mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
Was that on a single core AMD, Handy?
Windows *Vista*
- Thread starter Mercutio
- Start date
Yes, it was a 1.2 GHz classic socket A. Given it was so long ago, and the CPU was much slower, it may no longer be a problem. But something worth mentioning if all else being equal when deciding between XP and w2k for some occasional gaming.
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
Well I went for it and installed Server 2003 on my machine. Seems to work rather nicely. Faster than 2000 as well. Nice to have a clean system since I haven't reinstalled in a good long time.
Haven't had a chance to install any Adobe products yet. But, will let you know if I have any problems.
Haven't had a chance to install any Adobe products yet. But, will let you know if I have any problems.
Pradeep
Storage? I am Storage!
mubs said:
Win2k Pro wouldn't have any probs with a dual core, it would think of it as two cpus. Only problem you may have is if you have dual dual cores (i.e. Opteron dual core duallies, in which cae it may think you have four CPUs and require you to have 2000 Server.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
New Vista build should be out by the end of the week. Supposedly a feature-complete version. Supposedly everything that will be in the shipping version except for some of the artwork. I don't know if that includes things like the "free" version of VirtualPC (available in the "Ultra" edition) or not.
I plan to load it on something or other, as I haven't looked at it since the preview version was called Longhorn.
I know Vista will be met with resistance by the folks here. I don't like most of what I saw before, either. Unfortunately, just like XP, we have to know the damned thing.
I plan to load it on something or other, as I haven't looked at it since the preview version was called Longhorn.
I know Vista will be met with resistance by the folks here. I don't like most of what I saw before, either. Unfortunately, just like XP, we have to know the damned thing.
Let us know when it hits, I need a reminder to go get it. I will definately check this one out.
The last one I tried wiped out my system when I installed daemon tools, wouldn't boot. So that whole vista trial lasted about 20 minutes.
The last one I tried wiped out my system when I installed daemon tools, wouldn't boot. So that whole vista trial lasted about 20 minutes.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
There was a new Community Tech preview released Friday. I'll probably install it tomorrow.
Also, looking at the rules for licensing, it appears that the only distributed Volume-Licensed media will be Upgrade discs this time around. That makes me sad. I bought 5 XP Licenses once upon a time and they threw in a VLK and media, and that's pretty much the media I use for everything.
Also, looking at the rules for licensing, it appears that the only distributed Volume-Licensed media will be Upgrade discs this time around. That makes me sad. I bought 5 XP Licenses once upon a time and they threw in a VLK and media, and that's pretty much the media I use for everything.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I ended up installing 5308.60 32bit edition - the newer than newest build that was released yesterday.
Again, my starting machine Specs:
Athlon64/4000
1GB RAM
128MB X600 Pro
4200rpm 100GB hard disk
... all in a nice little Gateway laptop.
Installation: No text mode. All graphical. There were no install options worth mentioning; no way to drop components. XP doesn't have any, either, so I guess that's no surprise.
I had a HELL of a time getting the key right because it turned out that Microsoft had updated product keys and download .ISOs since Friday.
Once the installer started, it took about an hour to run and needed to reboot twice during the installation.
Instead of putting up the classic installation timer (e.g. the "39 minute" XP install that now happens in something like 20 minutes), there's a simple progress bar. I'm guessing the installer was held back by my slow hard disk. It's probably only 40 minutes on a new-ish 7200rpm drive.
I will say that install time has come way, WAY down from Beta 1, which I recall being a 4 hour process.
The installer led me through the usual BS of setting up a user account. Nice touch - they added wallpaper and user icon selection to the account creation process. As someone who has heard "I wanna be the fish!" more times than I care to think about, I'm glad they put that setting someplace where I might actually be bothered to change it.
The default user account is still an administrator account. I thought I read that they were going to change it, but they didn't.
It is not possible to install unsigned drivers on Preview versions of Vista. Surprisingly, it picked up almost all my hardware anyway, but not my Conexant sound hardware. Kind of a pisser; having sound is pretty important to me.
Of course, step #1 was to install Firefox. That meant using IE7 for 30 seconds while I downloaded it. IE7 is essentially IE6, but with big, chunky tabs, RSS support and a Mycroft-like search bar (configured to search MSN, naturally). The Internet options applet is largely the same as the one we all know and love, and I noticed the default behavior of "created" windows seems to be to pop under IE7. I know that would confuse the hell out of my customers and about 90% of my students.
