|
| Thread: What OS are you running, and why? |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · NEXT» |
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:02 PM |
|
|
Poll Question:
What OS are you running, and why?
OS is a short way of saying "Operating system". Mainly what your running on your PC as a base to get things to work.
This poll aims at whitch OS you are using/are getting, and state the reasons behind your choice.
Currently i am running Windows Vista 32x because it was buildt in on my PC, however i want to swap to Linux. After more than 1 attempt i am going to do so once i get my awsers from the community so i can start the completel transfer to it.
I have yet to decide what distro to setle upon, a part of my says GKT and the other might as well go for Open Suse or Ubuntu.
Linux have better software(yet to find equal software that can compete with it on Vista, and i have locked. heck i miss Cheese), its more stable, it does not compeltely screw over my CPU or mishanles my RAM. It is faster, and les bugs.
Heck i do not need a bugging FW(FireWall) or a AV(AntiVirus) after the transfer. Simply because Linux is secure in comparision to Windows.
PS: Windows sucks........
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:06 PM |
|
|
Windows doesn't suck, but I must say that with each new windows OS that is being released, it is getting suckier and suckier. For me, one of the best Windows Operating Systems I have used must be Windows 98 or Windows 2000, both because of their flexibility and that they are easier to use. Plus, Windows 98 can play DOS games without having to resort to emulators, and some of my favourite games are made to be played in DOS. 
If I was to suggest a Linux distro, you would really need to choose between a GNOME or a KDE one. KDE is leaned more towards the Windows format in the way it is used, and GNOME is something quite different. I have used both and each of them have their advantages and disadvantages. I would suggest you go with either Ubuntu or Kubuntu. Both are quite good in my opinion.
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:13 PM |
|
|
I kind of know, but again all good software is for KDE
But again Gnome is cool enogh for me
I'l get done with the choice til i get done with checking up the support done.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:25 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 13:27, 22 Sep 2008.
|
Quote:
Simply because Linux is secure in comparision to Windows.
It's not. That's only because it is less popular, and "crackers" don't write so many viruses for Linux, thus you get the feeling that you are less attacked. After all, viruses are more effective when they affect a larger amount of systems, thus popularity is a thing to take in consideration.
Well I kinda agree with William. Best Windows are 98 & XP in my opinion. The latter is more bloated but has some extra security features. At least compared to Vista it's a pure optimized machine. Vista is crap. I need an OS, not a Las Vegas show or video game to operate my system lol.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Vista is crap. I need an OS, not a Las Vegas show or video game to operate my system lol.
LOL!!!
I totally agree there.  Vista is really bloated and filled with unnecessary garbage.
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:45 PM |
|
|
Windows XP... it's the "best" because it's the most "popular". Now, I don't want to say that it's good because it's popular, but because of this A LOT of programs/games and drivers, etc, are made for Windows, programs that you won't find on other Operating Systems.
I agree it's more "bloated" than Linux, but the fact that I'm almost sure all programs/games run on Windows as well (can't say the same about Linux though) make it "better" for me.
Vista sucks IMO
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:47 PM |
|
|
|
Linux has a Windows API emulator called Wine that can emulate some Windows Apps from what I heard
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:52 PM |
|
|
Some? Not all?
And emulators are usually slower
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:58 PM |
|
|
Quote:
And emulators are usually slower
Not very slower, it's not a "CPU emulator" that emulates instructions, it just translates Windows API functions to Linux API, not that slower
and it's "some" because Windows has too many not-very-used functions that are probably not implemented.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 01:58 PM |
|
Edited by william at 13:58, 22 Sep 2008.
|
@ Asheera
Yes. Why would you want an emulator that could emulate all programs? Then it would just be like using Windows and if i wanted to run something that is like Windows then I would just go out and buy the real version of windows and use that instead.
And Linux has it's own variety of tools that you can use that can match a lot of the windows programs. Have you used Linux, Asheera?
