 |
|
Zopperoni
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by elijah
And XP is NOT the most stable OS on the planet skywalker, why does it seem to decide to reboot with no warning at inopportune moments |
You can switch that off.
Control Panel > System > [tab]Advanced > Startup and Recovery > untick "Automatically Restart" under "System Failure.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by elijah
Flat panel IMAC would probably be a good idea. My brothers is better than my 2.8GHz box running XP at vid stuff, and even better than the linux dual boot on the same box (although that is better for all else except games). |
I call bullshit!
"Bullshit!"
How do you determine if it's running "better"?
It's 100% conclusive, by facts, that the 2.8GHz box is way faster (thereby, more productive) than the fastest dual PowerMacs, let alone a wussy iMac.
quote:
It doesnt empty your bank balance through your nose.
MS Licencing: Insert Wallet into drive $, and press return to empty. |
XP Home (which comes w/ Windows Movie Maker) is cheaper than OS X. Hello!
quote:
And XP is NOT the most stable OS on the planet skywalker, why does it seem to decide to reboot with no warning at inopportune moments |
Because that's what the preferences state for it to do. Don't like it? Change it! You can have it not force a reboot if something is detected as being ****ed up, and behave like OS X and Linux, but the reason why it forces a reboot by default is because the system is considered unstable at that point because something irregular happened. Linux zealots mistakenly translate this into meaning Linux is more "fault tolerant", but in reality Linux merely ignores those faults while Windows doesn't by default. And there is a reason why they're called faults.
quote:
why does it only put 2 channel sound into my 6 point surround sound soundcard |
For the life of me, I'm struggling to see how you equate this to system stability.
The default sound model in Windows is stereo sound. Why? Because it doesn't know what kind of speakers you have set up. All it knows is your sound card.
But you have a 6 point surround sound soundcard, right? So why didn't it automatically default to 5.1???
Well, if we applied minimal thought to it, we would realize that'd be an incredibly stupid thing to do. Almost all integrated soundchips shipping now, for example, are 5.1 capable. Almost all soundcards are 5.1 capable, period. Very few (a small minority) of sound systems have 6 channels of sound. So why the hell would you default this to 6 channels when most people can only hear 2? Then you're sending data to 4 channels which simply go into the void of nothingness!
The reason it defaults to 2 is because that's the smart thing to do.
Mind you, Linux defaults to 0 sound channels by default. 
If you've got a 5.1 system, the wise thing to do would be to go into the insanely-well-hidden sound preferences (Control Panel -> Sounds and Audio), under the Speaker Settings groupbox click "Advanced". Then select 5.1 surround speakers as the speaker type. It even shows a nice big, purty color picture for you since they know how hard it was to get there, and want to reward you!
quote:
and why does Linux work perfectly, except for running windows binaries which is improving anyway?  |
That is perhaps the most laughable thing I have heard you say yet. Do you even use Linux?
Linux certainly does not act perfectly. No OS acts perfectly.
Linux is overrated crap for the desktop. It doesn't do anything better than Windows as a desktop OS. The only thing it has on Windows is, it's free. And you get what you pay for.
Last edited by Asher on 21-06-2003 at 15:32
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by monolith94
"wanted to make movies and burn them onto dvds (I was oblivious to the fact that thats possible, is it?). "
On macs, it is. On pcs, too, if you want a major pain. |
Totally, it's a huge pain.
I have to edit it in Windows Movie Maker 2 (which does all that iMovie does, if you bothered to check), which comes free with Windows, and then burn it to the DVDROM by selecting "New Video DVD" and selecting the image file, then hitting burn. 
I really wish it was less complicated! This is too much for my puny mind.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
Asher, I'm surprised you'd recommend XP Home to anyone. Choosing an OS because of the bundled software has to be a mistake.
Anyway, the user isn't computer literate, and the Mac will handle it, why not go for the Mac?
This "Wintel does everything better" rant is just that - a rant.
