38 pm

Yeah, 98 actually has crashed less for me than XP. Sure when 98 crashes it buys the farm, but XP does it a lot more. Not really crashes with XP, more like system hangs. And ctrl+alt+delete closes all open programs, still not the best way to do things.

I am, however, a firm believer that it is everyone's personal choice to choose what OS they use. But when they start calling me to fix their computer, I say that gives me the right to scold them for using Windows.

Infin8Cyn · Post by **Infin8Cyn** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:42 pm

Araxian, Umm... Windows ME and 98 are almost identical. '98 was NOTORIOUS for crashing on systems, even boxes straight from the factory. Buffer Overflows were everywhere, and don't even try leaving it on for more 49.7 days.

Nt4/2000/XP are the most stable, reliable systems to come out of MS. They're more prone to attack as anything that's in the spotlight is, but to compare the stability of Windows 98 to Windows XP is like comparing the AMC Pacer to a 2004 Vette.

Deacon · Post by **Deacon** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:44 pm

I've been using XP for a while now (like, since it was first available), and I've literally never had it crash on me. The only time my computer has crashed is when the computer itself has crashed due to things like overclocking a video card beyond what it can handle, etc. ME sucks a nut. I would use 98se over ME. But I would use Win2k or WinXP Pro over both.

[quote="Araxian";p="303140"]I have never had 98 crash on me because I dont go over it's capabilitys or my RAM's.[/quote]
I'm struggling not to add that to my sig...

Brian · Post by **Brian** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 4:45 pm

I can't believe I'm actually going to defend ME, but here goes.

If you have hardware that was specifically put together for ME with factory drivers for ME, ME runs alright. I have a laptop (running Win2K now) that came from the factory with ME, and it ran more stably than 98 did when I put it on there. However, this is the only positive experience I have ever had with ME. If ME was put on a system that wasn't deployed from the factory for it, it never worked worth a damn and the person usually went back to 98 afterwards.

grassmunk · Post by **grassmunk** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 7:28 pm

You never, ever EVER had internet explorer crash on you? Ever? Either you A) dont use it to surf the web or B) use something else like netscape or C) Started using win98 in 2003 when IE was updated to IE 6.0. ( I use firefox now cause of all the trojans and the unpatched holes in IE ). But i do agree i liked win98 too because it was fast stable-ish and i pretty much knew all the nooks and crannies of 98. Thats what i liked about win98.

Sir Spankspeople · Post by **Sir Spankspeople** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 7:31 pm

And the best thing about Windows 98's nooks and crannies? You can't lock people out of them! Yay!

Araxian · Post by **Araxian** » Thu Mar 18, 2004 10:33 pm

Araxian, Umm... Windows ME and 98 are almost identical. '98 was NOTORIOUS for crashing on systems, even boxes straight from the factory. Buffer Overflows were everywhere, and don't even try leaving it on for more 49.7 days.

Why would anyone need to run a 98se machine that long? what is wrong with you people?

You guys are all idiots, you're so convinced of your own opinion and that newer is better. I'm leaving this thread.

Real Life Forums

Linux vs Windows vs Mac vs Unix

Re: Linux vs Windows vs Mac vs Unix

Re: Linux vs Windows vs Mac vs Unix

Re: Linux vs Windows vs Mac vs Unix

Re: Linux vs Windows vs Mac vs Unix

Who is online