Totally bogus answer. No one is being threatened with jail for using Vista. And, one more time, there IS NO BIAS against microsoft. It seems to be expected that the upgrade path, when implemented, will be to Win7 anyway, so where is the anti-microsoft bias? Finally - the requirements for Vista have been discussed. Care to make an estimate about how many machines owned by the state will simply not be capable of running Vista? Based on my own business in and around Texas, I would have to guess that less than 25% is capable. Hell, the employment office is still using machines running at 700 and 800 khz, and 128 MB of memory. Their SERVER was taken down a couple years ago, and replaced with a serious machine, but the guys in the cubicles are running dinosaurs!
you meant mhz, i suppose, because my entry-level phone has 200mhz arm cpu. you seem to be correct on the un-upgradability of most systems. i wasn't thinking of that problem. now that i think, i haven't seen any machine that did not come with vista pre-installed could run it. mostly due to pixel shader crap.
It is an entirely legitimate desire not to have your home's photo on Google. Streetview is a convenient tool for burglars to scope out neighborhoods, since Google has already done all the legwork for them.
your logic is flawed. although google has done the thieves' leg work, there was nothing stopping one of the thieves to go and take pictures himself. the residents could not have stopped anyone from taking pictures. its a bit like saying "selling guns is bad beacause the gunmakers have done all the legwork for the murderer."
Why wait for Win7 SP1? On the whole, I've found the early leaked betas (never mind the current stuff that's near RC stage) to be far better than Vista in pretty much every way I can think of.
because microsoft won't support a beta/rc os that anyone can download for free.
If it made VISTA mandatory; and outlawed use of BSD, Linux, Solaris, and Mac O/S by anyone with long term jail sentences at hard labor, Microsoft would be praising it as progressive, enlightened, and humanistic.
and slashdot would be enraged, shocked. completely opposite of the reaction now. whereas both situations are completely equal: bias against a specific company.
why are the big publishers focusing so hard on the smaller, more costly, 360 and PS3 market?
maybe beacuse 360 and ps3 graphics don't look like that of a decade old pc? also i believe ps3+360 sales combined are greater than wii sales.
And onlive is a farce; I can't believe that anybody on Slashdot believes that company has magical 22nd century technology.
i agree completely. there is no way out of high performance hardware if you want to play the latest games, onlive will do nothing except move the consoles to a central location and people will have one more monthly subscription.
session saving has never worked on gnome, never since i've been using linux, around 2000. why do they not remove the gui option for it? why confuse users?
are you saying linux's goals do not include increasing market share? because if linux has to grow, that growth has to come from microsoft's loss of share. and last time i checked, capturing someone else's market share was included in the list of things to do to beat someone. so what exactly are you suggesting?
How did I solve my clock problem? I just added a little widget on my google.com/ig page which displays the two time zones that I need without any hassle.
so you're basically saying that you could just as easily have solved your problem on kde? according to you xfce doesn't have the features kde has but you still left kde due to "lack of basic functionality". so you moved to a window manager with even less functionality, right? why?
i'm sorry. i thought customs as in tradition. just my idiocy. actually i was thinking in terms of the web, so it was difficult for me to make the connection.
thanks, but i was not trolling. i actually knew about the whole "bittorrent broadcasts your ip" thing, but i forgot. my main question remains: how does someone know if i downloaded an mp3 without using bittorrent?
one thing i do not understand. how can riaa know if my friend sent me a song by email, or i searched on google and downloaded an mp3? or that i downloaded a film using piratebay? how can they trace online activity to real world people?
That depends where you go. I'm fairly certain that it wouldn't pass customs in my country. I don't see anyone running out of their way to ban the internet as a medium for filth here either though.
sorry, but nobody's talking customs. legality depends only on the law.
Where did you get the idea that Windows 2000 can't multitask?
It does, & quite well!
APK
from your reference, which says 2000 "does not run background apps".
P.S.=> Have YOU ever used Windows 2000? It doesn't seem like it, based on your statements... apk
of course i've not used 2000, that's why i was asking. you persistently show your inability to follow a coherent sentence and derive meaning from it. i'm amazed a person like you can even exist.
if you refuse to talk logically, then i will have nothing to do with you. i regret communicating with a person is is not ready to talk with his mind receptive to what others say.
if you had even read my comment, you would have realized that there was no grammatical error in your statement. there was a logical fallacy. so no, i'm not an english grammar phd wannabe. as you rightly point out, this is the tech section, not the trolling section. so once again: quit trolling
i think you won't be able to live happily and peacefully after commiting such a cold-blooded murder. and that would be bad for you. so for your own good, you will not kill me and snatch my burger.