I installed and unblocked Firefox from the Windows Firewall and immediately found that my internet connection was no longer routing outside my LAN. I mean INSTANTLY. I could ping other hosts, and once I turned on firewall exceptions for network browsing, file sharing, network printing, and UPnP I could see other local hosts, but I could not access remote IPs at all. Notice here that pretty much everything the Windows Firewall might block, it is initially configured to block, except IE and Windows Mail.
Something else, before I forget: My Vista install is 9.7GB. I installed into a 25GB partition, but holy shit that's a lot of space for an OS.
So, the network mystery: I checked Windows Services to make sure relevant components were running. I did an ipconfig and found that the settings from DHCP were in fact appropriate. I turned off the Windows Firewall and, in point of fact, all the other Security Center Bullshit as well, and tried to ping my favorite DNS server (4.2.2.2). No luck. I rebooted. Still nothing. I set my IP configuration manually. Then I rebooted. Nope, didn't work either. I moved to someplace where I could connect with 802.11 instead of ethernet. Nothing there either.
So I walked away for about 15 minutes (stupid job). When I came back, everything was fine. I went back to DHCP, turned the firewall back on and surfed away with Firefox, no problem.
With the internet working properly, I went on to do some more standard install-type things.
Nero 7 did not install.
WinRAR (which I hate, but sometimes need) 2.42 did not install.
Winzip 8.1 installed just fine.
PowerDVD 6 did not install.
Office 2003 installed fine.
At that point I stopped trying to install software. I checked to make sure that I was on with an administrator account. There's probably a setting someplace I need to change to install those other programs.
My laptop can fully support Aero Glass, so I used it. It drives me insane, but I kept it running because I pretty much have to get used to it. I actually kind of like the transparent window edges, but the windows that "pop" out at you are annoying as all hell.
The start button (well, it's a circle now) and start menu are arranged slightly differently, but are not so different as to be unusable. There's a permanent Run/Search command line that really isn't labelled as such, but I like having it where it is. Frequently used programs still arrange themselves on the left side of the start menu, while the right is reserved for categories of configuration tools.
And all I have to say right now about the control panel is... I think that it will be a source of aggravation. Even in "Classic View", there are still sub-categories of functionality that are hidden beneath higher-level applets - "Personalize" is where Mouse Pointers, Themes and Display Properties live, while "System" has links to Security, Restore and the "System Properties" that we're used to seeing - now called "Advanced System Properties". Classic View control panel is pretty much the second thing I change after installing XP Pro, but even classic view here isn't satisfying.
Also, there are way MORE control panel applets, and some functionality has been redistributed. There are at least three different applets with Network-related tools that used to be concentrated with [Network Adaptor Name] Properties.
Oh, and hey, pretty much every time you run a system tool - the ones that might need Administrator level access, or any program that is "foreign" to your Windows install, you'll be asked "Are you sure you want to run this program?" This gets really, really old when you're just looking to see what's in device manager, or to check your network connection properties.
Again, there's probably a way to turn it off, but I haven't found it yet.
The constant confirmations for administrator-type activity are COMPLETELY out of hand. Even the oldest versions of Xenix, Linux (.87 is the first kernel I used), Netware and VINES that I can remember didn't behave in such an obnoxious fashion.
Um... local search performance is much, MUCH better than any other version of Windows. We knew that was coming, but it's nice to see.
Boot time on my laptop is around 35 seconds. I was timing off a wall clock, so that's not exact. One of my students told me his 512MB A64/2800 (that's a minimum config) desktop boots the December CTP build in around 20 second; again, we knew it was going to get better or at least stay in line with XP, and that's pretty much what it did.
Speed? It's certainly not faster than Server 2003. I don't use XP a whole lot, but it certainly didn't impress me in that department. I did end up feeling that the animations etc. from the new interface were getting in my way and taking too long to complete.
Changes to Windows Explorer: No stupid toolbar. But also, no menu for the slow folk who want to go to Edit > Copy like they used to. The assumption seems to be that users will do Context (right) clicking for everything. Again, I think that's a rough change for the inexperienced; Aero is going to confuse the hell out of them.
