Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Microsoft and new windows version

Last response: in Apps General Discussion
Share
June 26, 2002 11:46:24 PM

Here is a thought......

Now microsoft keep releasing new versions of windows (in my opinion too many). Each release comes with new feature now windows xp comes with tons of rubbish none of which is useful. I feel microsoft have reached a point where they cannot add much more to the OS. I feel that they have reach saturation, at which point the only thing they can do is make the OS more reliable.

Now as with many people I hate microsoft, but however I do find the OS easy to use, (I actually prefer it to linux but you can sacrifice me later). I hate the management at MS to be exact, personally I feel they press the programmers too hard, give them an extra couple of months and the OS may not crash!. But in the managements hurry to get a new version out the OS is unstable. I believe that windows XP was not even needed, Win2k works fine! and in the case of windows me. Why? Windows 98 runs faster and better than ME!.

This may seem like a b*tch about MS but I want to know what you guys think about the MS situation, do we really need a newer vesion of windows, is XP now enough.

p.s. How relieved is MS 64bit processors are coming out, another new version of windows?
June 26, 2002 11:54:53 PM

Windows XP has several new features that are useful. Compatability Mode and the ability to search online for the proper program to open a certain file type, for instance. Driver Rollback is a very nice feature...I just haven't gotten it to work right once.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
July 3, 2002 7:39:12 PM

Well on Windows XP there are so many different comments;
Some critical articles about WinXP, you might find very interesting are listed below;

<A HREF="http://www.wired.com/news/gizmos/0,1452,41822,00.html" target="_new">The only thing new in windows XP is 'P'</A>

<A HREF="http://www.darwinmag.com/read/thoughts/column.html?Arti..." target="_new">Five thoughts about Windows XP</A>

<A HREF="http://www.modernmerchant.com/news/xp.html" target="_new">Windows XP, The Good & The Bad</A>

<A HREF="http://www.tweakheadz.com/xp_connection.htm" target="_new">WinXP The major Gains, The major Drawbacks</A>


<b><font color=red><i>"All delays are dangerous in war."</b></font color=red></i>
Related resources
July 15, 2002 10:43:11 PM

I concur that MS has blown it in the name of sales revenue.
Stability has never been very high on their list. Often, MS puts out unfinished software on the public and hopefully remembers to update it to workable later.

I started at Win 3.1 / then Win 95 and 98. I went up to XP @home upgrade with few problems except the ever famous question: What software will and will not work with it?
I recently got XP Pro which I installed on a blank hardrive. THANK GOD !! Any relationship between the home version and the XP pro is an accident.
XP home upgrade was work, but it was at least understandable. XP Pro is hard to change and hard to use. I'm taking a LONGGGGGGGGGG vacation when my sister installs hers. And I'm hiding my copy from me.
XP home has been somewhat stable and more so in time.
XP Pro was unstable from the first reboot.
My friends tell me the opposite ... but the that has been my experience.

Every working computer must be improved .... or replaced ...
August 23, 2002 11:57:09 PM

My input is simply this: You have the choice to buy, or not to buy any Microsoft products, including their operating systems. I use Windows XP Professional and love it, not that there are any amazing advancements (a few niceties here and there, along with it being more stable) but simply because of the new GUI, it just looks... better...newer (uses alpha blending for one), and I like that. However, I would NOT pay $300 for this piece of software. My copy of Windows XP is, if you will, illegal. And if you want Windows XP, I suggest you do the same thing. I read a quote from a Mircosoft executive that was said during a press interview, I can't remember exactly how it goes, but it was something along the lines of... Yes there are anti-pirating techniques used with windows xp (besides just the cd-key), you must register your copy within 30 days or it will become crippled, and will only work in safe-mode, with limited features. But this is mainly just a deterant for every-day users (the avg. joe), and is fairly easy to get around (i.e. a crack easily found using any search engine) and we dont expect it to stop pirating from occuring. I guess this is one way I justify pirating, the componies know its going on, they don't always care, M$ is still very much in business, its not physically stealing, and it's just too easy... for now anyways." I mean, if microsoft REALLY didnt want ANY pirating to occur with their OS's, they could do it. I mean, its already pretty impossible to pirate Lightwave (from what ive heard/read), so I dont think its big on their list, MOST of M$'s money from OS's comes from them selling it to various vendors (gateway, dell, compaq, etc.), and large corporations, who obviously cannot pirate it because in this case inspections are done regularly

The first LAN party I went to was at a PETA convention. They booted me when I shot a crab in HL!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Willamette_Sucks on 08/23/02 07:59 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
August 24, 2002 5:52:10 AM

MS is probably excited that 64-bit processors are coming out, it doesn't work for free you know. People having to upgrade means $$$. My copy of XP is also illegal, it's just too easy and tempting not to. I'm not going to deal with Win98SE crashing left and right because I can't afford a new OS, XP should be a free upgrade to fix 98's stability problems.
All software developers are really behind in the anti-pirating measures. It's like software is this big pile of cash in the middle of the Mall of America, and the people who own it put up a velvet rope around it to block people from taking it. Of course everyone is going to steal it, and until developers decide to put up at least barbed wire, nothing's going to stop. Maybe MS is happy with just Joe not being able to get around the copy protection.
August 24, 2002 6:39:20 AM

