Slashdot Mirror
Windows 7 Hits Build 7600 (Possible RTM)
An anonymous reader writes "One Microsoft Way is reporting that Microsoft has significantly incremented the build number of both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2: 'Reports across the Web are pointing to a build 7600 for both Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2. This is significant because the bump in the build number would suggest that Microsoft has christened this build as the Release to Manufacturing (RTM) build. The RTM is expected to be given out to Microsoft partners sometime later this month and launched on October 22, 2009, the day of General Availability (GA). The build string is "7600.16384.090710-1945," which indicates that it was compiled just a few days ago: July 10, 2009, at 7:45pm. Microsoft only increments the build number when it reaches a significant goal, and the only one left is the RTM milestone. The last builds that were leaking were all 72xx builds, so such a large bump is suspicious but at the same time it is something Microsoft would do to signify that this is the final build.'"
"First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceedest on to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it." Amen.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
For the rest of us: Not so much.
I just got sweaty palms and fell out of my chair.
Seriously? Windows 7? People are really going to play that game?
Does anybody recall any other launch of a Windows product? They always claim to have fixed all the bugs present in the previous one. They have claimed since Windows 98 that there is better security. Vista was supposed to be XP that had been fixed, remember?
After all these years and years of people eagerly anticipating the next Windows provide a lot of laughs, but it's really very sad when you think about it.
Windows 7 is the last appeal from death row. The same tired promises as ever, wrapped in fancier 3D windowing effects.
I have a question I've been trying to figure out. What exactly is going to be the effect of Windows 7? I think there are a few issues, but I haven't been able to come to a clear conclusion. There are a few issues:
* Windows 7 is like Vista, except without as many obvious bad things.
* If Microsoft writes it, people will put it on their systems. OK, Vista showed that's not entirely true, but it didn't cause a switch away from Windows, only down to XP. So, will people begin to switch away from Microsoft, or move on to Windows 7? All it has to do is be no more annoying than XP.
* Netbooks: hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper. WIll this cause people to switch to Linux (it's a $50 - $100 savings on a $200 computer)?
* Apple: OSX keeps getting better and better. Will they make enough improvement that people want to switch away from Microsoft?
I don't really know the answers to these issues, but I've been trying to figure out.
Qxe4
This does indicate it may be the RTM build, but not because it has a new build number... but because it has a build number ending in 00.
Larry Osterman's post Thinking about Windows Build numbers goes into this in more depth.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Gaming.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
is the rc code just frozen in time with security updates or are they going to upgrade it to rtm levels? i'm asking because i was actually thinking about installing the rc and using it for a while on a laptop. $300 is not much less than the cost of the damned laptop. You think OEM licenses will be cheap? :)
zosxavius photography
I believe a pwned is called for.
Oh, you mean, random shit that used to work, doesn't anymore?
Why can't I connect to my wireless network at home?
Why does krunner randomly crash? Or Plasma?
On second thought, maybe you're right. It's things like this that are the reason I left Windows in the first place. Maybe it's time to go back.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
apple needs better hardware like a real desktop to get people and big business to switch. The mini is too limited but the big part of that can be fixed by having a easy to open case and a desktop hd and imac does not fit in to there reuse the old displays that a lot of do. Also the mac pro is bad as they can get a systems from dell , hp and others for about $1000-$1500 less with more ram and better base video card.
I'd like to see nicknames, like:
Bellicose Bill
or
Ballistic Ballmer
or
Screamin' Steven
rather than boorrrrring build numbers.
Just sayin'.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is insufficiently documented.
"As Microsoft strives to migrate their core technologies from the desktop onto the Web, so too is their propaganda machine migrating from the established press to the informal social web. Microsoft shills are invading social web sites everywhere - in forums, discussion groups, comments to news items, edits to Wikipedia, manipulation of search engines, comments to blogs - posing as innocent participants to promote their agenda and counter wide spread complaints about their shady marketing practises. Even in the comments section of blogs by Microsoft employees on their own corporate site they employ sock puppets to say the things the author felt inappropriate to say directly. They race to place their shill postings at the top spot in the comments section of news and blogs, or perhaps they are given advance notice enabling them to do this where they are a sponsor. The evidence is here on Slashdot for all to see, without embellishments from me. What I say here is amounts to only a digest of hundreds of postings by others. A careful investigator can see for himself the evolution of discussions on Microsoft related issues, especially those accusing them of their usual hard ball tactics. As one reads from Slashdot's historical record on through to recent times, the evolution of Microsoft's efforts to pervert Slashdot's discussions becomes readily apparent. Microsoft's ambition is to twist internet discussions around a full 180 degrees until these discussions become a platform for propaganda from Microsoft's "Ministry of Truth". A study of the comments of the shills posted here can be cross-correlated with postings on other sites. Their pattern of saturating a discussion with shill postings, and the repeating of mindless memes becomes obvious. Their harassment, ridicule, and suppression of criticisms is designed to intimidated those who would speak out against them. They seek to establish and enforce a discipline of giving Microsoft "fair treatment" and their propaganda the same consideration and respect a real person would deserve. In the process they are destroying Web 2 as we know it. This insidious attack on the infrastructure we rely upon to form our opinions in a complex world has both a direct and an inhibitory effect on free speech as a side effect. We must stop this while it is in its infancy. Once it fully established, it will become much more difficult to root out, and other ruthless corporations, organizations, and even governments will want to emulate the success of Microsoft's campaign. This is the nightmare vision of the end of the social internet as we know it."
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1284651&cid=28502473
That's nice but wake me up when it leaves beta^H^H^H^H SP1
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
Does this mean I can go out on the streets dancing naked and burning my Linux and OS X DVDs?
For future reference:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9135199
is a better URL
Just like:
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/07/12/2324216/Windows-7-Hits-Build-7600-Possible-RTM?art_pos=1
is only:
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/07/12/2324216
While I think all MS products are pretty craptacular, and I'm mostly a UNIX fan for desktop / engineering work, I did buy the $99 Win 7 Pro upgrade preorder just to keep up with a reasonably modern generation of windows. Pragmatically I realize that for at least a couple of more years there will still be a lot of software that runs on Windows and not UNIX / MAC / whatever, so it is good to be able to run Windows when needed (even if only from a VM under your desktop UNIX / MAC). ...), networked backup, transportable file metadata, good integrated search/metadata database based content organization functionality, decent file systems [think ZFS], decent backup, or decent drive content organization. Abolish the registry, turn it into a SQL database if you must, make it possible to in
Now that 64 bit hardware and 4G+ RAM is so ubiquitous, and relatively inexpensive, I find that virtually all the PCs my family has or would be likely to get would be best served by a 64 bit OS, and having 4GB or or likely more of RAM. Thus I feel that XP-32 has pretty much outlived its usefulness as a primary desktop OS for mid-range or better new desktop hardware. That's also true because it seems likely that evolving security patches, security products, as well as media application products will likely function better on Windows 7 / Vista than on XP SP3 as 2010 and beyond progresses and XP becomes more and more of a legacy OS and Vista/Win7 become more and more mainstream.
The things I like about Win 7 are that they upgraded Media Center / Player for H.264 / Divx etc. They didn't go nearly far enough in terms supporting of other codecs (no Ogg, etc.), bad media format / file portability, no intrinsic HD-DVD / Blu-Ray playback (WTF?!), still bad DRM, etc. But at least the more ubiquitous Media Center functionality with integrated H.264 is a good step forward. I'm not thrilled about Silverlight / WPF, et. al. but I concede that to the extent that they'll be perhaps popular, Vista / Win7 are reasonably convenient desktop media platforms to run them on.
They got a clue and included all the features (supposedly) of Home Premium (e.g. Media Center) into the Pro. version, which I applaud -- doing otherwise in Vista was simply deplorable. Personally I think they should have just let all the features of Ultimate be the standard for Home and Pro use, and I think their crippled feature edition product differentiation still sucks (no ubiquitous Home/Pro bitlocker and no Home EFS and no 'full' Home backup tools?! WTF?!), but at least they've taken a tiny step toward making their mid-range Pro edition useful for cases where multimedia support and less crippled networking/security/backup [relative to 'Home Premium'] is important.
So basically I think that 64 bit is the 'killer feature' for mid-range or better desktop use for either Vista or Windows 7. It is good they decided to include 64 bit versions for Home and Pro editions, they should REALLY push for 64 to be the primary installed product, with 32 basically being for some netbooks and really underpowered legacy hardware with 1-3 GB RAM. In the respect of facilitating 64 bit access, Win7 is better than Vista since they made you jump through hoops to get Vista 64 Home/Business in many cases. Maybe by the time they get to Win 8 we'll finally get decent backup / RAID / NAS support, a better filesystem with WinFS and reasonable metadata support and no crippled path length limitations on NTFS, better codec / transcoding support, and truly ubiquitous encryption access/support. By Win 8 they ought to bundle next generation "home server" cloud support into the "family pack" too and have some kind of distributed secure cross-PC "cloud" sync/incremental backup system with transparent file synchronization and off-site encrypted backup integration APIs for internet hosted services like Carbonite, Wuala, Mozy, Windows Live SkyDrive, etc. too -- it's all overdue by years.
They apparently just don't get it about providing good file security (including bitlocker, PGP, ACLs
A while back coke.. err i mean microsoft.. introduced "new coke".. err.. i mean windows vista.. which was an unfort--*cough*purposeful*cough*--unate flop.
Then, they released "coca-cola classic".. err.. i mean windows xp again...err.. i mean "windows 7".. which the public raved was so much better than before!
HURRAY! *cough*and microsoft gets away with zero innovation by simply engineering expectations*cough*
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
Yes, that's one of their new features, in response to similar concepts introduced by the Linux and Apple communities.
I have left slashdot and am now on Soylent News. FUCK YOU DICE.
Did you get first or third?
You can fool some of the people All the Time ...
"And that's our target market", said the marketing droid.
Say what you will about Microsoft, but they are geniuses when it comes to marketing. I mean they can tell everyone that 6.1 is equal to 7.0, and sell Vista to the same pissed off customers again at $400 a head.
/^([Ss]ame [Bb]at (time, |channel.)){2}$/
This is quite astute.
I'd also like to point out another story detailing a strong statistical anomaly in the speed at which anti-microsoft and pro-linux stories get "buried" on social news sites.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
apple should have thinker systems and not higher pried thin system come on the older imacs had real video card now most of them have 9400m at with laptop dual cores at prices where you can get a desktop core i7 systems with much better video cards at the same price levels.
And PEOPLE WANT MATE Displays, Not have cpu power tied to screen size, easy to get HD come on the dell and others AIO have at where it is very easy to get to the HD, and whats up with mini DP and no free mini dp to DP and mini dp to dvi cable?
The mac video cards should of had a full size DP port with a free DP to mini dp cable as well maybe even 2 DP ports with a free DP to DVI DL cable and DP to mini DP.
I pre-ordered a copy for myself and my son.
Of course my Laptop will dual-boot both Windows 7.0 Pro and Fedora 11, so that if Windows 7.0 fails me, at least I have Fedora 11 to use. I will try to use the Windows XP virtual machine option with 7.0 Pro to run legacy software.
My son has been begging me for Windows 7.0 so I got him a Windows 7.0 Home Premium, I could not afford two 7.0 Pro copies, so I bought him a Home Premium version. If he needs the 7.0 Pro version Microsoft allows an upgrade to 7.0 Pro via the Internet and I can afford that later if needed.
If the XP virtual machine does not work to well, I'll be buying two old copies of XP Pro from pricewatch.com and run them in Sun VirtualBox later. I hope I don't have to do that, but the current Windows XP licenses would be invalid after the upgrade to 7.0.
My son's system uses a wireless adapter that does not have Linux support, and he showed no interest in Linux, most of his games work in Windows XP, and if they don't work in Windows 7.0 I'll look for upgrade patches to work with 7.0 or he'll have to skip playing those games until I can get a virtual machine set up to play his games.
Both systems were Vista boxes, downgraded to Windows XP Pro, so they should run Windows 7.0.
I know I am taking a risk, but I hope to find out what problems friends and relatives will have when they upgrade to Windows 7.0 as they'll be calling me and asking for help. Upgrading from XP requires a reformat and reinstall, and most of my friends and relatives are using XP and some are using Vista.
I preordered before July 11 to qualify for that half off special on upgrade copies. I am not sure if the old XP licenses will still work if Windows 7.0 fails and I have to reinstall XP, or if I have to buy new licenses for XP to switch back to XP.
