View Full Version : Winblows Vista sucks!!!
Good grief this is what Redmond is going to release on the unwashed masses? I am a certified geek and simple stuff I have never found to be so damn difficult!
I have been using RC1 on my laptop. Well.. If you have Vusta you know RC2 cane out a day or 2 ago. So I download it. TWICE! It tells me that for security reasons it will D/L the iso into some obscure temporary folder. Fine whatever.
Download finishes. Says that it in my ~home/downloads folder. I open exploder, Empty! OK??? I know its here somewhere! It's chewing up my HDD space! I do a search for files names *.iso. NADA!
OK... Maybe I f'd up and didnt save properly. Fine. I will D/L again. Nope... File exists! Do you really want to overwrite? WTF?!?!?! But I was able to tell it to open it into WinISO and burn it to DVD.
I still can't find the damn file! I can't even find where to tell this F'n OS to search in places I supposedly (even as admin) have no right to be poking my nose into.
Microsloth is lost. Vista! You can shove it!
:flame:
Spicoli
10-08-06, 07:38 PM
Yopu're prolly just drunk Cam and can't remember where you put it.:D
Yopu're prolly just drunk Cam and can't remember where you put it.:D
Nope! Tried both ways... Still got me discombobulated. :saywhat:
indyfan31
10-08-06, 08:08 PM
Yopu're prolly just drunk Cam and can't remember where you put it.:D
:laugh:
Oh yeah, be helpful. You may have already done this but it doesn't hurt to ask. Did you turn off the "hide system files" option? Maybe it's there and invisible.
:laugh:
Oh yeah, be helpful. You may have already done this but it doesn't hurt to ask. Did you turn off the "hide system files" option? Maybe it's there and invisible.
Again. My whole point! I can't find it! The whole menu system I am used to is GONE!
Joelski
10-08-06, 10:44 PM
Why is the download manager not putting the file the same place that you've downloaded previous versions to? Can you not change the folder you want it to go to?
devilmaster
10-08-06, 11:14 PM
Nope! Tried both ways... Still got me discombobulated. :saywhat:
I had that happen once. Sat on the toilet for hours....
WickerBill
10-09-06, 06:45 AM
:cry:
Again. My whole point! I can't find it! The whole menu system I am used to is GONE!
I told it to put it in my users folder/Downloads. It aint there!:mad:
racermike
10-09-06, 11:03 AM
go to "search" on start menu, and then "files and folders"
Search for this string, *,* (or other parts of search string that you may know, whether it be a filename, or file extension. Wildcards are your friends!)
With a search date limited to the day you downloaded it.
It will list any file downloaded or changed on that specific date. Works everytime.
go to "search" on start menu, and then "files and folders"
Search for this string, *,* (or other parts of search string that you may know, whether it be a filename, or file extension. Wildcards are your friends!)
With a search date limited to the day you downloaded it.
It will list any file downloaded or changed on that specific date. Works everytime.
Might try that later. I did do a search for all files over 100MB though and it didn't find it then eiither. :irked:
cameraman
10-09-06, 12:48 PM
Our IT guys have banned Vista from the network. They won't support it, period.
Why on earth are you loading that crap on your machine anyway?
racer2c
10-09-06, 01:04 PM
Our IT guys have banned Vista from the network. They won't support it, period.
Why on earth are you loading that crap on your machine anyway?
Why would they support a product that hasn't been released? Of course they won't support it. Any IT group with any brains wouldn't.
cameraman
10-09-06, 01:05 PM
Hence the question - why have it on his machine?
racermike
10-09-06, 01:50 PM
I have it loaded on my P4-2.0 machine, and not one glitch yet. Works nice and smooth.
Only problem is it took me a week to get the right HP Printer drivers to work with my HP990Cse Printer.
Our IT guys have banned Vista from the network. They won't support it, period.
Why on earth are you loading that crap on your machine anyway?
Because I am an IT guy and I need to know exactly how much it sucks so that I can say no when management wants to implement it where I work.;)
cameraman
10-09-06, 02:52 PM
Because I am an IT guy and I need to know exactly how much it sucks so that I can say no when management wants to implement it where I work.;)
Good reason.
