 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999 time: 22:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Adalbertus
I didn't use Win 2000, only Win98. With XP I got the impression that a lot of configurability is lost (i.e. you have to like what M$ presents you, or you'll have to dig deep into the system). I have to switch the calculator to scientific every time I use it. Older versions remembered the old state. |
This is patently untrue, at least for the Pro version I use. WinXP Pro has all of the features of Win2K Pro plus some new stuff, and Win2K Pro had considerably more features than Win98 (by a longshot). And for the record, my calculator starts up in Scientific mode. 
quote: More annoying to me is that it pretends to be a multi-user system but in this respect it performs poorly. Most non-Microsoft programs cannot be installed in a way that every user accesses their own workspace. |

All programs can be installed in a way that every use access their own workspace, the reason most don't is because they were designed for Win98 or older Windows OSes where there was one workspace...
WinXP fully supports the concept of multiple users and multiple workspaces -- why don't you try using it on a huge network and see how it works.
quote: Windows XP is 30 years behind Unix. |
It's the other way around -- UNIX is the antiquated design for large mainframes and servers and people don't understand that such a design doesn't work well on the desktop.
quote: As a single-user system I didn't see major problems, but the network setup at work forces me to a multi-user setup. |
I still don't see your problem -- WinXP's multiuser system is fine. You can do fast switching between users logged in at the same time, an idiot-proof welcome/login screen, etc. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
BeBro
|
 |
of the Krauts
Mar 2000 time: 06:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
It will make you impotent, poison you children, make you wife unfaithful,reduce you IQ, and make you dog hate you. |
Sounds ok for us polytubbies.... 
Adalbertus: by cool gfx I mean those fancy (and customizable) XP style taskbar, windows, buttons, icons, etc. Of course I can have different icons or wallpapers for Win2k too, but not the other stuff. There are some solutions for skins available on the web for pre-XP versions, but those I tried didn´t run stable and/or slowed down the system.
Of course, I can live without all that, it just would be nice 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Cruddy
|
|
Hmm... my own argument is that until I NEED XP, I'm sticking with old 98.
It's not as expandable, it's not as pretty, but it does what I need it to, so why change? Until I want to run some NT applications together with some Windows, I don't really see the point.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Worthingtons
|
|
Pride Park,Derby
Jan 2002 time: 05:28
|
|
Windows XP will allow the government to control your mind, BeBro
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Willem
|
 |
Canada
Dec 2001 time: 00:28
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Cruddy
It's not as expandable, it's not as pretty, but it does what I need it to, so why change? |
Because it's a hell of alot more stable than 98 for one. I haven't had a single problem in a year now, except for my own error, but with 98 it seemed I had a system crash every 3-4 months.
Last edited by Willem on 23-05-2003 at 18:58
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28. Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|