Linux does one thing better than Windows - it lets you tinker around with Unix programs. The sort of mentality that wants this baffles me, but I never heard of Windows letting your mess with MS applications.
You find it easy to use a PC because you have years of experience. Pity the poor noob who doesn't give a sh1t how fast the processor is, so long as it does the job.
Giving a timeframe for burning DVD would be nice. How long does it take? How long does the AVI-MPEG translation take?
I don't see your posts as that helpful. And I thought Windows Movie Maker had a knackered codec that wouldn't let you encrypt/decrypt at full resolution? Pardon me if I've been misinformed here.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
 |
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:29
|
|
Seriously! In windows, its sluggish, in Linux its blisteringly quick. My brothers mac (dont ask me for specs) gives comparable performance to my linux box, noticeably faster than the same box running windows, which I can only put down to better archetecture than i86.
quote:
How do you determine if it's running "better"?
|
Speed/Stability/Usability (for those without commandline knowledge, windows has a considerable advantage there at this stage) and scalability.
quote:
XP Home (which comes w/ Windows Movie Maker) is cheaper than OS X. Hello!
|
XP Pro is the one that OS X is comparable to, in which case, XP is more expensive. Besides, I downloaded Slackware 9.0 for the cost of having my computer on for 6 hours.
OSS is far cheaper, and even on microsofts TCO thing, which is inherently flawed anyway, linux/BSD wins, except on that MS sponsored "study".
quote:
All it knows is your sound card.
|
Linux correctly modprobed it, and I got surround sound
quote:
Mind you, Linux defaults to 0 sound channels by default.
|
When did you last use linux? 8 months ago?  It modprobes my man!
quote:
Linux certainly does not act perfectly. No OS acts perfectly
|
Well, for all intents and purposes. It does all I want it to and more with no bull, no costs, relatively easy (relative to manual reading ability). It allows me superior control of my system, but in control and ownership, as well as code.
quote:
Linux is overrated crap for the desktop. It doesn't do anything better than Windows as a desktop OS
|
Even when i got into linux few people were talking about it on the desktop, now a few months later its a serious contender, with as many people using linux desktop as mac desktop. It needs time to mature. Besides, I use it on the desktop partly because of one seriously major advantage over windows... the commandline.
quote:
And you get what you pay for.
|
Exactly what gates said.
For free, I can get a fully fledged desktop system that configures most of my hardware automatically (monitor needed a little tweaking), with all the productivity software I need, including 2 and a half office suites, one of which is at least as good as MS office (if not as fast, but theyll sort that out with OO.o 1.1).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by elijah
Seriously! In windows, its sluggish, in Linux its blisteringly quick. |
Call now! Order yours today! And if you call in the next 15 minutes, we'll throw in two free days of tech support! That's right, two days! Call now, don't delay!
Linux is the one (save for the 2.5 kernel) with the ridiculous kernel latencies. 
And I do have a dualboot of Linux and Windows, and I can assure you Linux is not "blisteringly quick". In fact, XWindows is far less responsive than Windows is as an interface, and unless you do a bunch of third party hacks to the kernel, latencies are high which results in a performance pentalty in things like gaming, multitasking, and (you guessed it) computer graphics/movies. Not to mention how Linux is incredibly slow with launching and managing threads, and seeing as the new CPUs coming out rely on multiple threads for maximum performance...
quote:
My brothers mac (dont ask me for specs) gives comparable performance to my linux box, noticeably faster than the same box running windows, which I can only put down to better archetecture than i86. |
i86 isn't even an architecture! 
Do you have any clue what you're talking about? You sound like a drone...
The architecture is x86. And if PowerPC was truly a better architecture, how come it's a fraction of the speed?
quote:
XP Pro is the one that OS X is comparable to, in which case, XP is more expensive. |
Don't play that game, man.
She's basically not computer literate, she has no need for XP Pro whatsoever. XP Home is designed for people like her, and lets her do what she wants.
quote:
OSS is far cheaper, and even on microsofts TCO thing, which is inherently flawed anyway, linux/BSD wins, except on that MS sponsored "study". |
Again, you display fundamental misunderstanding. 