Might try that later. I did do a search for all files over 100MB though and it didn't find it then eiither. :irked:
You need to enable the option to view hidden and system files.
Take your redhat off and put on your thinking cap. :D
You need to enable the option to view hidden and system files.
Take your redhat off and put on your thinking cap. :D
OK G. Tell me exactly where I find that option! For the life of me I have tried everything! The functionality in exploder has been crippled (or hidden along with all the files) it seems. And while you are at it, how the hell do I turn off those nasty large icons and tell it I want a detailed directory listing? :mad:
BTW. For a change of flavor I put Ubuntu on the new laptop. :D
pfc_m_drake
10-09-06, 08:41 PM
Just a thought:
1) Open up a command prompt
2) change to the root directory (presumably c: )
3) dir/s /od *.* > files.txt
or better yet, if you know the extension or name of your downloaded file
dir/s /od *.ext > files.txt
dir/s /od filename.ext > files.txt
4) open up the resulting text file (files.txt) in wordpad or equivalent and search for either your filename (if you know it) or by date created. Once you find the file you're looking for, the directory it resides in will be located above it in the files.txt file.
Here's another thought, Insert the XP w/SP2 disk, when it when it gets to the part about formatting and how it will destroy everything on this partition click
YES!
racer2c
10-09-06, 09:15 PM
Because I am an IT guy and I need to know exactly how much it sucks so that I can say no when management wants to implement it where I work.;)
And you can't find your file? :)
right click the start button
Select explorer from the list
In Explorer click View in the toolbar and then Details from the list (this will give you the details instead of the large icons)
Now Select Tools toolbar and then Folder Options
Select the View Tab in the popup that appears.
Select "Apply To all Folders" button. (This will do away with the large icons and give you the details in all windows from now on.)
In the same place use the scroll bar and ensure that the "Hide system files" checkbox is unmarked and "Show hidden files and folders" radio button is highlighted.
If that doesn't work, we can get somebody from Bangalore to give you a ring.
ellllow.
See isn't that easier than a manpage? :shakehead :thumbup:
WickerBill
10-09-06, 09:48 PM
Funny stuff. For years anyone calling Linux "too hard" was dubbed a noob, a simplistic dolt, or (far) worse. Suddenly a beta... a BETA! of Windows takes a smidgen of technical ability and people -- many of the same people -- scream that the Windows team has lost the plot.
I also love that people who are desperate to tear it apart can't manage to get it installed. Not just you, Cam; the Cisco and Unix zealots at my job are in the same boat.
It's a pretty nice OS.
Joelski
10-10-06, 12:27 AM
Best thread ever!
I also love that people who are desperate to tear it apart can't manage to get it installed. Not just you, Cam; the Cisco and Unix zealots at my job are in the same boat.
Fortunately in my job I don't have to worry about installing Windows to tear it apart or demonstrating how much it sucks. We have a Windows team for that. Bam! Thank you ladies and germs, I'll be here all week! :rofl:
WickerBill
10-10-06, 05:57 AM
http://168.144.128.135/erdincakan/resource/dilbert7_strip.gif
Bah. *paw wave*
Insomniac
10-10-06, 07:02 AM
right click the start button
Select explorer from the list
In Explorer click View in the toolbar and then Details from the list (this will give you the details instead of the large icons)
Now Select Tools toolbar and then Folder Options
Select the View Tab in the popup that appears.
Select "Apply To all Folders" button. (This will do away with the large icons and give you the details in all windows from now on.)
In the same place use the scroll bar and ensure that the "Hide system files" checkbox is unmarked and "Show hidden files and folders" radio button is highlighted.
If that doesn't work, we can get somebody from Bangalore to give you a ring.
ellllow.
See isn't that easier than a manpage? :shakehead :thumbup:
This seriosuly can't be it. That's how almost every version since 98 has worked.
I also love that people who are desperate to tear it apart can't manage to get it installed. Not just you, Cam; the Cisco and Unix zealots at my job are in the same boat.
It's a pretty nice OS.