Anyway I could always buy my son a wireless card that works with Linux and install Fedora 11 with WINE and see if that runs his video games better than Windows 7.0 and save money on XP licenses and virtual machines, and teach him how to use Linux as an alternative. But it is more important that he learn how the Windows upgrade process works and any troubles with it and how to resolve them. Right now to him the Windows 7.0 is cool, but if there are issues and it won't run his video games, he will learn that sometimes newer technology is not always better and even if it looks cool, it might not always do what he wants it to do. Because eventually they will upgrade to Windows 7.0 in his school, too bad they don't support Linux.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
You mistook Win7 for XP.
This should be modded up, if not for the discussion that may come after. ASTROTURF!!!
Oh, you mean, random shit that used to work, doesn't anymore?
Why can't I connect to my wireless network at home?
Why does krunner randomly crash? Or Plasma?
On second thought, maybe you're right. It's things like this that are the reason I left Windows in the first place. Maybe it's time to go back.
Ubuntu is unabashedly and unequivocally built around gnome.
complaining about kubuntu not performing properly is like complaining a stretched hummer limousine doesn't perform to proper off-road specs. Sure they're based on their respective distro/model, but they're both a completely new animal.
If you want a true offroad vehicle you get a military surplus HMMV, if you want a truly seemless out-of-box KDE experience you should get a linux distro built around KDE.
Though, to be candid, I think GP's comparison of windows to kubuntu is humorously apt given the kludgy nature of windows in general (for the record, I use neither windows nor linux, i'm a mac man after a decade of using windows and 2 years of trying out linux distros)
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
As soon as you can hook me up with a link confirming the bullshit you're spewing across my screen, I'll believe you. In my experience, my frame rate has gone up by 20-40 depending on the game. GTAIV has a 25fps increase.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
They are still making "Windows?"
That's cute. I guess there's always a market for retro stuff.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
I'd suck nine dicks to get a job posting pro-Microsoft stuff online. Just got laid off and would LOVE to get a check while still being able to troll people like you.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
I plan to purchase a copy and install it, having skipped Vista as I didn't have "Vista capable" hardware for the past couple of years. The old WinXP box just kept chugging along, and I didn't really "need" to upgrade. But with XP getting a little long in the tooth and Microsoft dropping free support/patches for XP in a year or so, it's time to "invest" again.
However, I'll be upgrading my CPU (P4 3.8 GHz) before I consider springing money on Windows 7. What I might do is buy the upgraded CPU and Windows 7 at the same time so I can get an OEM edition instead of wasting money on a retail version.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
Windows 7: There are so many versions to choose from...
As opposed to, say, Linux distributions?
You can start with mine.
-- Steve
Performance numbers so far show the games to run at the same speed _or_slower_ under Win7.
Google begs to differ: http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/25/windows-7-edges-out-vista-for-gaming-in-thorough-benchmark-tests/
However, common sense does tell you not to benchmark a beta OS.
They are a blessing and a curse. They can be very amusing as they attempt to argue their points from the shallow depth of their experience. I've seen them attribute all manner of things to Microsoft: multitasking, BSD, heirarchical filesystems, multithreading, shared libraries, and on and on. But they can be bullheaded in their attempts to keep their post count up and their scripts are necessarily shallow as there can only be so many response tabs in a talking points folder. Their command of American idiom can be amusing too.
I dread the inevitable "my favorite feature is more important than your favorite feature because..." threads. May FSM protect us from any of that garbage being posted as an actual article. Bangalore must be a dismal place that hundreds of people will line up for a job blogging in a cube 3' square for 12 hours a day for a couple bucks a day.
They're not the doom of Web 2.0, but they can be a nuisance. We're at the same point we were at before the launch of Window Vista - attempting to build momentum and energy for a huge launch day where people stand in line to get the product at midnight. I don't see it happening yet, but they could get that going.
I propose that we call them MATT: Microsoft AstroTurf Team.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
He meant gaming. Not shitty not-supported almost-works-properly retrogaming.
Although I'm not really doubting your FPS stats (and I actually quite like Win7, and generally despise Vista), I think a large portion of people touting Win7 is "way better than Vista" is because their Vista installation has been there for 2 years and has a bunch of stuff installed in it, their Win7 was probably cleanly installed a month ago after the latest Beta/RC.
Well, since the number of distros is used as an argument to explain the failure of linux in the desktop (I do believe that is simply a stupid argument, but, well...) then Win7 is doomed...
But isn't that problem created by the same people that complain about it? (ie: if you don't switch, the "professionals" won't make games.) So who's going to make sacrifices to make your life better through competition and why do you go out of your way to stand in their way and ridicule them?
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
The dd command's been around for almost 40 years, and does about the same thing.
Yes, but whatever Linux distro I install, I can make it work like any other without having to pay extra.;)
Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
The main change is that Microsoft goes back to marketing a product people actually want. From what I can see, pushing Vista damaged their credibility pretty strongly, but with 7 they'll likely regain much of that trust, and in fact already have with the open beta/RC.
Let's fix that - a product people might actually want. It's well established that Vista is a product that people don't want. Whether or not Vista 7 is a product people actually want will depend on what's in the RTM version: whether it's more useful than XP, if it's not more painful to use, if it supports enough hardware and software, if it includes enough new functionality to replace the utility of the inevitable incompatibilities, if it's secure enough to get through the first six months without a major worm.
Since we don't have it yet, we don't know yet how it weighs in the balance.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
I'll bite, you troll. A Dell eight 2.26GHz, 6GB of RAM, a 512MB video card, and a 500GB hard drive is $3,157. That's $142 less than a Mac Pro with the same specs (though the Mac has a hard drive with 140GB more space). $142 less - for a Dell. Try to build an eight-core HP for less than $4,000. Good luck!
What is Vista/7 stopping me from doing to my files?
I have a 400 Windows laptop that has few, if any, issues. What problems should I be seeing?
have you schpunked from it?
Skill is when luck becomes a habit.
so anonymous coward is named steve is he... you've slipped up this time, STEVE!
I'm using Build 7100 RC1, but I've seen other leaked versions pop up on TPB and Slashdot.
Anyone have a good idea of what has changed since the release candidate? Any big features or bugfixes I should be expecting for the final release?
Gaming.
Wii.
And for indie stuff, patronize developers that port to Linux.
I'll bite, you troll
The big complaint is that Apple has chosen to leave a huge gap in its product line between the Mac mini and Mac Pro.
Citation needed.
Citation needed.
Irrelevant. Unless of course you want to prove that WINE is faster than / as fast as native execution. AND that Wine is compatible with everything. Why don't you go work on those three things? Then perhaps the scorn you are receiving from almost everyone here will fade.
Although I'm not really doubting your FPS stats (and I actually quite like Win7, and generally despise Vista), I think a large portion of people touting Win7 is "way better than Vista" is because their Vista installation has been there for 2 years and has a bunch of stuff installed in it, their Win7 was probably cleanly installed a month ago after the latest Beta/RC.
That this would matter is amusing to a *nix user.
From kubuntu.org (it's the quote in gargantuan font on the FRONT PAGE, in case you missed it...)
That's why it's called Kubuntu.
ooohhh! I have no mod points to mod you insightful with. Damn! And the first intelligent post in this thread too.
Ubuntu is unabashedly and unequivocally built around gnome.
Kubuntu is a separate enough project that it should work -- and did work very well, with KDE 3.5.
complaining about kubuntu not performing properly
I was replying directly to someone who was using Kubuntu as an example of what's so great about Win7.
you should get a linux distro built around KDE.
Know of any good Debian-based ones? It's been a long time since I tried, but I remember intensely disliking RPM.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Doesn't matter.
Whichever release it is, it will never save System Restore properly.
My first install of Win 7 RC 1 got corrupted thanks to nVidia 186.18 driver.
I could not roll back because NO system restore points were available.
so i reinstalled Win 7, allocated 22% of my disk spaces to System Restore and created manual system restore points AFTER Bootup and BEFORE Shutdown every single damn time.
But when i reboot, i find all of those points missing.
Not just Manual points, but also those created by Install and Automatic are gone Kaput.
This happens every day. I i create 20 system restore points and reboot, ALL 20 are gone. If the Install service created one system restore point and i rebooted, its gone.
I contacted Technet, but while MVPs acknowledged my problem as unique, they could do nothing.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
Kubuntu is just terrible. They routinely ship broken packages. And I have a laundry list of gripes with plain Ubuntu to boot. I really don't get why they get all the hype and attention. Give this a spin for a day or two.
http://download.opensuse.org/repositories/KDE:/Medias/images/iso/openSUSE-11.1-KDE4-Reloaded-LiveCD.i686-4.2.4-Build1.2.iso
Check out the new notification system and the new system tray. Notice how stable Plasma is, even in these "unstable" builds.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
In all fairness, dd is a bit-for-bit image. That works fine except that it creates files that are just as large as the disk. Backing up a 40GB partition with 1GB worth of data on it creates a file 40GB in size. Not so great if you want to store multiple sets of images. Programs like Ghost and other more elaborate imaging tools know the format of the filesystem and copy only the actual data of the partition, making the file only as large as it needs to be, and making it possible to restore it back to a partition of an arbitrary size rather than only the exact size that the image came off of.
There are some tricks you can do to reduce the size of a dd generated image - namely defragging and zeroing out all unused space before imaging so that compressing the image eliminates much of the space, but that's a hassle and still carries the limitation of only restoring back to a partition of equal size.
Like most pro-Unix arguments that basically equate to "*nix has had xyz for ages.", saying dd is "about the same thing" is a gross oversimplification of the issue. dd has it's uses, but for most hard drive imaging tasks there are better ways to do things. I love Linux. I've used it for years, but the automatic tendency to assume that any and everything that ever occurs on any other platform has already been done better on Linux is just offputting, and usually not accurate.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Great troll, there friend! You almost had me until you said "reasonably modern" and then I lost it! I tip my hat to thee!
Seriously though, WinXP is about as good as it gets when it comes to Windows, and seriously, you could have probably stopped with Win2000 if you were willing to live without the WiFi applets, cleartype, and current support from Microsoft--although given the direction of their last few releases, that last one might not really be a negative at all...
--bornagainpenguin
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
That's one. I know dozens that have had fits with their el cheapo laptops. The damn things are cheap for a reason. Quality is dismal for the most part. Sure some of them work okay...lots don't. Good for you that you're one of the lucky one. Keep on rolling the dice and you'll come up snake eyes. I've seen some nice Sony and Toshiba laptops with great build quality....and they cost about the same as Apple.
bank accounts... That's what I get for not previewing.
Karma is for whores
Oh yeah, but Steve who?
Muahahahaa!
*twitch* DEVELOPERSDEVELOPERSDEVELOPERS *throwschair*
ah I like windows xx and I'm very happy
and someone feed the troll...
If we don't pay attention sooner or later slashdot will lose its independency
Gaming.
Wii.
The Wii is great, if you're not into gaming. Or if you're 9.
Advice: on VPS providers
From kubuntu.org (it's the quote in gargantuan font on the FRONT PAGE, in case you missed it...)
That's why it's called Kubuntu.
what makes ubuntu ubuntu rather than debian is the very tight integration between the out-of-box debian kernel and the gnome user interface.
If you pry off gnome and slap KDE on there what you have is debian with KDE and updates from ubuntu's repositories.
You can usually tell if a car doesn't have the factory stereo installed, it just doesn't look as whole.
There are plenty of distros which are built around KDE by default rather than gnome, but ubuntu is not one of them.
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
The only things that run better (like video) are due to MS spending all of their time streamlining the DRM code that will prevent you from using *your* legally purchased files wherever you want.
The DRM systems are only active when DRM-encumbered media is being played. Further, the apply no more restrictions than any other DRM-enabled player capable of playing such media.
Actually everyone...every-single-person...that I know that upgraded from ME to XP, was fucking overjoyed! Without exception. In fact ME was even more hated than Vista....far more.
I'm sorry, what was your old trolling account, so I can associate you with the right one.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
The Wii is great, if you're not into gaming. Or if you're 9.
Guess whom I babysit.
It depends though. Most of the time price != performance. For example I bought an Alienware laptop (this was back when they had a simi-decent reputation), it cost me more than a cheap laptop, but I figured that I might as well go with Alienware because at the time I had a lot of cash and figured it was just as easy to buy it pre-built then mess with a cheaper laptop to upgrade its specs. While it worked it worked great, it was a fast machine for its time, came installed with one of the (very few at the time) wireless cards that worked very nicely with Linux and overall was a great machine. Then, about 6 months into using it, the power cord stopped working, so I called up support and got another one, went through two powercords, then the motherboard died and was still under warranty so I got that replaced. Then the power cord died yet again, however they had discontinued the make of my computer and to buy a third-party one, upon buying the cord they said I should buy, it after 2 weeks of usage managed to fry my motherboard. After that I bought a cheap laptop (Compaq) and it works to this very day (although it is obsolete).