On the plus side, I like that each element in the Path of your present location is a Drop-Down item. "C:\" drops down to reveal "A:, C: and D:" for example, while from "Personalize" in Control Panel you have "Computer" which reveals "Computer, My Documents, Control Panel, Networks" etc in its drop down, then "Control Panel" which lists all 30 control panel applets in it's drop down, and then "Personalize" with the 8 or so sub-applets that're found under it. Quite handy for the experienced user (and yes, there will be screenies, eventually).
... and that's as much as I feel like writing right now. I plan to continue my use of Vista for at least another couple of weeks. I'll write about the things that I find out as I use it, or if there's a feature someone would like me to look at, I will.
Again, my starting machine Specs:
Athlon64/4000
1GB RAM
128MB X600 Pro
4200rpm 100GB hard disk
... all in a nice little Gateway laptop.
Installation: No text mode. All graphical. There were no install options worth mentioning; no way to drop components. XP doesn't have any, either, so I guess that's no surprise.
I had a HELL of a time getting the key right because it turned out that Microsoft had updated product keys and download .ISOs since Friday.
Once the installer started, it took about an hour to run and needed to reboot twice during the installation.
Instead of putting up the classic installation timer (e.g. the "39 minute" XP install that now happens in something like 20 minutes), there's a simple progress bar. I'm guessing the installer was held back by my slow hard disk. It's probably only 40 minutes on a new-ish 7200rpm drive.
I will say that install time has come way, WAY down from Beta 1, which I recall being a 4 hour process.
The installer led me through the usual BS of setting up a user account. Nice touch - they added wallpaper and user icon selection to the account creation process. As someone who has heard "I wanna be the fish!" more times than I care to think about, I'm glad they put that setting someplace where I might actually be bothered to change it.
The default user account is still an administrator account. I thought I read that they were going to change it, but they didn't.
It is not possible to install unsigned drivers on Preview versions of Vista. Surprisingly, it picked up almost all my hardware anyway, but not my Conexant sound hardware. Kind of a pisser; having sound is pretty important to me.
Of course, step #1 was to install Firefox. That meant using IE7 for 30 seconds while I downloaded it. IE7 is essentially IE6, but with big, chunky tabs, RSS support and a Mycroft-like search bar (configured to search MSN, naturally). The Internet options applet is largely the same as the one we all know and love, and I noticed the default behavior of "created" windows seems to be to pop under IE7. I know that would confuse the hell out of my customers and about 90% of my students.
I installed and unblocked Firefox from the Windows Firewall and immediately found that my internet connection was no longer routing outside my LAN. I mean INSTANTLY. I could ping other hosts, and once I turned on firewall exceptions for network browsing, file sharing, network printing, and UPnP I could see other local hosts, but I could not access remote IPs at all. Notice here that pretty much everything the Windows Firewall might block, it is initially configured to block, except IE and Windows Mail.
Something else, before I forget: My Vista install is 9.7GB. I installed into a 25GB partition, but holy shit that's a lot of space for an OS.
So, the network mystery: I checked Windows Services to make sure relevant components were running. I did an ipconfig and found that the settings from DHCP were in fact appropriate. I turned off the Windows Firewall and, in point of fact, all the other Security Center Bullshit as well, and tried to ping my favorite DNS server (4.2.2.2). No luck. I rebooted. Still nothing. I set my IP configuration manually. Then I rebooted. Nope, didn't work either. I moved to someplace where I could connect with 802.11 instead of ethernet. Nothing there either.
So I walked away for about 15 minutes (stupid job). When I came back, everything was fine. I went back to DHCP, turned the firewall back on and surfed away with Firefox, no problem.
With the internet working properly, I went on to do some more standard install-type things.
Nero 7 did not install.
WinRAR (which I hate, but sometimes need) 2.42 did not install.
Winzip 8.1 installed just fine.
PowerDVD 6 did not install.
Office 2003 installed fine.
At that point I stopped trying to install software. I checked to make sure that I was on with an administrator account. There's probably a setting someplace I need to change to install those other programs.
My laptop can fully support Aero Glass, so I used it. It drives me insane, but I kept it running because I pretty much have to get used to it. I actually kind of like the transparent window edges, but the windows that "pop" out at you are annoying as all hell.
The start button (well, it's a circle now) and start menu are arranged slightly differently, but are not so different as to be unusable. There's a permanent Run/Search command line that really isn't labelled as such, but I like having it where it is. Frequently used programs still arrange themselves on the left side of the start menu, while the right is reserved for categories of configuration tools.