Remember when XP came out, many of it's detractors decried it as being "cartoonish"? This latest vision definitely is! Why the enormous Icons? I am not blind! :yuck:
And I will have this installed today. I just hope it doesn't bork the MBR like when I installed 1. :flame:
WickerBill
10-10-06, 07:40 AM
Will you still respect yourself when you find yourself liking it?
Will you still respect yourself when you find yourself liking it?
NO!!! I will buy a Mac first! :D
I think I need therapy.
Joelski
10-10-06, 09:28 AM
Remember when XP came out, many of it's detractors decried it as being "cartoonish"? GUI sells the app.
This latest vision definitely is! Why the enormous Icons? I am not blind! :yuck: It's a BETA! Tune them if you'd like them smaller, but for now and until RTM, that is the least of the woories, mate!
And I will have this installed today. I just hope it doesn't bork the MBR like when I installed 1. :flame: Was RC1 not supposed to be a clean install? Like living dangertously? BTW I upgraded over 5298 :)
Was RC1 not supposed to be a clean install? Like living dangertously? BTW I upgraded over 5298 :)
Yeah RC1 was a clean install. Did that, wiped out the whole laptop in the process.
Joelski
10-10-06, 09:38 AM
IT-isms:
Alpha: "I hear it has all the security updates, but nothing gets onto my network until I say so!"
Tech Beta: "It looks pretty good."
Beta 1: "I don't know, what we have now is pretty good."
Beta 2: "This stupid F4c*ing thing! I HATE IT!!"
RTM through SP1: "It's impossible to support and chock-full of bugs!"
"I don't want that headache!"
"Our mission-critical* data is too sensitive to subject to this mickey mouse file system!!"
Post-SP1: "Hey _______! (boss), I've been looking over _______ (OS/app), and I think we can cut service desk calls by over 12%! I've prepared a migration timeline and would like to go over some selling points for you to take to the next board meeting!!
*IT Geek buzzword intended to help keep job consuming Cokes & M&M's for 8 hours/day.
Joelski
10-10-06, 09:42 AM
Yeah RC1 was a clean install. Did that, wiped out the whole laptop in the process.
I've had memory leak issues with my lappy, but I think it's more the measly 512 Mb of DDR I have than anything. Never had more than some access issues with my desktop box though. PM me and maybe I can help you get through some of those folder/view problems. I spent a lot of time with the GUI and though it takes getting used to, that's the only way forward. This is the first really harsh departure from backwards compatibility promise that MS has ever kept, and though it will take some changes to our habits, I still think it'll be a fine OS for the next several years. Look how long XP has lasted!
indyfan31
10-10-06, 12:16 PM
Remember when XP came out, many of it's detractors decried it as being "cartoonish"? This latest vision definitely is! Why the enormous Icons? I am not blind! :yuck:
Windows by Fisher Price! :rofl:
cameraman
10-10-06, 12:44 PM
NO!!! I will buy a Mac first! :D
I think I need therapy.
You should. I'm reading this using Windows XP on my iMac. It makes one of the nicer XP machines that I have ever used. Unix, MacOS and XP all on the same machine. :D
What needs therapy is my left hand as Mac uses the Command-S while XP uses Ctrl-S. That will drive you nuts...
Is their any reason to use Vista once SP1 is out? What will it do that XP doesn't?
Insomniac
10-10-06, 12:59 PM
Remember when XP came out, many of it's detractors decried it as being "cartoonish"? This latest vision definitely is! Why the enormous Icons? I am not blind! :yuck:
And I will have this installed today. I just hope it doesn't bork the MBR like when I installed 1. :flame:
I still call the default XP interface "fisher price". However, the UI was still improved over 2000/Me.
Insomniac
10-10-06, 01:02 PM
I've had memory leak issues with my lappy, but I think it's more the measly 512 Mb of DDR I have than anything. Never had more than some access issues with my desktop box though. PM me and maybe I can help you get through some of those folder/view problems. I spent a lot of time with the GUI and though it takes getting used to, that's the only way forward. This is the first really harsh departure from backwards compatibility promise that MS has ever kept, and though it will take some changes to our habits, I still think it'll be a fine OS for the next several years. Look how long XP has lasted!
If you were/are using Intel's Proset for wireless, it had a bad memory leak (the version they released to fix the security hole). They have since released a new version. I don't know if that's it, but it may be.