I haven't personally had any Sony laptops, but from reading some various forums they were a pain to get to work with anything but the Windows they came with. And the two Toshiba laptops I have had (a really, really, really old Satellite running Windows 3.1 and still working today, and a newer one) were all very low end (as in, the cheapest laptops I could find that ran "real" OSes and weren't a netbook) and they were decent.
And even with a cheap laptop, today I don't have that much cash, if a $400 cheap laptop lasts me a year of productive work, it could very, very, well pay for itself faster than a $1000 MacBook or Sony Vio laptop.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
CowboyNeal?
Now - that being said. Eventually I found answers for those issues, and I'm pretty pleased with Win 7. There are a couple of quirks, but I'm fairly hopeful that the final build will have them fixed. However... discrediting every pro-Win7 poster as "shill" sounds a bit ridiculous. So with that in mind, where's your evidence that this is the case? You say it's "clearly visible" -- where is your "clear proof" that GP was a shill? Am I a "shill" now because after my initial issues I have had a relatively good experience (and holy shit, a TON better than Vista - even under SP1/SP2). How do you tell the difference between real people who like Win7 and shills?
Amusingly, your post - a copy-paste of someone other AC's unsubstantiated rant actually got modded "interesting", while mine will likely get modded down.
Finally, a Mac fanboy admits there's a Mac tax!
TL;DR. You lost me at complaining about having to type out the few extra bytes in "0.0.0.0" versus just "0". You realize Windows has to read the whole 4KB (or whatever) disk cluster anyways, right? And probably "read ahead" many more clusters to fill its buffer?
And why would you use GetTickCount() to time anything? Besides being inaccurate, all it's measuring is how long it takes to return focus to your program from the context switch it makes to do a hosts lookup.
DATABASE WOW WOW
Because if you enjoy playing games that aren't brown, you must be 9.
Now benchmark Windows 7 against XP in both GPU and CPU limited graphics intensive applications.
Seriously, I've done the tests myself a thousand times. I use to dual boot Vista with XP, kept both completely up to date, all the latest drivers, patches, trimmed down my Vista services, disabled indexing and all that good stuff, and Vista was literally 40% slower in completely GPU bound applications (RTHDRIBL was my main test suite, as it is a good example of higher GPU load with modern shaders and little CPU processing). This was both with Aero on and with Aero off, both fullscreen and windowed. In reality most games these days are CPU-bound so most benchmarks probably don't reflect this gap, or to a smaller degree, that isn't the main port here, the main point is that graphics performance decreased substantially. The only two possible explanations for this are that the new user mode graphics driver model makes writing a graphics driver that is as efficient as XP's was impossible, or Nvidia's Vista driver team couldn't even come close in the performance they achieved in the XP driver for some other reason.
Fastforward a few years to Windows 7. Now I dual boot the RC with good ol' XP, and likewise again I keep both up to date, latest drivers as well and I boot back in to run the same tests every few months. RTHDRIBL shows 7 with about a 25% performance disadvantage to XP, which is an improvement I suppose, but there's still absolutely no way in hell I'm sacrificing that kind of performance for any number of new features.
I'll bite, you troll.
A Dell eight 2.26GHz, 6GB of RAM, a 512MB video card, and a 500GB hard drive is $3,157. That's $142 less than a Mac Pro with the same specs (though the Mac has a hard drive with 140GB more space). $142 less - for a Dell.
Try to build an eight-core HP for less than $4,000. Good luck!
I'll bite: HP Z600 Linux Workstation
~$2000 when you add the second CPU. Maybe another $100-$200 if you want Windows
Granted, I didn't configure all of your fancy 6GB of RAM and other silliness :)
Well, there probably won't be any decent use of DX11 (there's going to be an 11?!) for a while. There's not any decent use of DX10 or 10.1 yet, even though even the cheapest hardware has DX10 support.
The Only DX10 games that jump to mind are Crysis, Hellgate: London, and Age of Conan. Except Age of Conan never actually shipped their DX10 client to my knowledge. Kind of sad - DX10 is really shiny.
DATABASE WOW WOW
Quad-core Mac Pro + Applecare (to match the Dell's warranty): ~$2750.
Precision T3500, 2.66Ghz quad-core, 3GB RAM, 750GB drive: ~$1750.
Studio XPS, 2.66Ghz quad-core, 3GB RAM, 640GB drive, 3yr warranty: ~$900.
For nearly everyone, the $900 Studio XPS is equivalent to the $2750 Mac Pro.
look at the base mac pro and any other core i7 system same cpu power apple price $1000+ more.
Either you are being sarcastic or you have not seen any Monty Python movies...(The Holy Grail)
You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
nice job missing the point though. bravo.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
DX10 adoption was hampered by low Vista adoption, and we all know why that happened.
But Win7 looks like it's going to be very different in that regard, so far. It may be that game shops have skipped DX10 just like users have skipped Vista, but both will now happily hop onto the DX11/Win7 wagon.
Err that is a dell. Any self respecting nerd doesn't buy shit from dell or HP. I buy all my pc gear from MSY and IT estate which are basically high volume wholesalers that sell to the public. There is no option to do this with apple. You buy retail or you don't buy at all. Now if you are talking about work stuff, yes we do use dell and HP, but as they are volume orders they are a lot cheaper than the shit you just posted above.
Your announcing on a technology site that you just pre-ordered TWO copies of an OS that's in a free public beta? See if you can cancel the order, create a (free) technet account and download then burn your disks. You can use this version until March 1, 2010 and then decide if it's worth your money.
Quack, quack.
Um, dude, I'm sure I'm being trolled here but... are you complaining about wasting 6 bytes in your hosts file? If that's your big objection to Windows 7, then they've done a bang-up job IMO.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
Wow. Helluva rundown. Almost over my head, too. Now I have to do some reading, to see how well I can really understand all that. Oh, don't worry, I got the "in a nutshell" idea of it. Firewall is a layered defense, and Microsoft took away the layers. Which just begs the question: do 3rd party firewalls provide the layers of defense, or do they just rely on Window's API's? And, if 3rd party firewalls provide a good layered defense, which ones do so?
I'm glad I have a good gateway machine, lol. I just didn't realize how important it might be!!
And, I understood the HOSTS thing just fine.
Thanks for the info, and I'm off to find more. :-)
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
I'm not so sure that they are just clueless fanboys instead of paid shills. For example, there was one clueless fanboy here the other week that was convinced that RMS had written linux and that linux needed a "runas" feature despite the fact that it had been in linux since 1991 and other forms of *nix long before then ("su" and more recently "sudo"). A paid shill would know more. It's just like the cult of Apple cheering for the technological underdog this time.
Despite the hype MS Windows will get better, and hopefully by the time MS Windows 7 is released it will actually recognise my IDE DVD drive and actually install from it (yes I know it is a beta).
Personally, I game infrequently - but the half-dozen games I play (mostly HL2 engine games, CoH/V, and WoW) now run just fine under Wine.
Really? Part of the reason I installed the W7 RC is that I couldn't get L4D or any of the other games working above 1440x600 or so, and even then only at 600fps... when my friend's identically spec'd machine running XP can do 1920x1080 at 60+ fps.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
While 0 is a valid IP address and should work in a hosts file, dude, STOP ABUSING the hosts file like a clueless idiot! Seriously, 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup? That's the most retarded thing I've ever seen.
At those proportions, there are WAY more efficient methods. Think about it, a hosts file can only match fully-qualified host names. If you want to block a whole domain you waste enormous amounts of space because you have to specify each and every host. Following that, you should instantly realize that security doesn't work with blacklists, i.e. if you know that domain evil.invalid is hostile, you can't afford to miss some hosts below it. Otherwise, what's the point?
And anyways, diverting traffic to 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 is changing semantics in so many ways. Suppose you start running a local HTTP server for testing purposes and all that traffic is suddenly hitting it. It's just wrong.
"Blocking" hosts by listing them in the hosts file is an evil evil evil ugly hack conceived by clueless idiots that can't manage to run a local proxy where you could block domains with simple regular expressions and only for protocols which need them blocked. Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains so you get a semantically correct (for your purpose) NXDOMAIN error.
If you weren't abusing it like that the whole 0 vs 0.0.0.0 issue would fly past you because noone ought to modify the hosts file anyway these days. That's what DNS is for.
Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
man nice
PS: That's no compliment, type it in a shell :P
Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
It has been done in a better way on the MS Windows platform for a very long time by many third party vendors as well - effectively by dd plus a compression program and a way to identify blank space in the file system.
I'm not sure if I've every been able to get anything out of a backup by MS software without third party tools (lately I haven't even bothered to try the native recovery tools), and now I've got weird stuff like a backup of a volume that is ALWAYS 236GB even though the amount of data on the disk is steadily increasing. Some sort of rsync to another volume, ghost, partimage or dd is a solution that is more trustworthy.
Umm, so they're doing an image-based backup but apply huge amounts of logic to understand filesystems to achieve what is basically a file-based backup?
And all this just because you can't efficiently back up a running Windows system because of a myriad of open files and because you would trash the holy fragile registry?
Yeah, I can see why UNIX seems archaic to some. It's because all the stuff still works and hasn't had layers and layers of obscurity piled on top over the years*.
* Not talking about Linux :P
Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
That's not a troll at all...look at the mac product line. For desktop computers you get the choice of a mac mini or a mac pro. For an integrated desktop you have the imac.
You don't see a problem with there being NOTHING in between a mac mini and a mac pro?
I liked Vista just fine. The basic version came installed on my laptop. But I wanted Windows Media Center to connect to my Xbox, so I downloaded the RC of 7. And honestly, the only difference I've noticed is the ability to change the background at time intervals. I didn't think Vista was bad (way more stable than XP on my desktop), and I don't think 7 is anything impressive. What am I missing?
I know more people who "downgraded" from Vista to XP than I ever knew installed ME. I guess that's a major accomplishment for Microsoft's marketing - that they actually got as many people to try this dog as they did.
Strangely enough, I still use ME for some rare needs. There are peculiar things about its software stack that make it useful as a boot OS for odd jobs. But yeah, a terror that one.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
sarcastic. The powerpuff girls writers got the monkey from Monty python anyway.
I see a lot of people saying that win7 is going to be a viable OS for netbooks. I just installed it this weekend on a netbook, and frankly it was a miserable experience. When finished, it was totally unusable for two primary reasons. First the netbook has a 1024x600 10" screen, once windows was done drawing all its art in the form of huge taskbars and big ribbons, plus assorted other screen junk, about 1/3 of the extremely limited screen remained. Secondly, it was just a dog, the 1G memory and low end CPU just makes it crawl along.
"While 0 is a valid IP address and should work in a hosts file, dude, STOP ABUSING the hosts file like a clueless idiot! Seriously, 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup? That's the most retarded thing I've ever seen" - by TCM (130219) on Monday July 13, @12:12AM (#28672489)
First of all: 0 is no longer useable in the VISTA hosts file, after the 12/09/2009 patch tuesday update... & it isn't in Windows Server 2008, or Windows 7. AND, if you read lower, even "security experts" agree HOSTS are useful... so please, do read on (& the name tossing & such is not helping your case)...
Secondly: Ever heard the term "layered security"? I use HOSTS files to supplement IPSec, Port Filtering, & the native Windows firewall (to block access to known bogus sites)... &?
----
Oliver Day of SECURITYFOCUS.COM tends to "2nd my opinions" & findings, here, per his article "RESSURECTING THE KILLFILE":
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491
----
(Nuff said, on THAT account... either you favor layered security, as much of it as you can use as possible, or you don't...)
----
"And anyways, diverting traffic to 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 is changing semantics in so many ways." - by TCM (130219) on Monday July 13, @12:12AM (#28672489)
First of all - I don't run a webserver here (moot point on your part, that)... &, secondly?
Not for BLOCKING ACCESS to known bad sites, it works - I get my data from various sources for that, including SpyBot S&D's hosts file populations, SRI.com, stopbadware.org, & other reputable sources for that purpose (to stay safe - "if you can't go into the kitchen, you can't get burnt" type thinking)...
----
""Blocking" hosts by listing them in the hosts file is an evil evil evil ugly hack conceived by clueless idiots that can't manage to run a local proxy where you could block domains with simple regular expressions and only for protocols which need them blocked. Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains so you get a semantically correct (for your purpose) NXDOMAIN error." - by TCM (130219) on Monday July 13, @12:12AM (#28672489)
Oliver Day of SecurityFocus.com above would disagree with you, & so do I...