And all I have to say right now about the control panel is... I think that it will be a source of aggravation. Even in "Classic View", there are still sub-categories of functionality that are hidden beneath higher-level applets - "Personalize" is where Mouse Pointers, Themes and Display Properties live, while "System" has links to Security, Restore and the "System Properties" that we're used to seeing - now called "Advanced System Properties". Classic View control panel is pretty much the second thing I change after installing XP Pro, but even classic view here isn't satisfying.
Also, there are way MORE control panel applets, and some functionality has been redistributed. There are at least three different applets with Network-related tools that used to be concentrated with [Network Adaptor Name] Properties.
Oh, and hey, pretty much every time you run a system tool - the ones that might need Administrator level access, or any program that is "foreign" to your Windows install, you'll be asked "Are you sure you want to run this program?" This gets really, really old when you're just looking to see what's in device manager, or to check your network connection properties.
Again, there's probably a way to turn it off, but I haven't found it yet.
The constant confirmations for administrator-type activity are COMPLETELY out of hand. Even the oldest versions of Xenix, Linux (.87 is the first kernel I used), Netware and VINES that I can remember didn't behave in such an obnoxious fashion.
Um... local search performance is much, MUCH better than any other version of Windows. We knew that was coming, but it's nice to see.
Boot time on my laptop is around 35 seconds. I was timing off a wall clock, so that's not exact. One of my students told me his 512MB A64/2800 (that's a minimum config) desktop boots the December CTP build in around 20 second; again, we knew it was going to get better or at least stay in line with XP, and that's pretty much what it did.
Speed? It's certainly not faster than Server 2003. I don't use XP a whole lot, but it certainly didn't impress me in that department. I did end up feeling that the animations etc. from the new interface were getting in my way and taking too long to complete.
Changes to Windows Explorer: No stupid toolbar. But also, no menu for the slow folk who want to go to Edit > Copy like they used to. The assumption seems to be that users will do Context (right) clicking for everything. Again, I think that's a rough change for the inexperienced; Aero is going to confuse the hell out of them.
On the plus side, I like that each element in the Path of your present location is a Drop-Down item. "C:\" drops down to reveal "A:, C: and D:" for example, while from "Personalize" in Control Panel you have "Computer" which reveals "Computer, My Documents, Control Panel, Networks" etc in its drop down, then "Control Panel" which lists all 30 control panel applets in it's drop down, and then "Personalize" with the 8 or so sub-applets that're found under it. Quite handy for the experienced user (and yes, there will be screenies, eventually).
... and that's as much as I feel like writing right now. I plan to continue my use of Vista for at least another couple of weeks. I'll write about the things that I find out as I use it, or if there's a feature someone would like me to look at, I will.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I guess I should say one more thing:
The overall user experience that I have had so far with Vista essentially comes down to a few simple statements.
It's basically Windows XP with a prettier interface.
Common Control Panel options are pretty much redistributed at random.
Security is WAY off the deep end. The best analogy I have at the moment is that it feels like being in a house where all the interior doors lock behind you; I am sure that the most likely result of this will be that everyone turns off the most onerous security options and we're left with something that's really no better than XP.
The overall user experience that I have had so far with Vista essentially comes down to a few simple statements.
It's basically Windows XP with a prettier interface.
Common Control Panel options are pretty much redistributed at random.
Security is WAY off the deep end. The best analogy I have at the moment is that it feels like being in a house where all the interior doors lock behind you; I am sure that the most likely result of this will be that everyone turns off the most onerous security options and we're left with something that's really no better than XP.
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
Thanks for the exhaustive feedback, Merc. You're awesome!
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
Nice write-up Merc.
From what you have said so far, I am not looking forward to using or fixing Vista. (Though I stay as far away from fixing computers as possible these days, except for myself, my parents, friends, etc.)
Sounds cumbersome and excessive at every level.
From what you have said so far, I am not looking forward to using or fixing Vista. (Though I stay as far away from fixing computers as possible these days, except for myself, my parents, friends, etc.)
Sounds cumbersome and excessive at every level.
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
I'm constantly amazed at how blunted-edge I am. Win-XP is on the way out, and I'm installing it for the first time. 
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
You should go for 2003 Server, much better choice than XP.