Joelski
10-10-06, 01:10 PM
If you were/are using Intel's Proset for wireless, it had a bad memory leak (the version they released to fix the security hole). They have since released a new version. I don't know if that's it, but it may be.
AMD/Broadcom
Hibernate does not release cached memory, and reboot crashes. It turns into a monster after 5 cycles.
pfc_m_drake
10-10-06, 03:50 PM
Is their any reason to use Vista once SP1 is out? What will it do that XP doesn't?
The main selling points are
1) The AeroGlass interface with fully 3-D rendered icons etc.
2) DirectX 10
3) Native 64-bit architecture (which is available currently via XP-64, but not all that well implemented from what I've heard)
The other 'key' selling point was going to be the WinFS file system, but that wasn't completed in time and was kicked to the next version of Windows instead...therefore Vista will feature NTFS just like NT/2000/XP.
WickerBill
10-10-06, 05:07 PM
other benefits:
1. Only the very base Vista version will not support multiple CPUs - most if not all PCs will be multicore very soon
2. IPv6 ready
3. Event log enhancements for troubleshooting
4. Peer Name Resolution Protocol
5. User Account Control
Lots more
cameraman
10-10-06, 05:20 PM
other benefits:
1. Only the very base Vista version will not support multiple CPUs - most if not all PCs will be multicore very soon
2. IPv6 ready
3. Event log enhancements for troubleshooting
4. Peer Name Resolution Protocol
5. User Account Control
Lots more
Gee, it will almost do what Mac OS X is currently doing right now.
bit locker
increased kernel mode driver security
Gee, it will almost do what Mac OS X is currently doing right now.
That might mean something if more than 4 people bought it.
WickerBill
10-10-06, 09:12 PM
Gee, it will almost do what Mac OS X is currently doing right now.
...and it will actually work with hundreds of thousands of applications that won't run on a Mac...
Oh wait, forgot, arguing with a Mac zealot is basically politics, which isn't allowed here.
indyfan31
10-10-06, 11:44 PM
That might mean something if more than 4 people bought it.
Hmmm, Tens of thousands more people attend NASCAR races than Champ Car, that must mean NASCAR is better. :shakehead
...and it will actually work with hundreds of thousands of applications that won't run on a Mac...
I'll bet you can't name a thousand.
racer2c
10-10-06, 11:48 PM
Macs running XP, Intel cpu's and Office. :tony:
I'll start developing on a Mac when my company starts paying me to develop on a Mac.
WickerBill
10-11-06, 06:49 AM
Tucows.com: PC applications, 189,000. Mac applications, 69,000.
And, um, that's just the consumer stuff, that Mac is "the best" at. The ratio would increase exponentially when you get into business applications.
Mac Ad (with naughty word so I didn't post as a picture (http://www.trekcubed.com/remote/macad.jpg)
WickerBill
10-11-06, 06:54 AM
Sorry, I forgot something:
Bah.
Insomniac
10-11-06, 08:08 AM
1. Only the very base Vista version will not support multiple CPUs - most if not all PCs will be multicore very soon
To be clear, the Home Basic version will only support one socket. A quad-core CPU would be recognized and fully supported.
Insomniac
10-11-06, 08:10 AM
Gee, it will almost do what Mac OS X is currently doing right now.
Yeah, that's a fair comparison. Windows supports infinite configurations and tons of hardware. Apple controls everything and can just throw out the last version of their OS and block people from upgrading. There's a reason Apple has a 3% market share.
Insomniac
10-11-06, 08:12 AM
I'll start developing on a Mac when my company starts paying me to develop on a Mac.
Me too! I wish my company would by me a Mac to develop on.
chop456
10-11-06, 08:34 AM
There's a reason Apple has a 3% market share.
There's a reason Mercedes has a 3% market share, too. ;)
The PC tries to be all things to all people and does a good job. Apple sells high-end home computers and does a great job. Graphics and schools too, but I'd imagine that's a small portion of their sales.