(Your name tossing & profanity doesn't make YOU sound too intelligent, so I wouldn't go tossing names anymore like idiot...)
APK
P.S.=>
"At those proportions, there are WAY more efficient methods." - by TCM (130219) on Monday July 13, @12:12AM (#28672489)
AND, I use them, in a layered security manner (things in my webbrowsers even, like opera's filter.ini, Firefox's block lists, & even IE's restricted zones) alongside IPSec, Port Filtering, & Windows native firewall (plus a CISCO technology based linksys router)... layered security is the trend & the way, & smart to do imo @ least...
(Whoever modded you up might have made a mistake, but... oh well, opinions vary - facts & noted security experts agreeing with my points, do not!)... apk
Yes, but whatever Linux distro I install, I can make it work like any other without having to pay extra.;)
That's why I use rpm pointed at the fedora repos with my Kubuntu install. Your right I don't have to pay extra.
But I haven't gotten it to work either. Maybe I'm not not l33t enough. ;)
If you enjoy playing games with friends who are sitting on the same actual sofa as you, you must *definitely* be 9.
Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
I'll bite, you troll.
Have you actually looked at the PCs in those office buildings full of thousands upon thousands of cubicles. The current hardware refresh is 1GB XP (or 2GB Vista) entry level core 2 duos.
Most big IT shops supporting thousands of users wants standardized PCs that they can swap the monitor out when it dies without having to touch the pc. And if the hard drive goes they want something they can open, plug a new one in, image it, and send it back. ditto the power supply and optical drive. And if the motherboard fails they just replace the PC.
So the imac and mac mini are both out of the running.
The problem isn't that the mac pro isn't good value for what's in the box. The problem is that almost nobody needs what's in that box. And Apple doesn't sell a box with the stuff business needs the way business wants it. They want imac specs in an easily maintained box, separate from the screen.
Apple refuses to make one, and simply puts themselves out of the running in this market.
The AC is a retard.
NTFS reads blocks. If your hosts file is smaller than 1 block, it doesn't make a disk I/O difference HOW BIG each address is.
String parsing is fast. Perhaps it would be a reduction of a couple dozen CPU cycles to read a "0" rather than "127.0.0.1", but that actually might be offset if the code to look for 0 caused a page fault due to code bloat to support special cases. Under the covers Windows would still have to alloc a SOCKADDR so we're only talking about a difference in parsing complexity.
Plus, the AC poster obviously isn't familiar with Windows DNSClient service. It is not actually necessary to parse LMHOSTS every time a network connection is made by name; the file is only parsed when it changes.
So many versions of Windows one by one, I saw Windows 7 on friend's PC, I like the interface,but my PC is old and maybe have to buy a new one if to run Windows 7. http://www.lifting-anchor.com/
The problem isn't the OS, it's every third-party's shitty tray applet/update checker/brand spammer.
Which is precisely what you get when you use an OS that has no centralised package management system: Every vendor has to invent their own retarded little update applet, because there's no other way you'll ever get updates. The entire application installation/management/update "system" is the problem and that is a fault of Windows as an OS.
mirrorshades radio -- darkwave, industrial, futurepop, ebm.
For myself all the programs I wanted to run under XP 64 crashed like a mofo. MS conspiracy I dunno. But the windows 7 public betas and rc run those programs perfectly it is almost as if MS wanted vista to be a total failure just to get even pirates to purchase windows 7.
When I want to get rid of the cruft I use 'apt-get autoremove', perhaps in combination with 'deborphan -an'. A package manager is supposed to make all that crap reversible, which is why I shudder when I come across any software that doesn't use it.
Upgrades screwing up config files, on the other hand...
I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
As opposed to, say, Linux distributions?
You mean... there's more than one?
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
If a paid MS shill knew that Linux's equivalent to "runas" is "sudo", why would he mention this at all? Most people, even on Slashdot, either don't know what either of them are and would think that the shill is speaking the truth, or don't know what 'sudo' is (same result) or don't know what 'runas' is, and of course the shill himself won't say what it is, so it would register in their head as "Windows has an important feature that Linux doesn't", which gives roughly the same effect. So maybe only the 0.01% of the population (maybe 1% here) that has a high level of experience with both Windows and Linux would be able to call out the troll, at wich point you just change your username or create a new account and start all over.
Note: I have no such experience with Windows so I may be wrong in my statement that "runas" is a Windows feature and not from BSD or Unix or wherever.
I'm not necessarily defending the method, but is the hosts file really parsed each time a lookup is performed? Surely it checks the file modification time (cached in memory) of the latest change, and if it has changed only then it parses it and adds it into its own internal indexed DNS cache? /etc/hosts every time?
You can bet DNS queries aren't performed every time you need to find google.com, so why would it read
I haven't even read GP and why he's doing it, so it may be a total waste of memory, and it sure isn't an elegant, robust solution, but I don't think it'd be as bad as you say.
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
"For nearly everyone, the $900 Studio XPS is equivalent to the $2750 Mac Pro."
Except that it's /not/ equivalent in any way shape or form. Do the Precision or Studio XPS machines have Xeon processors in them? If they only need a $900.00 machine, they shouldn't be looking at anything like a $2750.00 Mac Pro.
Oooh, we are like yang and ying. My interest seems to be declining with each revision. 3.0 was really exciting and new, 3.11 had shares and stuff, 95 wasn't all that fantastic, 98 was like a bugfix of 95, 2000 was a hugely pleasant surprise, XP meh, Vista pah, 7 is barely registering at all.
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
The HOSTS file was never intended as a filtering mechanism, and MS, et al have no obligation to make it work or continue to work for that purpose. Run a proxy or firewall.
The ludicrously minimal built-in firewall was never intended to be an anti-spyware utility. If you want to run dangerous code on your system, and not have it bypass your security, then relying on any version of Windows' firewall is insane. More than half of the windows GUI runs SUID root, for chrissakes!
Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
How does it take a "high level of experience with... Linux" to know about sudo? If you open a terminal on a Linux system these days you probably have encountered sudo.
Naah. It's more funny with the typo. :D
I just realized that the things that will make me the happiest about Win 7 (potentially) are really totally indirect effects, but ones that will really help the overall computing world / experience.
No I'm not shilling about how great Win7 is -- LINUX has done most of this stuff well / much better for years, but the point here is that the UBIQUITY of market adoption of capable OS / HW platforms will enable better momentum for these technologies / opportunities than if they were just "niche market" demands as they currently are perceived to be.
* One: 64 bit windows will be a mainstream OS that 3rd party software / hardware vendors just CANNOT ignore anymore. I've been using 64 bit for years with Vista, but lack of good 64 bit SW/HW driver compatibility has been painful. Now that a good percentage of people who buy new PCs will be having Win7/64 by default, finally SW / HW makers will support it properly just due to their bottom line.
* Two: I realize that there's nothing special about 64 bit vs 32 bit for legacy hardware, but RAM is CHEAP now (at least DDR2 is). Moore's law tells me that 8GB, 16GB, 32GB RAM will be cheap in the near future. 32 bit OS/SW was a MAJOR obstacle to taking advantage of cheap RAM more than 4GB, so getting widespread vendor support for that means we can all have more cheap RAM and not have it be considered some "power user" or "enterprise" or "server" high end thing to have 8GB, 16GB+ RAM. Maybe they'll even start putting enough RAM slots in *consumer* motherboards and add the CPU support that you'll be able to install 32GB, 64GB+ cheaply within 3 years without a server class CPU/motherboard. More RAM is one of the best/cheapest upgrades you can get for a PC, even if it is just used mostly for disc cache, that's OK. With 1TB hard drives being cheap / common, we NEED lots of disk cache RAM just to speed up the disk metadata searching and filesystem journaling / buffering. 8GB RAM is less than 1% of the capacity of a $90 1TB disc, so really we've sorely needed more/cheaper RAM just for disk buffering for a couple of years.
* Three: This is the potentially BIG thing for usability as well as the environment. The system will boot faster, shut down faster, but most crucially, it will SLEEP better, and because it will be widespread, PC / hardware / driver / SW makers will get crucified if they DON'T have BIOS / drivers / software that don't deal well with ACPI / PC sleeping / "instant on" etc. This hopefully will enable MANY more people to actually make effective use of the power saving sleep / hibernate features of their PCs, saving a huge amount of energy and energy resources and TIME. It will also greatly increase productivity for people who don't want to wait for slow boot/shutdown times, sleep/hibernate functions that don't work right, etc. I think the OS functionality has sorta started being usably reliable since Vista SP1. Now with Win7, I think the OS vendors and BIOS / SW vendors will really focus on making instant-on PCs and fast boot/shutdown a reliable "it just works" situation. Maybe we'll even start seeing ability to "snapshot" your system state hibernate style, but "bookmark" various "sessions" of the entire PC's application state so you can quickly switch between "desktops" relating to working on one thing vs. working on another thing, etc. Combing quick boot + VM technology + hibernation etc. and you could see whole new paradigms of organizing your workflow on PCs where you can load / unload whole PC configurations and application suites in a few seconds. Replace the old "dual boot" with "oh just load up this bookmarked VM or hibernated snapshot in 5 seconds" and you're running something completely different / task-oriented. Have 10 word documents, 10 PDFs, 30 browser tabs open for a single project, e.g. doing your taxes or whatever? Just have ways to snapshot/hibernate/bookmark that whole set of context as a "desktop context" and quick-boot back to it as an hibernation context or migrate it transparently to a VM snapshot or whatever when you'r
This is just load of BS!
Wii has loads of good games! The Wii has no good games BS is getting old!
Super Mario Galaxy
Super Smash Bros. Brawl
Mario Kart Wii
WarioWare: Smooth Moves
Wii Play
Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Paper Mario
Okami
Wario Land
Metroid Prime 3
Scarface
Resident Evil 4
Raving Rabbits
Medal Of honor 2
Call Of Duty World at war
Trauma Center
World of Goo
Bomberman
MadWorld
Guitar Hero: Metallica
Sonic And The Black Knight
Rune Factory Frontier
WWE SmackDown! vs. RAW 2009
Need For Speed: Undercover
Tomb Raider: Underworld
Castlevania Judgment
Sonic Unleashed
No More Heroes
Tales of Symphonia: Dawn of the new World
Arc Rise Fantasia
Phantom Brave: We meet again
Baroque
Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn
GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
Two common reasons for RTHDRIBL to run slower in Vista/7 would be that the Vista drivers (used to) have a strange problem with 4xAA which caused some performance issues. Try something different. Also, if you are running it in non-full screen, Vista/7 will force vsync on. Try enabling vsync in XP and compare, or run it full screen.
Really, RTHDRIBL isn't a very good indicator of how real games perform. Try a better benchmark.
Mempis is probably what you are looking for, as it is Debian based and built from the ground up for KDE. It is also nice and user friendly. Enjoy.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Add Company of Heroes, Company of Heroes: Opposing Fronts, Company of Heroes: Tales of Valor, Bioshock, Far Cry 2, Prince of Persia, Stalker. World in Conflict to that list (off the top of my head as well).
So what is the difference then between the Win7 distros? Because you seem to be saying there is none... as nothing will depend on something being present on one of them which is not present on the others.
Wait, why did you discount the iMac? It's still a desktop, isn't it?
Suck a long, well thought-out and insightful post, that hardly anyone will ever read because you're an Anonymous Coward.
Yes, that's why I said they are more likely to be clueless fanboys like those apple was plagued with at one point. The fanboy in question was screaming at linux and saying it was useless for lacking a feature that it had before MS Windows even went multiuser.
Hi! I'm the guy that says "Linux needs a Runas" and YES I know about Sudo. I also know Sudo equals fail. Why? Now this will get me modded troll, but fuck it, Linux guys really need to hear this. Ready? Most users will NEVER EVER use a fucking command line!!!!! Okay, got that? Is that really so hard to understand?
You may think CLI is the best thing since sliced fucking bread, but home users HATE it, okay? They look at the PC as an appliance and can't fucking stand that arcane command CLI bullshit. You start talking "sudo" or answer a problem with "open up bash and type" please follow that sentence with "Get someone to put Windows on it because this OS sucks" because that is EXACTLY what the home users will be thinking.
If you would like to read the article where I am supposed to be a shill here you go. Notice how the article is about what I need(yes I wrote it) to help sell Linux to home and SMB clients. If I was getting paid by MSFT(I wish!) they would be getting lousy return on their investment. But the simple fact that you and the above poster can sit here and seriously believe that Sudo from the CLI equals "Runas" just shows what is wrong with Linux. Geeks like CLI, IT admins like CLI, home users and SMBs fucking hate it with a passion.