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
Wanna gift me a copy? 8)
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
Ask Mercutio. I am under the impression that he is rich beyond belief.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I'm what?!?
I drive crappy old cars, live in a crappy apartment and dress like I'm homeless.
I drive crappy old cars, live in a crappy apartment and dress like I'm homeless.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Downloadable 120-day trial of Windows Server 2003. Requires a passport ID.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Well, I was all set and ready to spend another day using Vista and to write about it it, but I had something funny happen when I turned on my Vista machine just now.
All the way through boot-up, my display was completely normal. Normal colors, normal aspect ratio, normal everything.
When I logged in, my screen switched to an incredibly low-contrast greyscale mode. Indistinguishable from the display being off, except for the mouse pointer, which remained perfectly visible. I turned the lights in my windowless office off, but I still can't see the screen well enough to interact with the computer, although I can make out the rought shape of the start menu and the like.
Same in Safe Mode.
Plugged into a CRT, the display is the same - it's Vista Purgatory.
I booted a Slax liveCD I happened to have handy, and of course that's fine. I ghosted an XP image back onto the machine and that's OK too (just OK, not fine, because XP is never fine).
I haven't used the laptop for anything since I shut it down last Wednesday.
So I don't know what the hell is up. I guess I'll just reinstall Vista and see if the problem repeats itself.
All the way through boot-up, my display was completely normal. Normal colors, normal aspect ratio, normal everything.
When I logged in, my screen switched to an incredibly low-contrast greyscale mode. Indistinguishable from the display being off, except for the mouse pointer, which remained perfectly visible. I turned the lights in my windowless office off, but I still can't see the screen well enough to interact with the computer, although I can make out the rought shape of the start menu and the like.
Same in Safe Mode.
Plugged into a CRT, the display is the same - it's Vista Purgatory.
I booted a Slax liveCD I happened to have handy, and of course that's fine. I ghosted an XP image back onto the machine and that's OK too (just OK, not fine, because XP is never fine).
I haven't used the laptop for anything since I shut it down last Wednesday.
So I don't know what the hell is up. I guess I'll just reinstall Vista and see if the problem repeats itself.
ddrueding
Fixture
Installing the latest CTP into a VMWare machine. If anyone is interested in trying it, you need to jump through some hoops to make it work. Let's see how it goes...
ddrueding
Fixture
Posting from Firefox on Vista x64 Beta 2 (Build 5308).
When doing my research into performance tweaking, I ran into this which made me laugh out loud. While poking about in the control panel called "performance", a tooltip popped up saying I had programs starting with windows that were slowing my boot process. I thought it was fantastic that windows made users aware of this crap, and went to see what was on there:
http://www.kupkepeyla.com/david/slowwindows.PNG
When doing my research into performance tweaking, I ran into this which made me laugh out loud. While poking about in the control panel called "performance", a tooltip popped up saying I had programs starting with windows that were slowing my boot process. I thought it was fantastic that windows made users aware of this crap, and went to see what was on there:
http://www.kupkepeyla.com/david/slowwindows.PNG
ddrueding
Fixture
And it seems MS Paint in Vista can't save compatible PNG files...
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Latest Vista Annoyances:
1. Being told that I don't "have permission to copy this folder" on a network share... which is a FAT32 volume on a network appliance that really doesn't even understand the concept of secured access.
Is the problem local? If so, what is it? I don't have NTFS permissions on the volume I'm copying to and I'm using an Administrator account in a futile effort to cut down on the number of bullshit prompts for authorization Vista gives me.
2. Every network connection you make creates a new network connection on the list of available networks. I walked through a building with several small wireless networks today. I found out that I now have Network numbered 1 through 17 that Vista is apparently aware of. What are they? I have no idea. Was I connected to them? I'm not sure. There's a delete button to remove them, but they don't go away when I try it.
1. Being told that I don't "have permission to copy this folder" on a network share... which is a FAT32 volume on a network appliance that really doesn't even understand the concept of secured access.
Is the problem local? If so, what is it? I don't have NTFS permissions on the volume I'm copying to and I'm using an Administrator account in a futile effort to cut down on the number of bullshit prompts for authorization Vista gives me.