As far as availability of apps, how many of the tens of thousands of "missing" Mac titles are core apps people can't live without? If someone wants a reliable home computer and doesn't want or need to tinker with it as if it's a '64 Triumph, they can buy a Mac. If they're a hardcore, knowledgable geek and can't live without the latest mods and upgrades, they can build a PC.
It's like comparing Apples and..uh...
racer2c
10-11-06, 10:57 AM
I have yet to see definitive evidence from folks who make the vague statement that Macs are "better" than PC's. In what way are they "better"? Because five years ago they could apply filters in PhotoShop 5% faster then a PC? Or because three years ago they could convert raw digital video 4% faster than a PC? What other reasons are there? What about today’s PC compared to a Mac? What is the tangible evidence that the Mac is better?
Sincerely curious.
Insomniac
10-11-06, 10:58 AM
There's a reason Mercedes has a 3% market share, too. ;)
The PC tries to be all things to all people and does a good job. Apple sells high-end home computers and does a great job. Graphics and schools too, but I'd imagine that's a small portion of their sales.
If someone wants a reliable home computer and doesn't want or need to tinker with it as if it's a '64 Triumph, they can buy a Mac. If they're a hardcore, knowledgable geek and can't live without the latest mods and upgrades, they can build a PC.
I'm not so sure you can say Apple is high-end. They have products that fit the entire price range now. They are not pricing themselves out of the PC market by any means. (Mercedes on the other hand prices at a whole other level to the cars that are top sellers.)
I also don't see how an Apple is anymore reliable than a PC. Security holes are also found on Macs and they require patches just as Windows or Linux.
Maybe the problem on the PC side is there are too many applications available to install and mess up your PC more quickly than a Mac. :p
Insomniac
10-11-06, 11:04 AM
I have yet to see definitive evidence from folks who make the vague statement that Macs are "better" than PC's. In what way are they "better"? Because five years ago they could apply filters in PhotoShop 5% faster then a PC? Or because three years ago they could convert raw digital video 4% faster than a PC? What other reasons are there? What about today’s PC compared to a Mac? What is the tangible evidence that the Mac is better?
Sincerely curious.
Hey, don't forget when Apple used the G5 they're machines were a billion % faster than Intel chips. Then when they switched to Intel chips they were a billion % faster than the G5 chips!
Some arguments I can make to say Apple is better (I don't own a Mac):
1. Tightly controlled hardware components means less likelihood of conflicts/problems with the OS.
2. Excellent support if you live near an Apple store (just bring it to the Genius Bar).
3. They can innovate more quickly than Microsoft.
Joelski
10-11-06, 12:16 PM
The biggest difference is that MS held onto dino-era apps because people bitched that when they got a new a computer, they always had to buy or pay for an upgrade to their apps. Mac users are used to this because Mac is a single point supplier. Now take into account that it took forever to get rid of ISA architecture and to implement even basic power management that worked, and this was all due to trying to develop new technology and cater to the tightwads who didn't want to part with peachtree 2.0 or that way cool SB 16 soundcard. Backwards compatibility has been the biggest hurdle to Wintel's advancement despite it popularity, but things are changing now...
eiregosod
10-11-06, 12:17 PM
McWindows always sucked. what is the alternative?
Joelski
10-11-06, 12:20 PM
McWindows always sucked. what is the alternative?
Well if your name is Linus, you'll make your own! Then you and all your command line GOD buddies can sit in a room downing mountain Dew and skittles as you write CD-ROM drivers and fantasize about your next big LAN party when Dr Doom.. er Paff gets the vulcan warship port righ.
cameraman
10-11-06, 12:20 PM
I have excellent Mac OS-only applications on this machine.
I have excellent XP-only applications on this machine.
I have excellent Unix-only applications on this machine.
I can use whichever operating system will get the job done the best whenever I want to. All I care about is getting the job done as quickly and easily as possible. I can guarantee you this, Unix is the most stable OS, Mac OS 10.4 is a close second, XP is a far, far distant third.
eiregosod
10-11-06, 12:26 PM
Well if your name is Linus, you'll make your own! Then you and all your command line GOD buddies can sit in a room downing mountain Dew and skittles as you write CD-ROM drivers and fantasize about your next big LAN party when Dr Doom.. er Paff gets the vulcan warship port righ.