There is a good reason why Apple and MSFT rule the desktop-it is because as far as their users are concerned there is NO CLI at all in their OS. It is all "clicky clicky" and GUI everything. Just the fact that you honestly think Sudo is equal to the easy of right clicking in a GUI and choosing "Runas" just shows how far Linux needs to go for the home users. I predict Win7 will be a hit, and Linux fanboys will still be here saying it is all because of shills and marketing while they run Bash for just about everything. But if Linux is ever gonna make a dent against Win7 and OSX CLI has to die. Period, full stop. You may think it's great, but the home users simply won't have it. Sorry if that makes you unhappy or makes you think I'm a shill for daring to point that out, but that's reality.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
You can only claim something is good if it is better than something else - it's relative. What else other than Windows and the Mac does Linux have to be related to? Isn't it inevitable that someone says "Linux doesn't suffer viruses like, er, the 'other operating system?'"
This is all just my personal opinion.
First of all a lot less since Linux can multitask better than Windows. No wait it's superior. It is with Linux that I can actually run as much apps as I like untill my RAM is full. Beat that. Seriously. I have 900mHz Celeron with 2GB RAM in my EeePC and it can handle it.
Secondly you don't get shitty background processes in the first place. Drivers actually work the way they should work on Linux. Okay so maybe 10% of the wireless cards have a single chip that Linux doesn't have a driver for. QQ. Win7 and Vista have a lot less.
Here be signatures
On the 0 vs 127.0.0.1 issue, sorry, 0 isn't a valid IP address. Just because a hack worked before does not mean that it should continue to.
Like what? You can't connect to your Wireless network? Have tried a distro with a newer kernel version? Lols I can troll too: My old soundcard, Printer and TV truning card do not work anymore with Win7. That's more expensive than a $15 wireless card.
Krunner and Plasma crash? I've been running KDE4 since 4.0 and have only encountered crashes whith 4.0-4.1 and when I upgraded KDE4 to an unstable release because I wanted to check out new functionality. Maybe you should try it again? BTW Win7 beta has already crashed more on me than KDE 4.0 has.
Here be signatures
I doubt it even bothers checking the date - NTFS has built-in change notification mechanisms which do not require polling.
The ignorance is rampant and unfortunate on both sides of the argument. Many Windows users (out of those who know what Linux is) think you still have to recompile the kernel to set up your hardware, and mess with text configs to get anything working. Many Linux users think that Windows doesn't have any FS or process security at all, forces to run everything as root, and bluescreens every time you move the mouse.
It's why it makes for such hilarious flamewars!
Very few people upgraded from 98 to ME in the first place.
Anyway, most people who complained about XP weren't your average Joes migrating from 9x/ME - it was all about power users who stuck to their Win2K (which was good).
I say this as an XP Pro user:
Isn't it your own fault for purchasing DRM'd crap? Oh, and a lot of games run just fine on Linux (at least the important ones, like Unreal Tournament :D) - for the rest, there's Wine or a second OS for gaming...
They still wont get it, and you wrote that big ass, frustrated post knowing it.
My advice: give up on Linux. There are more pleasant communities to be a part of, better software, and far more noble ideals worth pursuing. Find those first, and play with whatever is left over.
I'm no shill. I have several linux boxes at home and a mac mini in addition to my windows pcs, and I run a whole ton of linux servers (debian, ubuntu, vyatta) at the office running the website, imap/squirrelmail, DNS, VPN, some DHCP, a bunch of routing boxes and some fileservers. We run server 2008 for active directory, and linux for virtually everything else server-wise.
That said - ubuntu still sucks on the desktop for me, especially on laptops. I've tried to love it, I really have. But when you're running half the stuff you need in a virtual windows instance, you might as well just run windows native as save the grief.
Windows 7 is what vista should have been in the first place. I've replaced every single vista box with windows 7 RC. It's faster, it's snappier, ejecting usb keys is finally sane, media centre is a metric shitton faster and better, my other half loves the snipping tool. Is it faster than XP? I think so - my eeepc certainly runs better on 7 than XP. The hardware support is *much* better (built in AHCI support), I actually prefer the interface, and it's not about to be retired, either. Is windows 7 the best OS ever? No, there's still room for improvement. Is it better than linux? Depends upon what your needs are. Is it the best version of windows yet? Holy hell, yes, easily.
Would I pay full retail price for windows 7? No. Will I be taking advantage of technet, discounted upgrade pricing (when it finally starts in europe), OEM copies and using my schools agreement at the office to skip vista entirely and go straight to 7? Yes.
Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
If you want a true offroad vehicle you get a military surplus HMMV,
That would be Gentoo then. It's like a HMMV but with more functionality and a nasty habit of going a bit strange. Personally, I wouldn't run anything else.
If you want a true offroad vehicle you get a military surplus HMMV,
That would be Gentoo then. It's like a HMMV but with more functionality and a nasty habit of going a bit strange. Personally, I wouldn't run anything else.
so long as it burns gas at a rate of 10 gallons per mile im game *thumbsup*
VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
You think CLIs are bad? Have you tried using something like Ubuntu WITHOUT the CLI? It's even worse - 5 ways to change the same setting, and only half of them work. Oh, and only one of the five options corresponds to the one you can set via the CLI...
Sure, if all you need is Firefox and Thunderbird you're not going to be changing a lot of system settings, but even simple things like changing screen resolutions or refresh rates for multiple monitors (stuff that takes seconds in properly thought out operating systems) take hours of tweaking and research...
All in all, I don't think Linux without the command line is feasible at the moment... it's just not functional enough without it.
The missing of each non-Ultimate-version Windows distro are listed somewhere, and probably don't even number in the dozens. When you buy a cheaper version of Windows, you check the list and decide if you're willing to live without the features. IIRC you can also upgrade the version you have purchased from within the OS, so it's just a question of cash.
As for Linux... well, you download an ISO, install the damned thing hoping it'll work, find out it doesn't work because package so and so doesn't exist for the distro you downloaded, and that you'd have to compile it yourself (which includes finding, possibly compiling and installing all the packages that the package you're actually trying to install depends on). So you try to compile it, give up after half an hour, kill a bottle of vodka and throw the PC out the window (or put Windows back on it)...
"RTHDRIBL"
I'm sorry... do you need a tissue?
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
So I've never heard of you before, but you seem to like throwing your initials round APK, or Alexander Peter Kowalski.
Your initial comments seemed idiotic, you were complaining about your 15mb+ hosts file being slow to load. Sorry, but what the fuck? You have a 15mb+ hosts file? are you really that clueless about IT?
But you try and justify it all by talking about security so I figured hey, I'll see what this guys credentials are. Well, a quick search turned this up:
http://www.ca.com/us/securityadvisor/pest/pest.aspx?id=51276
A piece of software that can arbitrarily run applications invisibly? Sorry what, did you really try and throw such a security threat onto consumer's PCs??
But wait, it appears you didn't stop there, I also found this:
http://www.thorschrock.com/2008/05/19/how-to-respond-when-people-threaten-to-sue-you-on-the-web/
So not only do you produce an app. that is a massive security risk, not only do you fail to see why it has been validly categorised as such, but you throw a hissy fit and threaten to sue? Not only that, but continue to spam the comments section of that site for over a month continuing to whine?
People make mistakes though so fair enough, I figured I'm sure there's more to this guy. I found this:
http://www.thenewtech.com/forums/chit-chat/today-4378/index32.html
Er, a program built entirely around breaking the hosts file using it for purposes it is simply not intended? Again, do you have any idea about the subject you preach? Do you realise that your very own programs pose a security risk? Do you realise how trivial it would be for Malware to hide malicious redirects in hosts files of the size you are talking meaning yet another one of your programs is a vessel for anti-security?
And there's more:
http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/51009562/m/3680937305
Threatening to sue again on online forums because people didn't like the fact you were using them to advertise your dodgy Delphi programs?
Other than that, all I could find was a couple of dead web pages of yours and mention of a couple of long obsolete Delphi programs.
Your complaint is about the performance of using the hosts file for something it's never meant to be used for and the resultant performance drops of reading such a large file.
The fact that using the hosts file so incorrectly inherently severely decreases performance of DNS lookups anyway seems lost on you.
You talk of security yet you produce applications that are security threats.
You threaten to sue anyone who points out that your applications are security threats, you threaten to sue people who do not like you using technical forums to advertise your programs.
You complain here about how people obviously aren't programmers because they disagree with you yet your language of choice is object pascal via Delphi, hardly the language of choice for an expert programmer and second only to pre-.NET Visual Basic for the horifically bad bloatware it results in.
Do us all a favour, quit posting anything to the internet, spend a few years updating your knowledge to learn a worthwhile language like C++, Java or one of the .NET languages. Get a clue about security and understand why your applications are a far bigger security risk than anything you talk of and finally, stop threatening to sue anyone you disagree with.
Hell, I'm running the current development stream of Slackware64 and KDE4 here works better than the pile of crap they slapped together in Kubuntu.
Seriously!
This isn't even a snapshot. This is the edge of development.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
I think they really do not match up part by part. But who cares? Seriously, who? I am so sick of this whiny-apple-too-expensive-whatever posts.
"Freiheit ist immer auch die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" - Rosa Luxemburg, 1871 - 1919
Dude, just give it up alright and be happy, you're really getting into all this a little too much.
Actually KDE4.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Hear, Hear! I nominate you for the Rory Award For The Most Gratuitous Use Of The Word "Fuck" In A Serious Slashdot Reply. I find your argument very persuasive, can I pay you for your newletter?
Win7 was probably cleanly installed a month ago after the latest Beta/RC.
Sure that could be it, but in cases where this is NOT true, the performance differences are still present.
This old laptop I am using at the moment was a Vista RTM/SP1/SP2 (SP2 Beta insstalls even) Win7 Beta 1, Win7 RC (using modded text file to allow upgrade. This computer is nothing special execpt it is my 'testing' work horse that I throw lots of crap at all the time and for its 'time' (2005) was a nice model, having a nice P4 and a 7950 GPU.
The main thing about performance gains with Win7, and I will speak in general, but it applies very directly to this laptop, is there are lots of 'UI' level optimizations that give a faster feel. This means when you open 'Computer' or 'Documents' it pops open and subsequent use of Explorer continues to be snappy and you get around at speeds that are beyond even what Explorer in XP felt like. (In fact some of the bug reports dealt with on Win7 have been from the Explorer UI responding too fast while scrolling, etc thus making the user not fully double click as the UI has responded faster than the User.)
So there is the 'feel' and this goes beyond Explorer and also just 'feel'. Many applications have a bit more of a lightness and spark to them (3rd party as well), and this has to do with DWM optimizations and other little refining steps. There are also less 'locks', as with XP and even some with Vista, you would find the Control Panel locked up while the system was applying a setting or a dialog stick to the screen, etc. These types of locks in the OS applications and Explorer and hard to find now.
Technically there are also reasons why lower level operations in the OS not only work a bit faster, but are also smoother, as granularity has been combed through in Win7, with many kernel and various layer locks removed as they are no longer necessary.
The memory footprint and memory usage is also a big thing, and helps performance, even on higher end systems with extra RAM.
On low end systems like 512mb or 1gb of RAM, the service model has changed in Win7 with a new event based service handler, this keeps services 'alive' but not 'running' in a classical sense, which reduces the service footprint considerably.
On high end RAM systems, the flipping in and out of RAM was improved in Vista, but again refined with a few new rules in Win7. This keeps Superfetch doing good things better and also lets some of the RAM flagging added in Vista smooth out for better overalall usage of RAM for Video and other things 'extra' RAM is used for.
Gaming does see improvements in Win7.
Part of this has to do with the RTM Vista Video drivers from NVidia and ATI sucked, and where barely working, let alone optimized. As everyone here should know, Vista introduced WDDM and this was not a 'revision' but a ground up re-write of video drivers. This was great for progress, but sucked for gaming as all the years of optimizations used in games and by the video drivers either no longer applied or had to be done another way. About Jun-Sep07, this changed as the NVidia and ATI drivers caught up to the XP speeds users had 'expected' out of Vista.
So going forward with 'more' optimizations and implementation of the WDM 1.1 specifications that give the OS more 'scheduler' level control of the GPU, brings the performance up a bit from Vista. Some GPUs will see minor improvements, some will see large improvements, and as the newer WDM 1.1 revisions are optimized, these 'boosts' could even grow, while giving the GPU multi-tasking abilities of the OS a more smooth experience.