OSS does not equate free. OSS free as in source, not as in beer.
And you're right, OSS tends to be much cheaper.
quote:
Linux correctly modprobed it, and I got surround sound |
You cannot modprobe speakers. You can modprobe soundcards, which tell you the capabilities of the soundcard.
Did you purposefully ignore my post?
If you detect a 6-channel compatible soundcard, it is incredibly stupid to default this to 6-channel speaker setup. A very small minority of people with 6-channel compatible soundcards (almost all are 6-channel compatible these days, even the integrated ones) have 6-channel soundcards, so if the OS thinks it can output to 6 channels when only 2 exist, 4 channels never get heard.
That is a design flaw, not a feature.
quote:
Well, for all intents and purposes. It does all I want it to and more with no bull, no costs, relatively easy |
Are you using the same Linux as the rest of us?
Have you ever tried getting a Radeon 9800 Pro to work in Linux? Ever tried configuring it to play 3D games? Ever tried to get an Audigy 2 working in Linux (I got it working now in ARTS and no other sound server, and ARTS frequently corrupts the sound...).
One look at the Linux directory structure, and it's obvious ease of use and "no bull" is the last thing on their mind.
quote:
It allows me superior control of my system, but in control and ownership, as well as code. |
Give me a break, you would never look at the code. You don't even understand the architecture name. Further, by the time you did look at the code and figure it out and change what you wanted, days (or weeks) have passed...
quote:
Even when i got into linux few people were talking about it on the desktop, now a few months later its a serious contender |
LOL. You thought no one was talking about Linux on the desktop a few months ago? They've been talking about it for years, man, and the Linux desktop share is still ridiculously small.
Linux is a mediocre server OS, whose best feature is its cost. BSD is much better for that, the difference is Linux got all the hype...
quote:
For free, I can get a fully fledged desktop system that configures most of my hardware automatically (monitor needed a little tweaking) |
You must have old hardware.
Linux absolutely sucks ass with new hardware. You can't even get full hardware acceleration with a new ATI card. Most wireless cards don't work with it. To enable 3D acceleration you need to add kernel modules, you need to configure XWindows by hand, etc.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Whaleboy
|
|
Please make all cheques payable to Whaleboy
Jan 2003
time: 05:29
|
|
quote:
save for the 2.5 kernel
|
You said it! 2.4.x is basically 2000 technology. I always run dev kernels as soon as I get the chance. AND ITS STILL MORE STABLE THAN WINDOWS! 
quote:
In fact, XWindows is far less responsive than Windows is as an interface, and unless you do a bunch of third party hacks to the kernel
|
Which desktop? KDE sucks ar$e, dont bother with that, you want Gnome!!! Now THATS my baby!
What kernel hacks by the way? I'd be interested to squeeze out some extra juice, if you wanna PM me, I'd appreciate it!
quote:
i86 isn't even an architecture!
|
It was either i86 or x86, I forget, but either way, that means the 8086, the 286,386,486,586,686 classes of processor.
quote:
You cannot modprobe speakers.
|
No, but you can modprobe soundcards! Unfortunately theres no kernel module for automatically plugging in speakers... but when there is! No more experiences with the dark evil place that is the area behind my desk!
quote:
If you detect a 6-channel compatible soundcard, it is incredibly stupid to default this to 6-channel speaker setup
|
Didn't realise that, in which case, Kudzu is stupid! In all fairness, I now run Slackware, where I had to modprobe everything manually, but thats not a distro designed to compete with windows, its for those of us who dont need a mouse to use a computer... although it obviously provides... ill stop now... or not..
quote:
Have you ever tried getting a Radeon 9800 Pro to work in Linux?
|
No, hence my sanity. I dont deny that there are more hardware problems and setting up some hardware is harder in linux than windows, but is it possible (of course... what isnt?), is it feasible soon? (yes), and is the situation improving on a daily basis? (yes).