Mr Linus was looking for a cheap substitute for Unix. call me old fashioned, but I prefer real social intercourse to mountain dew & skittles.
Joelski
10-11-06, 12:26 PM
I have excellent Mac OS-only applications on this machine.
I have excellent XP-only applications on this machine.
I have excellent Unix-only applications on this machine.
I can use whichever operating system will get the job done the best whenever I want to. All I care about is getting the job done as quickly and easily as possible. I can guarantee you this, Unix is the most stable OS, Mac OS 10.4 is a close second, XP is a far, far distant third.
I'm glad you feel that way, it gives Apple a piece of the market and competition is good.
I have no need for anything other than what I use to manage my music/vids and apps over my home WLAN, edit those same files and run work and gaming apps. For that, windows works just fine.
racer2c
10-11-06, 12:30 PM
I must admit I'm a bit out of the loop regarding hardware. I've been working from laptops for the past two years. My current Sony Vaio has zero hardware/OS related issues. Now if the keys would stop falling off...
Mr Linus was looking for a cheap substitute for Unix. call me old fashioned, but I prefer real social intercourse to mountain dew & skittles.
social intercourse + EE == does not compute
:gomer:
Insomniac
10-11-06, 12:57 PM
I have excellent Mac OS-only applications on this machine.
I have excellent XP-only applications on this machine.
I have excellent Unix-only applications on this machine.
I can use whichever operating system will get the job done the best whenever I want to. All I care about is getting the job done as quickly and easily as possible. I can guarantee you this, Unix is the most stable OS, Mac OS 10.4 is a close second, XP is a far, far distant third.
Hmmm, checking uptime of my work Windows XP machine, 1 year+. Seems pretty stable to me.
BTW--Why do I have to reboot my home PC for some updates and at work they just push them without a required reboot?
cameraman
10-11-06, 12:59 PM
Hmmm, checking uptime of my work Windows XP machine, 1 year+. Seems pretty stable to me.
And I just finished restarting the conofocal microscope XP box for the third time this week.
eiregosod
10-11-06, 12:59 PM
social intercourse + EE == does not compute
:gomer:
:tony: :irked: :cry:
pfc_m_drake
10-11-06, 02:37 PM
Well if your name is Linus, you'll make your own! Then you and all your command line GOD buddies can sit in a room downing mountain Dew and skittles as you write CD-ROM drivers and fantasize about your next big LAN party when Dr Doom.. er Paff gets the vulcan warship port righ.
That's awfully harsh.
oddlycalm
10-11-06, 03:02 PM
I have yet to see definitive evidence from folks who make the vague statement that Macs are "better" than PC's. Unless you own both you won't get it. It's not about the speed and specs, it's about being intuitive to use, look and feel, and elegance of design. I put an iMac on a fiber connection at a little desk site we have in the kitchen and unless I'm working that's what I use 90% of the time. Camerman is correct about the stability, but without even considering that I'd give the nod to the Mac on every count. First Mac for me but it won't be the last.
I've been using PC's since they came out, built my first in 1989 (386), and I've built more than I can count since using DOS and then every version of Windows since 3.1. I was glad when Win2K came out and finally showed MS was at least somewhat serious, and XP more finely tuned the package, but it's simply not at the same level and probably never will be. The game boys will always love it, a lot of people won't care, and it will always provide massive IT employment due to the absurd amount of support it requires. It will never be what it could have been and should have been.
The auto analogy is like arguing about whether an BMW M3 or a Z06 Corvette is a better car. The Z06 will just barely best the M3 by every measurement, yet in the end I think most people would find the M3 a much more satisfying car to own and the resale value means the overall cost of ownership a lot lower.
oc
racer2c
10-11-06, 03:04 PM
Unless you own both you won't get it. It's not about the speed and specs, it's about being intuitive to use, look and feel, and elegance of design. I put an iMac on a fiber connection at a little desk site we have in the kitchen and unless I'm working that's what I use 90% of the time. Camerman is correct about the stability, but without even considering that I'd give the nod to the Mac on every count. First Mac for me but it won't be the last.