"Of the recent operating systems that have been tested, would you believe the winner so far is... Windows 2000?
That aging operating system, said Saeed Arash Far, engineering manager at SSD manufacturer Patriot Memory, is markedly faster than Windows XP, Vista, Mac OS X or Linux when using NAND flash memory. Far said his company's tests showed that Windows 2000 is 5 percent to 8 percent faster over its newer rivals because "Windows 2000 doesn't run any applications in the background.
"We're getting ridiculous numbers with Windows 2000," he said. "When it comes to Vista, it is faster than XP, but with XP, you have the luxury of turning off background applications.... With Vista, you can't."
okay if i understand this correct, 2000 is faster with nand flash because it "does not run background applications". and then it is stated that in xp "you have the luxury of turning off background applications." so, you can achieve the same performance with xp as you got with 2000. so i'll ask again: what exactly can 2000 do that xp can't? by the way, this not running background apps seems to be a truckload of crap to me. i want winamp and search indexer to run in the background. if 2000 can't do that, its just one more thing that it can't do, which every other os does: multitasking. and i don't want to be caught dead with an os that can't multitask.
no, actually there are different dvd isos for each language, it is not an installation time option. well it was that way during the 7000 build. maybe that's changed now but it's highly unlikely.
because at that time (may 07), ms thought vista was going to be as long term as xp. so by their reckoning they would have been releasing another verion in 10 years, when the transition from 32bit to 64bit would have been over and we would be talking about our new 128bit cpus. but it failed miserably, so they had to rebrand it in desperation, only that the transition to 64 is not complete yet. so they have to have a 32bit version too.
The reason for removing the PORT FILTERING gui, per the Microsoft VISTA resource kit is flimsy, & makes NO SENSE either!
either something makes sense or it does not. it can't be that the reason is flimsy and it makes no sense. because if the reason is flimsy, it has to make sense. grow up. quit trolling.
Slashdot Mirror
Totally bogus answer. No one is being threatened with jail for using Vista. And, one more time, there IS NO BIAS against microsoft. It seems to be expected that the upgrade path, when implemented, will be to Win7 anyway, so where is the anti-microsoft bias? Finally - the requirements for Vista have been discussed. Care to make an estimate about how many machines owned by the state will simply not be capable of running Vista? Based on my own business in and around Texas, I would have to guess that less than 25% is capable. Hell, the employment office is still using machines running at 700 and 800 khz, and 128 MB of memory. Their SERVER was taken down a couple years ago, and replaced with a serious machine, but the guys in the cubicles are running dinosaurs!
you meant mhz, i suppose, because my entry-level phone has 200mhz arm cpu.
you seem to be correct on the un-upgradability of most systems. i wasn't thinking of that problem. now that i think, i haven't seen any machine that did not come with vista pre-installed could run it. mostly due to pixel shader crap.
*spews rmaen all over the touchpad*
It is an entirely legitimate desire not to have your home's photo on Google. Streetview is a convenient tool for burglars to scope out neighborhoods, since Google has already done all the legwork for them.
your logic is flawed. although google has done the thieves' leg work, there was nothing stopping one of the thieves to go and take pictures himself. the residents could not have stopped anyone from taking pictures.
its a bit like saying "selling guns is bad beacause the gunmakers have done all the legwork for the murderer."
Why wait for Win7 SP1? On the whole, I've found the early leaked betas (never mind the current stuff that's near RC stage) to be far better than Vista in pretty much every way I can think of.
because microsoft won't support a beta/rc os that anyone can download for free.
If it made VISTA mandatory; and outlawed use of BSD, Linux, Solaris, and Mac O/S by anyone with long term jail sentences at hard labor, Microsoft would be praising it as progressive, enlightened, and humanistic.
and slashdot would be enraged, shocked. completely opposite of the reaction now. whereas both situations are completely equal: bias against a specific company.
In an unrelated news, Stallman has just announced that he's joining Microsoft.
in related news, windows 7 goes open source.
try removing and replacing the cmos battery, with the pc running.
why are the big publishers focusing so hard on the smaller, more costly, 360 and PS3 market?
maybe beacuse 360 and ps3 graphics don't look like that of a decade old pc? also i believe ps3+360 sales combined are greater than wii sales.
And onlive is a farce; I can't believe that anybody on Slashdot believes that company has magical 22nd century technology.
i agree completely. there is no way out of high performance hardware if you want to play the latest games, onlive will do nothing except move the consoles to a central location and people will have one more monthly subscription.
wanted: weapons of fate is quite good, actually. so not all movie derived games are crap.