I like your analgy Chromo, and your use of metaphores. However you forgot to mention that there are no security guards guarding this pile of cash, or the velvet rope around it. It seems that "Joe", the average computer user, must be, in metaphorical terms, disabled in some way, possibly blind and unable to see the pile of cash, much as many average computer users have no clue that it is so easy to pirate much of the software they see in stores, however "Me", as in a more educated computer user, would see this situation as an opportunity for, free samples if you will, much like the charity boxes you see at the register in restaurants, with a big pile of mints sitting there, and asking for a 5 cent donation. Personally i just take the mints and walk away.

The first LAN party I went to was at a PETA convention. They booted me when I shot a crab in HL!
December 21, 2002 8:43:07 PM

ive seen so many viewpoints on this topic. the only difference that i found was xp didnt do anything well enough not to cause me to format and break the cd in half (wear eye protection when doing this, trust me). all i found on it was fluff. it did install well, but so did red hat 8.0 (which is legally free). i personally use 2k pro for stability reasons. ive seen pictures of the new longhorn slated to be the next latest and greatest and all i can see is that m$ is doing what it does best by using parts of others o/s's and claiming it for themselves (specifically multiple desktops).
i think the reason m$ has made win*** so pirate friendly is if a person cant afford windows and wants a o/s then they have 2 choices. pirated win*** or one of the dozens of free o/s's. and of course the more people start learning just how crippled and incomplete windows is, the faster m$ becomes another penny stock company. so it makes it free* forthose who know how to get it free. just like the first rule of drug dealing, give out the goods for the first few times then once thier hooked just start raising the prices.
ive also heard that xp is a platform that basically gets the user ready for pallidum. which we know will be the death to computers as we know it.
anyways ill get off the soapbox and let others get a turn.
January 1, 2003 8:31:46 PM

98SE was the first and last time I invested in Microsoft.

Don't get me wrong, I like the Windows GUI. It's very easy if you know your way around the things that encompasses the operating system. I wish I knew my way around Linux as good as I do Windows. If I did then I'd definitely break away from M$. I'm still learning the Linux OS though so I'm still stuck with Windows... for the time being.

If I was to install Win2K over 98SE then I'd rather use Linux. I do have SuSe 8.0 Pro on a partition by the way. Nice. I haven't had any problems w/it yet. Seems to me that Windows has a bit of a problem w/ other OSs though. WINME you can just trash. I don't like it. That's my opinion. After the last time that 98SE crashed, I installed XP. No mishaps yet. Still diddling with this OS so I can't really comment on it. It's a mixed opinion on this OS. The majority like it but because everyone is familiar with 98SE, ME, and WIN2K, some are against it. Nonetheless, it'll probably be the same mixed results when the LONGHORN comes out.

<b><font color=blue>veni,vidi, and ended up in THGC<font color=blue></b>
January 9, 2003 3:50:39 AM

the Mall of America, Thats just down the road a ways,

For my 2 cents
win 2000 pro
Mandrake 9.0

I would kill for a copy of WINDOWS 2000 Advanced Server

<font color=blue>HOSED = Horrific operating system error detected</font color=blue>
January 11, 2003 2:44:12 AM

One thing I noticed about compatability mode - it seems to work for the administrator only. I really don't use XP at all, but it was installed by default on a few laptops and PCs at work. There was alot of software that only worked with admin privleges. n This may work ok at homeif you don't use multiple accounts, but if you do use an account that doesn't use admin privleges, especially in a corporate enviroment, you could have problems.

By the way, has anyone tried the Windows 2003 Server beta yet? I'm downloading RC2 iso and was wondering how it was before I load it.

Jarrett

<A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/modules.php?name=Forums&..." target="_new"><b><font color=red>Join The THGC Music Project</font color=red></b></A>
January 13, 2003 9:40:39 AM

On the evaluation copy (a real MS CD, not a pirate) of Win2K Advanced Server, is there a way to make that eval copy a regular copy so the 120 eval days does not have to be dealt with? If anyone can let me know of that info, please do.

Thanks

<b><font color=blue>"May the wings of angels surround and protect you from all the worries
and fears as you walk into the fog of reality."</font color=blue></b>
January 15, 2003 12:18:54 PM

Since you said
Quote:
I would kill for a copy of WINDOWS 2000 Advanced Server

Maybe then you might be able to answer the question in my last post...From an actual MS CD of Advanced Server, which is a Eval Copy, how could someone make it into a <i><b>regular</b></i> copy so you wont need to reinstall after 120 days? Is there any changing the key or anything? Not that I am saying anything to break the laws or anything... :smile:

If anyone, or even Owl, can answer this question, please please do!

<b><font color=blue>"May the wings of angels surround and protect you from all the worries
and fears as you walk into the fog of reality."</font color=blue></b>
!