2. Every network connection you make creates a new network connection on the list of available networks. I walked through a building with several small wireless networks today. I found out that I now have Network numbered 1 through 17 that Vista is apparently aware of. What are they? I have no idea. Was I connected to them? I'm not sure. There's a delete button to remove them, but they don't go away when I try it.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
It doesn't appear to be possible, from my efforts. Vista has to be loaded on a clean disk, and other versions of Windows overwrite its system files. I guess if I really wanted to I could back up ntldr and the like and restore them after OS#2 is loaded, but frankly that's more work that its worth.
Vista annoyance #840,561: Windows Explorer crashes a lot. A Lot. I'm talking a Windows 3.1 definition of a lot, that being a couple orders of magnitude more than a Windows 98 or Windows 2000 definition of a lot. Constantly might be a better word.
#840,562: Vista's Wireless network detection seems to have little or no basis in reality. My laptop is showing networks that I happened to walk through for five minutes a couple days ago while I thought the machine was on standby as "available", but doesn't see the signal boosted 802.11g Linksys AP that I'm 15 feet away from with clear line of sight.
Vista annoyance #840,561: Windows Explorer crashes a lot. A Lot. I'm talking a Windows 3.1 definition of a lot, that being a couple orders of magnitude more than a Windows 98 or Windows 2000 definition of a lot. Constantly might be a better word.
#840,562: Vista's Wireless network detection seems to have little or no basis in reality. My laptop is showing networks that I happened to walk through for five minutes a couple days ago while I thought the machine was on standby as "available", but doesn't see the signal boosted 802.11g Linksys AP that I'm 15 feet away from with clear line of sight.
Maybe MS are finding the same things as you Merc. Seems it has now slipped to Q1 2007. Who'da thunk?
http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml?articleId=183701609
http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingnews.jhtml?articleId=183701609
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
That's good. This is the worst MSbeta I can remember using.
timwhit
Hairy Aussie
As bad as some of the Windows 98 betas? I remember those being pretty flakey.
Tannin
Storage? I am Storage!
mubs said:I'm constantly amazed at how blunted-edge I am. Win-XP is on the way out, and I'm installing it for the first time.
You are in front of me, mate. I have never installed it on any of my own systems. I have tried keeping it as preinstalled on the last two laptops, but those installs lasted 10 minutes (the Toshie) and 20 minutes (the IBM) before I cracked the sads and reached for the W2K CD.
Bozo
Storage? I am Storage!
sechs
Storage? I am Storage!
Mercutio said:
I talked to some of the folks that I know involved in working on applications for Vista. Apparently, its security breaks a lot of stuff -- some of the programs these guys are working on won't work without at least power user privilidges. The current fix is to basically ask Microsoft explicitly allow the blocked actions; so the application will work at their whim.
Who said service monopolies are good?
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
About half the apps I try to install fail for one reason or another.
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
XP must belong to the same category as ATI/NVidia :lol:. I'm not terribly fond of XP, but thought it wise to move to it when building a new system. 2k's a dead product in terms of support and future 3rd party software releases (for eg., Adobe Premiere runs only on XP). XP is faster on some ops. I'll change the defaults any way so I don't have to put up with the crud that's in XP. I'm certainly not advocating change for change's sake! Are you still using OS/2 or have you finally abandoned it?Tannin said:You are in front of me, mate. I have never installed it on any of my own systems. I have tried keeping it as preinstalled on the last two laptops, but those installs lasted 10 minutes (the Toshie) and 20 minutes (the IBM) before I cracked the sads and reached for the W2K CD.mubs said:I'm constantly amazed at how blunted-edge I am. Win-XP is on the way out, and I'm installing it for the first time.
Tannin
Storage? I am Storage!
Only one OS/2 machine these days, Mubs (I used to have three) but it is my second-most used system (after the laptop), runs 24/7 and takes care of the really important stuff because I'd never trust those jobs to Windows, and also becuse it is just so much nicer to use for actual work (I'm talking business tasks here). I'm thinking of re-comissioning the second OS/2 box because I've missed it ever since I swapped it over to Win2K - but then I used to miss things on that second unit that Win2K does better ..... having two machines there seems ike overkill, can't decide what to do.
I'll have to retire the OS/2 machine one day, no doubt, but there still doesn't seem to be any particular reason to do so. When the day finally arrives - if[/i[ it arrives, I may retire before then - there seems to be only two possible replacements on the horizon, Linux or Free BSD. For those jobs, Windows will never cut it.