You forgot one, though: broken session saving!
session saving has never worked on gnome, never since i've been using linux, around 2000. why do they not remove the gui option for it? why confuse users?
are you saying linux's goals do not include increasing market share? because if linux has to grow, that growth has to come from microsoft's loss of share. and last time i checked, capturing someone else's market share was included in the list of things to do to beat someone.
so what exactly are you suggesting?
How did I solve my clock problem? I just added a little widget on my google.com/ig page which displays the two time zones that I need without any hassle.
so you're basically saying that you could just as easily have solved your problem on kde? according to you xfce doesn't have the features kde has but you still left kde due to "lack of basic functionality". so you moved to a window manager with even less functionality, right?
why?
i'm sorry. i thought customs as in tradition. just my idiocy. actually i was thinking in terms of the web, so it was difficult for me to make the connection.
thanks, but i was not trolling. i actually knew about the whole "bittorrent broadcasts your ip" thing, but i forgot. my main question remains: how does someone know if i downloaded an mp3 without using bittorrent?
one thing i do not understand. how can riaa know if my friend sent me a song by email, or i searched on google and downloaded an mp3? or that i downloaded a film using piratebay? how can they trace online activity to real world people?
That depends where you go. I'm fairly certain that it wouldn't pass customs in my country. I don't see anyone running out of their way to ban the internet as a medium for filth here either though.
sorry, but nobody's talking customs.
legality depends only on the law.
Where did you get the idea that Windows 2000 can't multitask?
It does, & quite well!
APK
from your reference, which says 2000 "does not run background apps".
P.S.=> Have YOU ever used Windows 2000? It doesn't seem like it, based on your statements... apk
of course i've not used 2000, that's why i was asking.
you persistently show your inability to follow a coherent sentence and derive meaning from it. i'm amazed a person like you can even exist.
if you refuse to talk logically, then i will have nothing to do with you. i regret communicating with a person is is not ready to talk with his mind receptive to what others say.
if you had even read my comment, you would have realized that there was no grammatical error in your statement. there was a logical fallacy. so no, i'm not an english grammar phd wannabe. as you rightly point out, this is the tech section, not the trolling section. so once again:
quit trolling
i think you won't be able to live happily and peacefully after commiting such a cold-blooded murder. and that would be bad for you. so for your own good, you will not kill me and snatch my burger.
"why would anyone prefer 2000 over xp? what can 2000 do and xp can't?" - by perryizgr8 (1370173) on Friday March 27, @09:18AM (#27356131)
Well, how about perform BETTER on, rather than "can't do"?
Windows 2000 Run SSD's faster than any other OS by Microsoft... as the "1 thing you asked for"...
http://www.pcworld.idg.com.au/article/270657/which_operating_system_best_ssds
----
PERTINENT EXCERPT/QUOTE:
"Of the recent operating systems that have been tested, would you believe the winner so far is ... Windows 2000?
That aging operating system, said Saeed Arash Far, engineering manager at SSD manufacturer Patriot Memory, is markedly faster than Windows XP, Vista, Mac OS X or Linux when using NAND flash memory. Far said his company's tests showed that Windows 2000 is 5 percent to 8 percent faster over its newer rivals because "Windows 2000 doesn't run any applications in the background.
"We're getting ridiculous numbers with Windows 2000," he said. "When it comes to Vista, it is faster than XP, but with XP, you have the luxury of turning off background applications. ... With Vista, you can't."
okay if i understand this correct, 2000 is faster with nand flash because it "does not run background applications". and then it is stated that in xp "you have the luxury of turning off background applications." so, you can achieve the same performance with xp as you got with 2000. so i'll ask again:
what exactly can 2000 do that xp can't?
by the way, this not running background apps seems to be a truckload of crap to me. i want winamp and search indexer to run in the background. if 2000 can't do that, its just one more thing that it can't do, which every other os does: multitasking. and i don't want to be caught dead with an os that can't multitask.
no, actually there are different dvd isos for each language, it is not an installation time option.
well it was that way during the 7000 build. maybe that's changed now but it's highly unlikely.
because at that time (may 07), ms thought vista was going to be as long term as xp. so by their reckoning they would have been releasing another verion in 10 years, when the transition from 32bit to 64bit would have been over and we would be talking about our new 128bit cpus. but it failed miserably, so they had to rebrand it in desperation, only that the transition to 64 is not complete yet. so they have to have a 32bit version too.
The reason for removing the PORT FILTERING gui, per the Microsoft VISTA resource kit is flimsy, & makes NO SENSE either!
either something makes sense or it does not. it can't be that the reason is flimsy and it makes no sense. because if the reason is flimsy, it has to make sense.
grow up. quit trolling.
why would anyone prefer 2000 over xp? what can 2000 do and xp can't?