On this 2005 laptop, I see about 5-10fps boost in games between Vista SP2 and Win7. It isn't massive, but helps. On an even older laptop at my house that is a P4 with a Geforce 5600M GPU, game FPS jump about 1.5 to 2x what they ran in Vista. The funny thing about this laptop, is that it has to use the same Vista drivers from Dec 2006, as NVidia doesn't update the driver for the FX 5xxx cards past
My Vista install was for 3 months and was SP 1 after they had a chance to fix things. My Win 7 install has been for 6 months and was better than Vista straight away. It is also better than XP by a mile, and plays Fallout 3, which Ubuntu doesn't. So, at least for me, my preference for Windows 7 is based on real reasons.
I'm a fruit pirate. I bought a watermelon once, and spat the seeds in the back yard. They grew into another watermelon,
Thanks for the link.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
Mod parent up. I've had 7 installed for a while now. It was amazingly smooth for a few weeks. Now it's just as sluggish as any other windows version is after acouple months.
Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
1.) HOSTS files being unable to use "0" for a blocking IP address ... ]
[
for instance? Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners, bad websites, &/or bad nameservers (used for controlling botnets, misdirecting net requests, etc. et al).
WTF ?
Am I the only one finding this completely ludicrous ? Get a hardware firewall already, or NoScript or something.
Even back before DNS I'm not sure there were host files that large floating around.
Is this how it's done in Windows ?
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
Do you have any evidence to back this up? Im not making a claim as to whether Win7 is faster than Vista. However, what I can say, anecdotally, is that I installed a fresh copy of Vista. It sucked, badly. I then installed a fresh copy of Windows 7. Loving it. So much so that I generally don't remember that I'm using a pre-gold build of an OS.
Best analysis of why Apple fails in the corporate arena I've heard yet. Bravo.
I'd suck nine dicks to get a job posting pro-Microsoft stuff online
Says "sexwithanimals@gmail.com".... As a point of mild interest, would said dicks preferably be attached to human hosts or aren't you the picky type? :-D
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
Xbox360 is great, if you fail at gaming. Or if you have a handicap.
(Seriously though did they plan 360games to take 1 day with little difficulty each... Or are they just aiming to make it 'fun' for people new to games. Almost all my NES games were harder than 360 games)
Ah another classic post by Alexander Peter Kowalski, software developer/hyperbolic ranter. Don't take offense. That's the only way he knows to communicate.
Microsoft haven't really taken away the layers, they've just changed the underlying code structure of those layers. The firewall platform is still performing all the checks it always has, it's just integrated together now. This really doesn't mean it's less secure. Either a packet gets through each stage or it does not. If a specific stage has a vulnerability in it's still got the vulnerability at that stage if that stage is in it's own binary or not.
If we're talking about an internal threat then again disabling one or three files is going to make no difference in Windows, it's just as trivial for a malware writer.
The hosts stuff is a load of crap too, the top parent doesn't seem to understand what the hosts file is for, it's certainly not designed to be used as a 650,000 entry blacklist, it's merely meant to contain a couple of hosts and even then only as a fix for broken DNS. Filtering of base hosts should not be done in the hosts file, that's a really bad hack for someone who simply does not understand how to build their own security layer to filter inbound/outbound connections but a hack with negative repercussions - the hosts file has to be accessed and 650,000 names have to be checked every time you access a host, that's going to slow down your DNS lookups massively.
Real layered security comes quite rightly from separate devices, not separate pieces of software on a system. You might have a hardware router at the front, a hardware firewall behind it and so on. For most home users a simple router with a built in firewall is fine, but you'll probably want them separate in a commercial environment.
The real security threats don't tend to come from direct outside connection attempts nowadays much anyway simply because of the prevailance of NAT and stateful firewalls. The most prominent attack vectors now are the browser, e-mail attachments and that sort of thing, but even these are fairly trivial to defend against. Your browser should be fairly secure if you disable Javascript on untrusted sites and no one should be opening unsolicited e-mail attachments unless they're asking to be infected. The applications you use to connect out are a far bigger worry than any attempting to connect in if you're behind a NAT and/or firewall setup.
>>> First of all: 0 is no longer useable in the VISTA hosts file, after the 12/09/2009 patch tuesday update...
Someone has got himself a time machine...
Will Window 7 be able to show file extensions out of the box? Or will it keep on tricking its users to install spyware?
Dang. I don't want to be in your hosts file. That would constitute a very serious breach of something, the privacy of my computer's name, whatever.
You need your own, separate Internet.
MMO Vampire Role Playing
I keep seeing BSODs with 7 beta. Some days it works ok and some days it's crashing like mad.
Someone show me where the troll is. I can show you on google maps where the chick lived if it will help. Or I can sell someone the computer for $500 (it comes with a 22" DCD-equipped monitor with component, composite, and S-Video inputs.)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Seriously, 14MB of plain text that needs to be parsed for every lookup? That's the most retarded thing I've ever seen.
While I agree with you, Vista has two technologies which speed up this sort of thing. Actually, three. Two are shared with XP, one of which is shared with pretty much everyone in existence. Vista has disk caching, which will probably keep that 14MB in RAM at all times. If it doesn't, and you have some ReadyBoost-enabled flash hooked up, then the file will probably end up copied to flash because it will be very frequently read. Three, XP and Vista both reorg files to be contiguously located on the disk to speed up boot time.
Obviously, tampering with DNS results is a better solution than tampering the hosts file. It's not available to dumbasses though... but it seems like it should be, and it wouldn't be that hard to just give people a package that would provide it. I wonder if you can run dnsmasq on Windows :)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I'm an equal opportunity blowjobber.
Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
Facepalms don't cut it for this level of idiocy. I am not going to deconstruct this ridiculous rant piece by piece, but a few points:
Another poster already shone a light on your background, "apk". Makes for an entertaining read. Someone like you is already a standing meme in German IT news forum Heise.de. Maybe the two of you could start a joint venture?
Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
I don't care how games perform, I care about efficiency of the OS in general, and it clearly shows a defeciency. I actually write graphics applications that aren't games (crazy, I know).
Anyway, this isn't a vsync problem, I'm talking the difference in frame rate between 250 and 400 fps for Vista and XP respectively (my monitor's refresh rate is just 60 hz). Also this has nothing to do with Nvidia's AA implementation. RTHDRIBL's AA is actually done using multiple passes and jittering, since when it was released hardware MSAA on FP16 or FP32 render targets was not a supported feature, nor would it be for several years.
I know you were joking, but "Real-time High Dynamic Range Image Based Lighting". :P
That's nice. I'm using the RC and can assure you it is most definitely not faster than Vista. It is slower. Vista64 vs 7-64; both much slower than XP.
It's mainly the new drive model, switching between kernel and user mode and back to get, check, and hand off commands (make sure they won't crash the system) from the game to graphics card.
Difference is ~800points in 3dmark06 at ~13800 for me, and significantly slower framerates (60 to 45-48) in certain ares of levels in games (UT3-- no DX10 stuff in it, just DX9).
Me neither. I would expect only sensible people to believe it.
Have tried a distro with a newer kernel version?
How is this relevant? Kubuntu Hardy worked. I would assume that Kubuntu Jaunty would have a newer kernel version.
But just for fun, when I run nm-applet -- that's right, the GNOME applet -- it works. It's only when I run the KDE4 NetworkManager Widget that it doesn't.
And, it's only with the wireless network I have set up at home, which I've given a random hex key. WPA networks with passphrases work, just hex keys don't. And WEP networks certainly work fine. Of course, the way in which they work is fairly unintuitive -- in order to choose a network other than the default one, I have to go configure them, change priorities, etc, because just clicking on a wireless network will assume I'm setting up a new one every time.
Krunner and Plasma crash? I've been running KDE4 since 4.0 and have only encountered crashes whith 4.0-4.1
Good for you. I can fairly reliably make either krunner or plasma crash by toggling compositing a few times. Depending on how I do it, I can also make compositing go so slowly that just dragging a window around can freeze the window manager for 30 seconds at a time. This is KDE 4.2.
The KDE people tell me this is all Kubuntu's fault, and I could believe that. Certainly, there's blame to share. I just wanted to question the claim that Kubuntu, specifically, is any better than Win7.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
> This is absolutely not true at all.
Gutmann's FUD has been refuted numerous times. Further, it's so stupidly trivial to demonstrate (eg: output video to an analogue connection) he is wrong, it's plainly obvious he didn't do even the most basic testing.
No DRM-encumbered media == no DRM systems active.
Except that it's /not/ equivalent in any way shape or form.
Sure it is. Find some features relevant to more than a tiny minority of users that are in the Mac Pro and Precision only. If all the end user is after is a fast CPU, lots of RAM (actually, more RAM than you can put into the Quad-core Mac Pro), a good video card and multiple hard disks, then the Studio XPS is fine.
Do the Precision or Studio XPS machines have Xeon processors in them?
No, but the only difference of concern between the Core 920 and the Xeon is support for ECC RAM. Performance is the same. There's nothing magical about the "Xeon" label and hasn't been for many years. This is particularly true for single-CPU configurations.
If they only need a $900.00 machine, they shouldn't be looking at anything like a $2750.00 Mac Pro.
Thanks to the gaping hole in Apple's lineup, if you want something more than a Mini or iMac, you don't have any choice.
Any company that employs a public relations company has had the opportunity to pay for astroturfing for years. In fact, I sort of wish we could recognize and reward the companies that don't do it. In Microsoft's case, there are documents from the Iowa case which basically lays out the tactics, like astroturfing, they use to influence the public perception of their technical merits.
Now, over at ZDNet, all the Windows 7 articles are accompanied by legions of talk backs wherein the writer relates how flawlessly the beta and RC of Win7 have operated. Then, the weekend that the Wall Street Journal reports Jobs' liver transplant, Dan "Fake Steve Jobs" Lyons makes a blog post wherein he describes his frustration in trying to write an article in Word on Win7 beta while it kept crashing. He had to go to his Plan B, write it on his Mac, and he excoriated Microsoft for the quality of its software. His commenters took issue with him critiquing a company for beta software, which is a fair point. But, in one place, dozens of testimonials that they are testing it and there's never a cough in the carload and it's ready to ship now, and at another place, for an arbitrary user, it fails when he needs it to get his job done. It's possible that that's just the way it broke. I think it's more probable that some of the "flawless" posts are pr product.
Mine is only 216k and comes from here.
At those proportions, there are WAY more efficient methods...
I use a custom
I agree that it's not perfect, but it's not like I run around engaging in any risky behavior just because I have a custom
And anyways, diverting traffic to 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 is changing semantics in so many ways. Suppose you start running a local HTTP server for testing purposes and all that traffic is suddenly hitting it. It's just wrong.
Well, first of all, I don't care about being theoretically "wrong" if the actual, real-life result is "just fine." I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom
"Blocking" hosts by listing them in the hosts file is an evil evil evil ugly hack conceived by clueless idiots that can't manage to run a local proxy where you could block domains with simple regular expressions and only for protocols which need them blocked. Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains so you get a semantically correct (for your purpose) NXDOMAIN error.
Yeah, but it works. And it's easier than installing and maintaining yet more software. (I've tried a couple proxies in the past and both were non-trivial to get working.) And regarding this: "Or running a local DNS cache where you could blacklist domains"--didn't you just say "you should instantly realize that security doesn't work with blacklists"?
All I know is that whenever I go to another computer and get swamped by ads, I'm reminded of how great my little system is.
One more thing: if all you want to do is block an ad or a software update or a validity check, WHO GIVES A FUCK if you get a "semantically correct NXDOMAIN error"?!?!?!? I don't lie awake at night wo
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
Your response is quite the opposite of getting the best of a troll as it is quite obviously emotional. Me, I just googled a random section of your post, and found it posted somewhere else then I tried to figure out why you were ranting incoherently. I found a history of the same types of posts and commented on how this was your default method of expression. Whether or not you have had articles run in magazines is unimportant.
I have no need or desire to address your supposed "facts" as doing so is not the purpose of this forum. This is a place for general discussion. You, of course, had the right to post your view, but you have to put up with whatever the internet sends your way in regards to comments. I don't have mod points as I don't post nearly enough nor metamoderate so whatever issues you may have regarding to moderators are also none of my concern.
Windows 7 is coming. You seem to have issues with the way it handles certain issues with its network security. The developers don't seem to share your concern. Some people have issues with the way you present your arguments, but yet you don't change your presentation. Go read up on how to write clearly and effectively and you will find that the "trolls" will be more likely to address your "facts" instead of just dismissing you out of hand as a raving loony.