quote:
Give me a break, you would never look at the code
|
At the risk of another accusation of "bullshit", I look at the code, I read it, even found a few bugs and sent off a few reports (that was mozilla 1.3 beta a while back). I look at the kernel code to see how stuff is done, and while im not the worlds greatest coder I'm capable of spotting flaws. I know lots of linux people that do, it gives a completely different dimension of control over my system than closed source systems offer. Besides, even if one doesnt look, it is the choice and option of doing so that is most empowering, as one is assured that a number of people around the world who are very capable coders, and not working for one corporation, with its own interests, are reading the code, making changes and submitting them, and its worked pretty well thus far!
I trust linux and bsd not to contain spyware. I dont trust microsoft or any other closed source company to do the same.
quote:
Further, by the time you did look at the code and figure it out and change what you wanted, days (or weeks) have passed
|
Says you. You dont know me, dont make assumptions about the way I operate.
quote:
You thought no one was talking about Linux on the desktop a few months ago? They've been talking about it for years, man, and the Linux desktop share is still ridiculously small
|
Hardly in a serious capacity, and I'm saying that looking at the amount of articles and posts on the subject at sites like linux.com etc etc. In the past few months its become a serious contender, up to the size of apple mac, even MS admits to that. Mac OS is a good desktop system, if it were not for compatibility (the main barrier to linux in the future but then, such things tend to be broken down by forks and clones), it would probably have destroyed the MS monopoly on OS's!. Linux would not have got into the position it is in now if it wasnt doing something right. I dont even remember a single specific linux advert, only the IBM one with the basketball game, but that was only relatively recent (2/3 months?).
quote:
Linux is a mediocre server OS
|
In terms of performance and compared to BSD, its not mediocre, but its not as fast as 4.4BSD, though this will probably change with the release of 2.6.x. On smaller servers, linux distros like slackware are easier to admin than BSD, quicker to set up, and yet give most of the advantages of unix over windows, so on balance I would say that linux is the best os for small servers, whereas the BSD's are better for larger servers, or indeed people who *really* know what theyre doing.
Having said that, FreeBSD makes a mean desktop when you put some effort into it (more than slackware imo).
quote:
You must have old hardware
|
6/7 months or thereabouts. Got my current box for xmas  . Agreed, linux is problematic at best with hardware released after the kernel of a given OS, but then, installing a driver fixes that, just as is the case with windows, it just so happens that driver availability (something that is improving) sucks at the moment, and there is a lag of a few weeks. Having said that, few people buy a new piece of kit within seconds of its release, a graphics card will never become harry potter V.
Though some newer machines can cut it fine (I had to wait about 3 weeks for full hardware support with my current system), generally speaking, most people runnign linux are running older boxes that used windows and got pissed off with it, and wanted something better. They might not have been able to afford the new PC that XP would only run on, so they ran linux. They might have found that XP sucks and ran linux (my story, and increasingly so with the civil liberties minded), you get the idea .
quote:
To enable 3D acceleration you need to add kernel modules, you need to configure XWindows by hand, etc
|
IIRC, Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSE, Knoppix, Lindows etc etc, all do agpgart and the 3d stuff (GLX etc) automatically, and yes in Slackware and older distros one has to do it by hand. I run slackware, I can, thus I do. Boo Hoo!
quote:
People who think that an "illegal instruction" means the police are on their way - who then ring Agathon in a panic
|
With all this DRM and spyware crap now, I wouldnt be suprised if that actually happened soon! And as for the NSA backdoors!!! 
quote:
Virtually every PC ships with an anti-virus program
|
Mine didnt .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:29
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by elijah
You said it! 2.4.x is basically 2000 technology. I always run dev kernels as soon as I get the chance. AND ITS STILL MORE STABLE THAN WINDOWS! |
2.4 is the stable kernel, 2.5 is beta.