I'll have to retire the OS/2 machine one day, no doubt, but there still doesn't seem to be any particular reason to do so. When the day finally arrives - if[/i[ it arrives, I may retire before then - there seems to be only two possible replacements on the horizon, Linux or Free BSD. For those jobs, Windows will never cut it.
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
Interesting perspective Tannin. For the last year . . . or maybe it's been two year already . . . I've used the next step above a vomit box for my hardware needs. It has a Celeron 2.53 GHz CPU, 512 MB RAM, WD hard drive, onboard Intel Graphics/LAN/Audio, and Windows 2000. Yet it competently runs all of my data recovery software, drive to drive copy programs, DVD/CD burning software, and folding@home 24/7. All of this crammed into a mini-desktop case. It never gives me any problems.
mubs
Storage? I am Storage!
Heck, if what you have does the job, why change it (this system I'm using is 5+ years old)? In your case Tannin, if the apps you need will run on OS/2, then I think it makes perfect sense to keep using OS/2. Unfortunately I never got to play with it. Someday it will become imperative to go to a 64-bit + flat-memory model, and it certainly looks like before Vista becomes mature enough, the *UXes will already be there. So as of now it looks like this copy of XP I bought is the last payment I'll make to MS for an OS.
Tannin
Storage? I am Storage!
Yup: for most practical tasks, a modest system is all you need these days. My OS/2 box is an Athlon XP 2500 with 512MB (or is it 1GB? 512 I think), and Matrox G400 32MB AGP. Oh, plus an 18GB X15 and Adaptec controller for it, which is hardly "modest" but is quite old now. No real plans to upgrade the hardware.
In fact the only hardware upgrade I really want - isn't it always the way - is the one I can't have: a 17 inch or 19 inch high-res screen, a 50% or better CPU upgrade, and around 300GB 7200 RPM hard drive ...... for my laptop.
sigh
Either way, we can be very confident that none of the machines I mentioned will ever run Windows Vista. I might allow the XP Pro to remain on my next laptop, if IBM ever produce a model that I actually want, but that remains to be seen. I much prefer 2000. The biggest sticking point, of all little things, is the f*%$#@ing mangy dog on the search function. (No offence to our own Mangy Dog, who is a complete gentleman, of course.) Yeah, yeah, you can turn the woofer off, but you still have a crippled interface to a search function that was perfectly good in the Windows 95 betas, and remained just fine through 98, 2000, and even the otherwise pox-ridden Moron Edition.
Oh, and I retain severe doubts about using a product - any product - that requires "activation". Big problems there for a machine that spends long periods of time in the outback where there are no telephones, let alone broadband connections.
In fact the only hardware upgrade I really want - isn't it always the way - is the one I can't have: a 17 inch or 19 inch high-res screen, a 50% or better CPU upgrade, and around 300GB 7200 RPM hard drive ...... for my laptop.
sigh
Either way, we can be very confident that none of the machines I mentioned will ever run Windows Vista. I might allow the XP Pro to remain on my next laptop, if IBM ever produce a model that I actually want, but that remains to be seen. I much prefer 2000. The biggest sticking point, of all little things, is the f*%$#@ing mangy dog on the search function. (No offence to our own Mangy Dog, who is a complete gentleman, of course.) Yeah, yeah, you can turn the woofer off, but you still have a crippled interface to a search function that was perfectly good in the Windows 95 betas, and remained just fine through 98, 2000, and even the otherwise pox-ridden Moron Edition.
Oh, and I retain severe doubts about using a product - any product - that requires "activation". Big problems there for a machine that spends long periods of time in the outback where there are no telephones, let alone broadband connections.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
The Dual Core Thinkpad X60 is making me think very hard about how much I like money, Tannin. Of course, that's the other way. It's only got a 12" screen. But it weighs 3lbs and lasts over 5 hours on a single battery.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
Excel stuff works pretty well. I've seen Word documents that would choke Writer, but most things are perfectly fine. I don't think textboxes are all that common in Word docs. Are they?
Buck
Storage? I am Storage!
LiamC said:
I have had good success LiamC. On my new system I no longer run Microsoft Office, just OpenOffice. The only one file that gave me problems was a .pps file. Typically PowerPoint opens this, but a standard PowerPoint file is .ppt. Openoffice didn't inherently open this file until I made a manual association. Now it works.
Text boxes in Word documents do happen. It's sort of a clumsy tool in Word, so most people just use the standard word processing features.