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:04 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Have you used Linux, Asheera?
No, I'm just saying what I heard from others
And if you did use Linux indeed, then you also favor Windows since you use it I can live without Linux
____________
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:05 PM |
|
|
Well....before you start saying stuff about Linux, maybe it would be best if you actually TRIED it first? 
I had Linux for a long time, both Kubuntu and Ubuntu while having Windows XP at the same time, but I had to uninstall the two due to space problems. One thing I must say is that Linux is definitely a lot faster. 
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:09 PM |
|
|
Point is, that the Linux "supporters" always get back to Windows, and even they wouldn't live without Windows
You said yourself above (and you seem to like Linux): you uninstalled Linux because of space problems. So if you are to choose between Linux and Windows, you choose Windows
____________
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:14 PM |
|
|
Actually, the one reason I would use Windows at the moment is so I can make my music. I could find alternative music software for linux that might be equally as good, but I am doing quite well with what I have now in my music software. Believe me, I would have stayed with Linux for sure, if not for the space problems.
And by the way, come up with something creative instead of saying that I came back to windows therefore I like windows better or something to that effect anyway. I like both systems for different reasons. Linux has better performance in speed but a disadvantage is that it is a bit harder in using than Windows is especially with installing programs. Windows CAN be fast but Linux just beats it mostly every time. But trust me when I say this, don't be surprised if in a few years Linux has the same popularity or is even more popular than Windows. Like I told you in HCM, notice how most web hosts are using Linus as their network server? It's because it is much better performance wise than windows can be.
You really do have to try it out. 
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:18 PM |
|
|
Well as a network server I think Linux can be better than Windows indeed...
But there's also a Windows Server (year) edition, never tried it, don't know if it sucks
____________
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:20 PM |
|
|
|
Yes, there are windows Server Editions but they aren't as good as the other editions such as XP or 2000. Notice how I rarely mention Vista? It's because it sucks.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Point is, that the Linux "supporters" always get back to Windows, and even they wouldn't live without Windows
Your views at the world are very narrow at only a few selected people Ash
|
|
radar
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Castle/Haven player
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:23 PM |
|
|
Have you heard of Microsoft conference featuring Mojave project? It was shown as a new OS to some Vista haters. After the show finished they were asked how it performed. Above 90% of the participants were convinced and pleased with the new system and said that Windows had got a new quality since Vista. I'd like to see their faces when they were told it actually was Vista not any new system!
____________
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Have you heard of Microsoft conference featuring Mojave project? It was shown as a new OS to some Vista haters. After the show finished they were asked how it performed. Above 90% of the participants were convinced and pleased with the new system and said that Windows had got a new quality since Vista. I'd like to see their faces when they were told it actually was Vista not any new system!
Why should I care what 90% of them think? Probably they were chosen selectively lol
Trust me, they won't fool me. No matter how hard they try. How much RAM did it require anyway? 4 GB? An OS should run with 128. Period. The rest is for others apps, no wonder games need so much RAM if the OS takes 50% of it
|
|
del_diablo
Legendary Hero
Manifest
|
|
posted September 22, 2008 02:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Simply because Linux is secure in comparision to Windows.
It's not. That's only because it is less popular, and "crackers" don't write so many viruses for Linux, thus you get the feeling that you are less attacked. After all, viruses are more effective when they affect a larger amount of systems, thus popularity is a thing to take in consideration.
I was not reffering to the virus rate, but the actuall system security. Since Linux got 5-10% of the marked according to sources: It would have by logic 5-10% of the total virus number. But that not the case.
Its becaue its harder to create a virus that works for Linux, and since its open source alot of eyes can get a way to counter and kill it.
Besides, Vista UAC feature is a complete failure. If i tell it: "Leave this program alone, i trust it", it would still deny it from creating register files that are needed to run it properly.
For Linux its just: sudo
Done
PS: yeah i agree Vista is a failure on RAM useage.
|
|
|
|