I've been using PC's since they came out, built my first in 1989 (386), and I've built more than I can count since using DOS and then every version of Windows since 3.1. I was glad when Win2K came out and finally showed MS was at least somewhat serious, and XP more finely tuned the package, but it's simply not at the same level and probably never will be. The game boys will always love it, a lot of people won't care, and it will always provide massive IT employment due to the absurd amount of support it requires. It will never be what it could have been and should have been.
The auto analogy is like arguing about whether an BMW M3 or a Z06 Corvette is a better car. The Z06 will just barely best the M3 by every measurement, yet in the end I think most people would find the M3 a much more satisfying car to own and the resale value means the overall cost of ownership a lot lower.
oc
Yes, but which OS picks up more babes? :) I'm guessing Vista considering the title of this thread.
Insomniac
10-11-06, 03:16 PM
And I just finished restarting the conofocal microscope XP box for the third time this week.
And my friend keeps taking her iBook in to the Apple store. What's your point? My point was stability is relative to what you put on your machine. You are ranking stability based on what you see and what software you run on it.
Insomniac
10-11-06, 03:18 PM
Unless you own both you won't get it. It's not about the speed and specs, it's about being intuitive to use, look and feel, and elegance of design. I put an iMac on a fiber connection at a little desk site we have in the kitchen and unless I'm working that's what I use 90% of the time. Camerman is correct about the stability, but without even considering that I'd give the nod to the Mac on every count. First Mac for me but it won't be the last.
What do you do on your Mac?
Joelski
10-11-06, 05:36 PM
That's awfully harsh.
Harsh, perhaps. What part was untrue?
:D
Joelski
10-11-06, 05:41 PM
And I just finished restarting the conofocal microscope XP box for the third time this week.
Windows being the predominant OS, has more people bashing keyboards, ten-clicking mice and otherwise failing to wait for the hourglass. Some say it's because the OS is trash, other have antiquated hardware and most all of them fail to realize that some apps throw a lot of instructions and just take time to run regardless of the platform. Hence the incidence of rebooting and BSOD's but a great number would rather blame anything other than their impatience or frugality. This works for windows or mac users.
extramundane
10-11-06, 08:31 PM
For just over a year, we've had a mix of ~15 iMac G5 & PowerMac G5 machines in addition to the 300+ PCs on campus. As standalone machines, I certainly "get it" about the Macs now. I'm currently breaking in a new MacBook for a teacher and will probably cry when I have to turn it over. When the time comes for me to get something new at home, it's going to be a tough decision whether to go Mac or stay Windows.
That said, putting a Mac on a W2003 network seems like the quickest way to turn a nice piece of machinery into a worthless heap. 'Course, part of the problem is that The Powers That Be don't understand that a Mac doesn't work just like a PC because it's a Mac and not a PC- they just demand Macs, then expect us to make them behave the same. But that's another rant.
That said, putting a Mac on a W2003 network seems like the quickest way to turn a nice piece of machinery into a worthless heap. 'Course, part of the problem is that The Powers That Be don't understand that a Mac doesn't work just like a PC because it's a Mac and not a PC- they just demand Macs, then expect us to make them behave the same. But that's another rant.
No SAMBA Gurus on campus? :saywhat:
JLMannin
10-11-06, 08:51 PM
And I just finished restarting the conofocal microscope XP box for the third time this week.
Upright or inverted?
pfc_m_drake
10-11-06, 08:54 PM
Harsh, perhaps. What part was untrue?
:D
Don't confuse the issue with facts!
:D
WickerBill
10-11-06, 09:49 PM
BTW--Why do I have to reboot my home PC for some updates and at work they just push them without a required reboot?
Dude... they're just installing the patches with the /norestart switch... you are NOT protected until you reboot 90% of the time.... bounce that machine!
Dude... they're just installing the patches with the /norestart switch... you are NOT protected until you reboot 90% of the time.... bounce that machine!
Just what I suspected! TY! :)
extramundane
10-11-06, 09:56 PM
No SAMBA Gurus on campus? :saywhat:
We're a non-profit private K-12 with a technology staff of 4 (2 of whom are teachers)- I'm what passes for a SAMBA guru, and it ain't pretty. I'd never done any Mac networking more complicated than a cable modem connection when they dropped all those G5s in my lap 2 weeks before school started last year. Sometimes I'm surprised they work at all.