The hosts stuff is a load of crap too, the top parent doesn't seem to understand what the hosts file is for, it's certainly not designed to be used as a 650,000 entry blacklist, it's merely meant to contain a couple of hosts and even then only as a fix for broken DNS. Filtering of base hosts should not be done in the hosts file, that's a really bad hack for someone who simply does not understand how to build their own security layer to filter inbound/outbound connections but a hack with negative repercussions - the hosts file has to be accessed and 650,000 names have to be checked every time you access a host, that's going to slow down your DNS lookups massively.
Prior to the invention of DNS, hosts files were the only way to do name -> address lookups on a IP network. So hosts files quickly became rather large.
(We're just lucky they didn't add some concept of #include to the hosts file. That might have pushed the concept of DNS back another decade.)
Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
Then use tar, if you don't want a disc image. It too creates backups as large as the files it is storing. That's what compression is for. And yes, Unix' ar and compress have been around for 40 years as well.
Tar is too far to the other extreme. It literally is just the file. No boot sector information or the like is preserved. If I take my main boot drive, make a tar of it, and then go to a new computer of identical config and untar the files onto a new drive, when I reboot I get . . . nothing. Sure you CAN make it work. Boot from a live CD, mount the drive, create a lilo config (or grub - when working by hand though I've always found LILO's config files easier to work with), install it do the boot sector, etc. I've done it before, and it certainly works, but it's a hassle.
For the task of creating backup images of systems for later restoration to different systems, neither only archiving the files or only imaging the disk is quite what you want to do. Both CAN do the job, but something that does a mix of the two (ala Norton Ghost) is quicker, easier, and more efficient. That's what development is all about. Aside from cutting edge stuff, 95% of what we do on computer these days has been done in some way or another on computers for decades now. Messages to other people, spreadsheets, typing documents and printing them, managing financial records, etc. All of it has been done by earlier programs, and it all worked when we used them. Despite that though, we still work to create programs that do those tasks better, faster, easier, and more efficiently.
The whole situation reminds me of a discussion I once had about Java with an old COBOL programmer. I explained the benefits of the standard libraries included, the whole concept of object oriented programming and inheritance, etc, etc. Their response "We basically been doing most of that stuff for years.". Well, yeah, most of what you can do in one language you can do in another, but to suggest that C++ or Java is pretty much the same as COBOL is just being shortsighted and stubborn.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
Rose-tinted glasses I guess, even before 4, KDE was about as stable as Tom Cruise.
Picking the lowest priced object on the shelf at Best Buy, which happens to have had a big advertising campaign attached, is not how you find a good deal. Those advertised "deals" are how you find shitty things.
"His name was James Damore."
Yes of course the imacs are desktops, and they're not bad computers--we've got a couple at work. Even so, you start with I believe $1200 for the minimum. The PCs we buy with similar specs are several hundred cheaper (maybe 600-700 on average?). That sub-$1000 price point is a BIG one, especially for businesses.
Perhaps my biggest issue with the imacs is user serviceability. Last time I had a power supply go dead in one, it was going to be like $200 to replace it--$200 to fix a $1200 machine? Additionally, we do color work and the general feeling seems to be that the imacs are not that fantastic for color reproduction. If for whatever reason something about the imac doesn't work for you -- form factor/size, monitor quality, glossy, specs, whatever--you're screwed. Go pay for a mac pro.
On the personal side, while I absolutely love my mbp, I maintain a vista desktop at home. It's mostly a htpc. Mac mini is really not powerful enough for my usage, imac is out of the question, and so for a desktop at home, my first choice is 2k+ mac pro. That sucks. i would buy a mac mini tower or something along those lines in a heartbeat if it was $1000.
This is one of those things that really does make me pause and give some credence to those who say apple doesn't care about businesses.
Kubuntu Jaunty has the Gnome networkmanager -> FAIL
Here be signatures
Holy crap! It's APK, the legend himself! He Who Shall Not Be Mentioned! http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/12009443/m/1810993821?r=2310969821 You're a legend in the Ars forums, man. Hats off to your amazing ability to troll. You don't see many who master the craft like you do anymore.
$ make love
make: don't know how to make love. Stop
All I play is flash games, so this doesn't matter to me at all.
On the other hand, they aren't really immersive gaming environments, so YPMV (your preferences may vary).
Note: I was 13 when I wrote most of this. Take with several grains of salt.
No. I remember back in the Win95/98 days an easy way to block ads was to use ad server-blocking HOSTS files, but they were never more than a hundred kilobytes or so, and even back then it was considered a hacky solution. Nowadays it's totally unnecessary with Adblock Plus and NoScript. Spybot Search & Destroy also allows you to add a list of known bad sites, but again, the list it creates is less than 250KB (less than 9000 entries - and it seems to contain two per site, as in www.nastysite.com and nastysite.com).
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
"He uses one. Just like I do... it works, read his article! Spybot S&D, a respected antispyware program, also uses them & helps make them stronger too... I suppose you know more than me, but Mr. Oliver Day & Spybot's people?"
There's a fundamental difference between the way they use it and the way you use it.
They used it to blackhole a select set of specific malware related addresses where the outbound Malware connections could use any port and could use any protocol.
You use it to filter fucking ad servers who you'll only ever be contacting via HTTP so would be much better served by an HTTP specific block such as say, a browser plugin or a proxy style app. Bloating your DNS resolutions by adding 650,000 odd hosts to check on each request is plain idiotic. Even your prized example, Oliver Stone that you keep referencing only blocks 16,500 hosts as per his article, that's a roughly 15 fold decrease in the number of hosts to check - that's more than an order of magnitude less.
Similarly Spybot does not blackhole anywhere near the amount of hosts in the hosts file that you do.
This is effectively your problem, your only justification for making the points you do is that "Well look someone else is doing it so I will too", the difference is, you don't understand their reasoning for it, you don't understand the repercussions, you just insist that it's okay to abuse it that way.
Regardless of that though, Oliver Stone's article is an opinion and nothing more, it's an individual opinion, and Spybot's method is similar their opinion on how to do it. But you see, for both of them there's thousands of IT professionals who would disagree with their method, I'm one of them. There are better solutions, perhaps the hosts file method is straightforward, it's certainly one of the easiest methods, but as you're finding it's not the intended use of the hosts file and ultimately it can lead to problems.
"I layer on several layers of software protection, in the interests of "layered security" (the recommended trend by security pros in computers) &, that seems to be doing well for others, not just myself:"
Yet here you go again, you really don't understand layered security. There is little point in layered protection like you suggest on Windows, because it only takes one layer to be vulnerable for the whole system compromised because of the poor way in which Windows is architected. If you add more layers, you're not necessarily adding more security, you're just adding more to go wrong and more to potentially cause problems. No, real layered security is about having a solid router and stateful firewall. With properly setup routing/NAT to prevent unsolicited incoming connections, and with any relevant servers setup in the DMZ. Layered security isn't about adding more and more layers for the sake of adding layers, it's about adding effective layers, but not more than are needed such that you end up with problems and possibly less security than you started with. Case in point, some years ago specific versions of Symantec and McAfee anti-virus didn't play well, have both on your system and neither would work, what use are the extra layers if they cause more of a security issue than just having one less layer? Again, you talk about something you've heard of, but you don't actually understand it.
"Have YOU done the same, Mr. Wannabe expert?"
I can't speak for the guy you're responding to, but I can speak for myself. No I didn't earn $100 writing up Windows spyware removal basics to a bunch of idiots on some non-factor site and for some non-factor publications. Instead, I spent years in a team managing a network, being responsible for security at an organisation with 11,000 employees and with over 100 sites distributed about the region. So fuck off with the bullshit about how you wrote an article and some shareware for a magazine aimed at Joe average who knows nothing about PCs, some of us have instead been working on high end real world security where dumping 650,000 hos
No idea. Maybe for the same reason I got a 'flamebait' here for saying 1) Apple is happy with their current profitable business and 2) different people like different things? :-)
PS: I miss the old days when you could click on one of your comments and see the % of troll/funny/insightful/flamebait/etc mods you got.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
No, that isn't what I said.
All versions of Ubuntu have all Ubuntu packages available for install. Kubuntu Jaunty comes with a KDE4 Widget for controlling NetworkManager.
Problem is, that widget doesn't work.
So, I installed the GNOME NetworkManager applet, as a workaround. It was one of several suggested workarounds -- another being to install wicd.
So yes, it still fails, just not as much as you suggest. It's the same thing I did when Kubuntu Intrepid just fucking dropped Bluetooth support, rather than delay the release -- this was a known bug at the time -- so for quite awhile, the only real solution was to use the GNOME bluetooth applet, or go without a mouse.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
If you enjoy playing games with friends who are sitting on the same actual sofa as you, you must *definitely* be 9.
If you enjoy playing games with friends, and the friends are sitting on a sofa with you, you must be 9 because otherwise, you could work to buy your own PC and your own copy of each game and become a card-carrying member of the LAN party.
</devils-advocate>
Seriously though did they plan 360games to take 1 day with little difficulty each
If you really want to bring back the days of Nintendo-hard video games, go into a game's menu and change "DIFFICULTY: EASY" to "DIFFICULTY: EXPERT". Or put I Wanna Be The Guy on your PC.
If Linux did everything I wanted except for games, I'd have no problem only using my XP install for games. Everything else I'd do in Linux.
As it stands, however, I can't do half the stuff I'd like to do in Linux, so I'm stuck with XP all the way :P
I agree. I gave it a huge chance and tried to like it. but when I learned that they didnt throw in native support for CRT Widescreen TV's (I buy things to last and thats why I have a CRT TV.) Any who, Vista's MCE has this awesome feature to correct for CRT **Overdraw**, so I put a suggestion in to microsoft that they integrate this at the Operating system since it natively supported my Tv's 1080i and nvidia tech. Well, come the open release, they removed the feature from media center. I promised that all newer machines would run Windows 7, but after using it, I cant.
Breaking working stuff isnt a reason for me to buy it. Shocking, I know. (I wont get into the added steps to do anything either. XP is what I'll be stuck with, I guess.)
Shared host files could provide a DNS-proof method of reaching sites, not to mention removing an additional vector of detection if anyone were trying to monitor the use of subversive sites.
Yeah, great. Never mind that the DNS was developed because static hosts files became unwieldy and impossible to keep up to date for ever growing numbers of hosts.
Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
Your mouse... is bluetooth?!
Agreed KDE4 isn't as good as KDE 3.5.x yet. Every release there's more stuff that gets added. On the Long run it will beat everything out there though...
Here be signatures
May appeal to you also, if you use Linux, Solaris, BSD's etc. et al also (it's multiplatform, based on industry best practices for each & helps large - see the results again for windows folks though, above, for your reference Fred & enjoy...)
Thanks but I think I'll pass all the same.
The last time I used Windows was 3.11. Glad it works for you though.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
[...] that's why obsessive internet psycho stalkers like you have followed me around forums to forums for 10 yrs [...]
You, sir, are a certified weirdo.
Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
Thank you very much for the link! It surely makes for an entertaining read. And there I was, wondering whether there is more to that person...
Absolutely hilarious.
Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
Not anymore, though I do still have it.
Agreed KDE4 isn't as good as KDE 3.5.x yet. Every release there's more stuff that gets added. On the Long run it will beat everything out there though...
In other words, it's a bit like Windows Eight. I hear it'll be awesome.
I mean, at least it's not like Duke Nukem Forever, yet, but even so... I'm not talking about the little things, like being able to customize keystrokes for browsing around in Okular.
No, I'm talking about stuff like, in one release, my mouse stopped working, and in another, my Internet stopped working.
That's unacceptable.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
In other words, it's a bit like Windows Eight. I hear it'll be awesome.
Yeah well, except KDE actually delivers what it promises :-)
I mean, at least it's not like Duke Nukem Forever, yet, but even so...
Well you're in for a surprise then. A little while ago George posted a buglist. Some things that had to be fixed in order for DNF to be released. They have the money offshore, that muchg we know now and it's being worked on again. Check the new screenshots! :-) Allthough it's not the DNF that we were 'promised' with insane interactivity, it is going to be released I think.
No, I'm talking about stuff like, in one release, my mouse stopped working, and in another, my Internet stopped working.
That's totally Kubuntu and not KDE4. They are a little 'understaffed' so can't really blame them :/
Here be signatures
KDE actually delivers what it promises
I suppose it depends how you count. They released a 4.0 that wasn't ready. They knew precisely what message they were sending, and are to this day trying to talk their way out of it.
Allthough it's not the DNF that we were 'promised' with insane interactivity, it is going to be released I think.
Are you in denial? They fired the DNF team.
That's totally Kubuntu and not KDE4. They are a little 'understaffed' so can't really blame them
The bluetooth thing was a known bug, and they released it anyway. I do blame them for that. Why the hell didn't they delay the release?
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I was referring mostly to the software issues of Windows. Time spent installing drivers, booting and rebooting, being interrupted every five minutes when the OS decides it needs to install its weekly update, frustration with clunky software compared to Apple iLife, and malware.
My mom and my sister both had all of those problems when they lived with Windows. One by one I converted them to Macs and now they can write books, burn CDs, edit and upload photos, and install their own tax software. And I don't have to fix some broken driver or missing file every six months. And I have a pleasant OS to work on when I visit.
I have Windows XP on my MacBook Pro too. Sometimes I need it, but when I can accomplish a task in either OS, I never find the Windows way to be more efficient or elegant.
There might also be hardware issues, but I haven't played with $400 laptop hardware enough to know.
I suppose it depends how you count. They released a 4.0 that wasn't ready. They knew precisely what message they were sending, and are to this day trying to talk their way out of it.
They have, at the 4.0 launch, declared it was a developper release. The base was stable, however the rest wasn't. They did this because devs could then start porting apps. They also wanted to release (too, arguably) soon, but that was in order to not let the development go Enlightenment style.
Are you in denial? They fired the DNF team.
No: http://www.duke4.net/news.php
Why the hell didn't they delay the release?
Why the hell didn't Microsoft delay Windows 95 when it wasn't finnished? Because sometimes, you have to. Better always ship then don't. However it is not a LTS release, so it's bleeding edgy stuff.
Here be signatures
My post was in reply to, "the mac pro is bad as they can get a systems from dell , hp and others for about $1000-$1500 less with more ram and better base video card." If you actually go to Dell's site and try to build a an eight-core Xeon machine with all of the same specs as the Mac Pro you'll only save a couple hundred dollars. An eight-core HP costs several hundred more than the Apple. Go try it for yourself.
Great. You left half the components out and it came to $1,000 less. Go figure. (The base config is really awesome with its 1GB of RAM) If you add the second CPU, memory, the cheapest 512MB video card, a gigabit NIC, a Firewire card, and a DVD burner you'll see that the price is over $3000.
the one tat is full of crap is you i use the hosts file just fine. and it does not slow me down as long as it is "0" format and not in "127.0.0.1" or the "0.0.0.0" format. yes disabling JavaScript helps stop the viruses but using the hosts file helps too. can you tell me what kind of mail is unsolicited email. i do not care what kind of firewall you have it still can be hacked if the person is good enough. and that is why i still use a hosts file. before i had a hosts file i would get hit with viruses and maleware and trojens. i would get 10 -20 of these a week some times more. with out a hosts file. so i believe the only on full of crap is you.
That's why he said "nearly everyone". Pretty much only difference nowadays between a Xeon and the desktop processor it's based off of is that it's multi-CPU capable and supports ECC ram (well, and price). Well, the base Mac Pro only has one CPU socket, so multi-CPU is out. So you're paying $1600 for ECC ram. For $1600, I think I can live without it, especially considering the base Mac Pro is crippled and can only accept a total of 8GB of ram, where as those Dells can accept more.
And you can hardly cry fowl when people compare a $900 Dell to a $2750 Apple when the $2750 Apple is the only thing in Apple's line up that's even remotely similar.
eight-core
I don't want eight cores. I want something more powerful than Apple's $600 headless laptop but less expensive than the least expensive Mac Pro.
Buying laptops for everyone would be even more retarded. They cost more, break more, are harder to repair, run slower, are more easily stolen, have shorter lifetimes, have batteries that wear out, and have poor ergonomics (unless you spend even more and buy extra keyboards/mice/monitors). It really only makes sense to buy a laptop for those that actually need one for their job, and unless they are almost always traveling they'll probably want a desktop too.
Agreed. The extra $100-300 for something like a Thinkpad is well spent.
They have, at the 4.0 launch, declared it was a developper release.
The rest of the world has a word for "developer release", and that word is "Alpha". Releasing it as a .0 release, and even using the word "stable", was misleading at best.
At the same time, the reason they gave for releasing it as .0, rather than as an Alpha or a Beta, is that they wanted users. Not enough people are willing to play with a Beta, apparently. So they were deliberately trying to con users into helping them bugtest a release -- a very Microsoft-like move.
Because sometimes, you have to. Better always ship then don't.
In the commercial world, that almost makes sense.
In open source, it really doesn't. Those who want bleeding edge will upgrade. Those who don't, shouldn't have to.
Kind of good news about DNF, though, if that's actually happening. I'm still a bit skeptical -- but then, it has happened before, with Prey.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
The rest of the world has a word for "developer release", and that word is "Alpha". Releasing it as a .0 release, and even using the word "stable", was misleading at best.
Plasma isn't part of 'base', so it was not misleading to me.
So they were deliberately trying to con users into helping them bugtest a release -- a very Microsoft-like move.
They stated it specifically on the download page and all distro makers knew it. It was their choice to include it with distros. There was a reason that at that same time KDE 3.5.x was still worked on.
In the commercial world, that almost makes sense.
In open source, it really doesn't. Those who want bleeding edge will upgrade. Those who don't, shouldn't have to.
Open Source is all about "release early. Release often so I don't really agree with you on this one.
Here be signatures
you can say what you want because you are going to any way. no matter what i say. the thing i am saying is i use a hosts file along with some other principles of securing my computer, so jerks like you can not hack in to my computer. if you try to hack my computer you will be in a world of trouble.
toshiba laptops with great built quality.... that is something I have to see.
And sony vaio? oh god... give me an ancient stinkpad and is probably faster than any vaio with all the crap installed.
You want to know why it fails? Okay, here you go-try running Sudo from the GUI. Go ahead...I'll wait /listens to some Judas Priest/....You can't do it can you? The ONLY way for you to "sudo" squat is from the CLI, which as I said the second you bring in the CLI please add this to your sentence "Please have someone install Windows because this OS sucks" because that is EXACTLY what the home users think. And nobody but geeks give a shit about the CLI being "more powerful" okay? It is 1000 times more of a PITA than clicking a checkbox or using a dropdown so nobody gives a crap but geeks how powerful it is, certainly not home users.
Home users will NEVER EVER use CLI, okay? Let me repeat that: Home users will NEVER EVER use CLI. So you can Sudo all damned day long, but if i can't even get root to edit the stupid config file because my monitor resolution isn't correct (and boy Linux sucks with monitor resolutions) without having to drop to CLI and deal with that bullshit, how do you expect Jane Public to deal? There is a REASON why MSI was looking at 400% return rates for their Linux Netbooks-it is because Linux is a geek OS. My Windows customers frankly don't know that CLI exists because they have never had to use it, same with my Mac friends. But have even the teeniest tiniest problem in Linux? "Open up bash and type" will often be the ONLY option you get. I'm sorry, but CLI has to die, and until it does even decade old WinXP will mop the floor with Linux and Macs will keep gaining. Because both Steves know that home users equal GUI NOT CLI.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
I seem to recall XP's RTM build was 2600, I recall it being very stable too.
- Dan
the only reason i could think of why they are down modding you is because they are afraid of losing there so called fans. or better yet money and fame they my have. but i prefer the real AC over the cloned AC any day. keep up the good work APK. things will turn around and they know they can not stop it from happening.
the only reason why there attacking this is because they know you are right and they hate being wrong. but T.F.S. to them in my book the people that are disagreeing with you are the retards and idiots. they can get infected if they wish but i will not. because i know the truth. and the truth is what you are saying. so do not play there game and keep doing what you are doing it is working really well apk keep up the good work.
A Dell eight 2.26GHz, 6GB of RAM, a 512MB video card, and a 500GB hard drive is $3,157.
How many of us really need that? To use the obligatory car analogy, Macs are like the Tesla Roadster. They may be great for what they do, but they're just not made for everybody.
the real coward i see is you because you will not print your real name. in stead you print as anonymous coward. the only one that really needs to seek help would be you. you would have to hire three hookers because the other two would not touch you. then again you may have to pay extra to the hookers for the 2 inches.
yes it is in black and white and any body that can not read or click on the link does not need to be here. so take a read and find the truth. and as for the naysayers they do not read the links because they are afraid of the truth. so i only have this to say to the naysayers "get a life" and get with the real program. secure your self from the viruses and malewaer.
yes you are the only one finding this completely ludicrous. i use a hosts file and i do not have a problem. and my hosts file is using "0" for blocking and it is doing just fine. i am also using a 654,000 entries. in conjunction with other principles for securing my computer.
Sorry, I forgot to mention tar. It is useful for just what you mention. Of course, the Unix tool mentality precludes integrating a do-it-all product if you can instead achieve the asme effect with several smaller and perhaps more general purpose tools. Somebody will always be able to come along and say something like "Well MS Word does everything TeX does." There are of course several good open source imaging tools similar to Ghost.
Part of the idea with Unix is that you can do damn near anything you need to do with a system, using nothing but the built in utilities and some command line switches and possibly pipes. A basic live CD of your choice of the several Unix and Unix-like OSs out there can do anything Ghost can do, and is far more flexible if problems arise.
And I see no need to bring up Time Machine, but I will anyway. Microsoft is simply playing catch-up as usual. This is quite their usual place in the universe. What is sad is that most of these features are simple imitations of features that made their appearances on other operating systems years before. The Windows 7 feature checklist, predictably as well, has shrunk and most of the really interesting or innovative features have been cut.
I'm sure they'll do fine, as they have the PC makers in a headlock and most PC buyers don't know what an operating system really is anyway. This is the irony of the situation - it doesn't matter if Windows 7 is terrible, or if it is great.
i do not know who the hell you think you are but i did not reply to my own post retard. if you are going to try to put someone down or try to mess with them you had better make sure that you have the right person. the kings jokwers is not who you think it is retard. oh that is right you are one that needs the three hookers because of the 2 inches.
buy the way why will you not answer any of the three post that the real AC posted. i will tell you why because you are afraid of the truth. so you would rather lie to the people than to tell truth.
W.T.F i will tell you the same thing that i told that jerk off that thought i was the original AC. i am not APK and any of you retards think other wise then you are the biggest bunch of idiots on this thread. by the way do you always accuse a person of being someone else when they are not that person. you need to start looking at who you are accusing because net time you do this it is going to the crime division of the F.B.I.
look i do not no who you are but this is the last time i am telling you that i am not who you think i am and you keep giving these people false information. then this is going to be an all out war. with you being the losers. if you really think i am APK or his sock puppet then go look in to the title jerk off and you will see who i really am. and do not tell me you can not do that because i know you can. even if you do not want to admit it to me. by the way you still have not answered any of the questions put to you are you scared to answer, or are you scared because you know AC is right. and by the way why would not give me my password to a previous account i had with you i know why because you did not like what i said the last time we talked retards.
you hit it on the head i am the angry voice of APK(not you dumb retarded jerk)still wrong as usual. do you not know when you are wrong or is being stupid your only gain in this war. but you would rather attack me hoping you are right about APK being me. well i have news for you I AM NOT APK. if you are in doubt ask your self this 1) why would you not send my pass code to my email address which is ja_ckd_w@hotmail.com 2) you still have not answered the real AC three points that he has been telling you. 3) why wont you post your name in here. i will tell you why because you are scared to because you know you are going to lose money from what we are accomplishing here. you are nothing but a lair and a loser in one person.
ya you know what is funny that he has the right guy. because this game you are playing with APK is backfiring on you and you do not like it. why are you posting anonymously oh! i know why because you have been burned by APK before and you can not handle it. talking about vast experience i have seen APK's education and experience first hand. i have not seen yours. now some of his ideas maybe insane, but when it come to computers i would believe APK over you any day. because all you want to do is sell false promises and bug up computers so you can make your money.
no the person that does not want the technical discussion is you. the one that started the personal attacks is you right from the get go when APK started to post on this forum. the only one that has been criticizing is you, and once people see you for who you are they will look at you and ask how could you. the only thing that is crashing down is your ego in an attempt to discredit APK and what he does trying to keep people safe from hackers\crackers like you.
if you have seen through APK's ploys then why are you still here. the people that know APK will not believe you so just leave and do not come back. but then again you like running sock-puppets and trolling because it gets you off. but you know what it is TO EASY to take you out. because you will not comment on APK's three url's. so you are done and burned i will not believe you know matter what you say. you are lame and a loser.