We're a non-profit private K-12 with a technology staff of 4 (2 of whom are teachers)- I'm what passes for a SAMBA guru, and it ain't pretty. I'd never done any Mac networking more complicated than a cable modem connection when they dropped all those G5s in my lap 2 weeks before school started last year. Sometimes I'm surprised they work at all.
:eek: I havent on Mac... But I have on linux... It works.
indyfan31
10-12-06, 01:00 AM
Tucows.com: PC applications, 189,000. Mac applications, 69,000.
And, um, that's just the consumer stuff, that Mac is "the best" at. The ratio would increase exponentially when you get into business applications.
Umm, like I said, I bet you can't NAME 1000 of them, and I don't mean copy/paste some list, I mean off the top of your head.
WickerBill
10-12-06, 05:24 AM
Bah. *paw wave*
Why don't you just say "WB cannot name 150 different cities in North Dakota, therefore North Dakota must not exist." Same thing.
Insomniac
10-12-06, 09:33 AM
Dude... they're just installing the patches with the /norestart switch... you are NOT protected until you reboot 90% of the time.... bounce that machine!
Wow, that seems quite stupid. I wonder how no one has been compromised. Perhaps the security measures in place work too. I know just having a hardware firewall is beneficial.
Mine was rebooted last night. We had a power outage to switch to a new backup power provider.
Insomniac
10-12-06, 09:35 AM
Umm, like I said, I bet you can't NAME 1000 of them, and I don't mean copy/paste some list, I mean off the top of your head.
For most people, just 1 application is enough.
(Note that has become less of an issue with the Intel switch and Boot Camp/Virtualization.)
Joelski
10-12-06, 09:48 AM
Wow, that seems quite stupid. I wonder how no one has been compromised. Perhaps the security measures in place work too. I know just having a hardware firewall is beneficial.
Mine was rebooted last night. We had a power outage to switch to a new backup power provider.
For a high percentage of updates, simply logging off is sufficient to complete the update. Loggin off unloads a lot of user & kernel apps from memory which is all the OS needs to complete patching.
For a high percentage of updates, simply logging off is sufficient to complete the update. Loggin off unloads a lot of user & kernel apps from memory which is all the OS needs to complete patching.
High percentage? :saywhat: Maybe, but the more critical patches are usually issued for services that either require a reboot or a savvy enough user that can go in and stop/restart the service involved and possibly other dependent services. Which is why a reboot is the easiest and safest way of making sure everything is applied.
Insomniac
10-12-06, 10:57 AM
For a high percentage of updates, simply logging off is sufficient to complete the update. Loggin off unloads a lot of user & kernel apps from memory which is all the OS needs to complete patching.
I just do what Windows tells me. :) I have to install the Tuesday updates and expect it to ask me to reboot. I just found it odd that at work, my machine wasn't rebooted. Although, I do log off/on everyday, so maybe they're pushed while I'm logged off and logging back on is enough.
indyfan31
10-12-06, 11:24 AM
I just do what Windows tells me. :) I have to install the Tuesday updates and expect it to ask me to reboot. I just found it odd that at work, my machine wasn't rebooted. Although, I do log off/on everyday, so maybe they're pushed while I'm logged off and logging back on is enough.
We go through the same thing at work, except a reboot is part of the "push".
I wouldn't think that logging off would be the sufficient.
Bah. *paw wave*
Why don't you just say "WB cannot name 150 different cities in North Dakota, therefore North Dakota must not exist." Same thing.
North Dakota has more cities than Fargo?
whoa. :eek:
Joelski
10-12-06, 11:32 AM
High percentage? :saywhat: Maybe, but the more critical patches are usually issued for services that either require a reboot or a savvy enough user that can go in and stop/restart the service involved and possibly other dependent services. Which is why a reboot is the easiest and safest way of making sure everything is applied.
Absolutely.
cameraman
10-12-06, 12:18 PM
Upright or inverted?
Inverted. A conofocal electrophysiology rig. Nice scope. Crap computer.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.