And no, I would disagree that it's more stable than Windows, since Windows from 1999 (Windows 2000) doesn't crash at all for me. And when my Linux box dies when I run Quake III with hardware acceleration, and the sounds become corrupting requiring a rebot, etc. -- I don't consider it that stable really.
quote:
Which desktop? KDE sucks ar$e, dont bother with that, you want Gnome!!! Now THATS my baby! |
I prefer Gnome, but it, too, is such a piece of crap that I can't properly set my mouse sensitivity. It's just way too slow, and the only way to turn it up any farther is to screw with acceleration, and then it just behaves whacked.
Not that it matters, the latency and responsiveness problems is a combination of poor kernel design, having the window manager talk to XWindows which talks to the OS, whereas in Windows the window manager is the OS and runs as a kernel extension.
quote:
What kernel hacks by the way? I'd be interested to squeeze out some extra juice, if you wanna PM me, I'd appreciate it! |
I don't have their names, there's a few out there for far better kernel latency issues, and more for competent thread handling.
quote:
It was either i86 or x86, I forget |
If you could forget something as basic as that, particularly as a supposed Linux user where 90% of the software you download has "x86" tagged on it, it really puts your credibility in doubt. It's like talking with someone about cars, and they forget what the steering wheel is called.
quote:
No, but you can modprobe soundcards! |
Hello! We've already been through this, twice.
Windows does detect the soundcards better (I can't believe you're even attempting to argue Linux has better hardware recognition, even Linux zealots avoid that territory). You cannot modprobe/detect speakers because speakers don't send information back to the computer, period. So autodetecting a 6 channel soundcard (which is 99% of today's soundcards) and defaulting this to 6 channel speakers is a stupid, stupid idea.
quote:
At the risk of another accusation of "bullshit", I look at the code, I read it, even found a few bugs and sent off a few reports (that was mozilla 1.3 beta a while back). |
"Bullshit".
How did your send your changes to the code, and which bugs did you fix (you do realize Bugzilla is kind enough to keep track of who patched what )
quote:
and while im not the worlds greatest coder I'm capable of spotting flaws. |
In a kernel?
Give me an example or two of bugs you fixed in the kernel.
quote:
I trust linux and bsd not to contain spyware. I dont trust microsoft or any other closed source company to do the same. |
Well, it's your own perogative to naively trust opensource to be secure and spyware free.
Did you know MandrakeSoft collects databases of information for your exact configuration plus hardware stats if you use MandrakeUpdate? Don't believe me? Packetsniff that data.
Did you know that the equivalent function in Windows, Windows Update, doesn't collect any of the data aside from your OS version? It works by sending your computer a catalogue of the updates available, then your computer decides what it has and doesn't have.
So in this case, it's certainly the open source software that has the spyware over closed source.
quote:
Says you. You dont know me, dont make assumptions about the way I operate. |
Oh, I'm sorry.
I didn't realize you were better than 99.9% of the programmers in the world, while at the same time forgetting what the instruction set is called on PCs.
quote:
In terms of performance and compared to BSD, its not mediocre, but its not as fast as 4.4BSD |
Which 4.4BSD?
BSD is faster and more secure. Linux is slower and less secure, but it's got the GNU license which open source pundits orgasm over, while BSD has the BSD license which is less "communist" in nature. The reason Linux is so popular is because of hype and GNU, and nothing more. It's hardly a stellar OS.
Look at Netcraft's record uptime statistics, every single one of the top 100 are BSD systems.
quote:
IIRC, Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSE, Knoppix, Lindows etc etc, all do agpgart and the 3d stuff (GLX etc) automatically, and yes in Slackware and older distros one has to do it by hand. I run slackware, I can, thus I do. Boo Hoo! |
Bzzzzzzzzzt.
Nvidia's drivers are binary only, and do not get configured properly for 3D on any of those systems due to legal reasons.
I've installed Mandrake 9.0 myself, which is usually the best for autoconfig/install, and it still does 2D only, directing you to nvidia.com for instructions on how to enable 3d.
And FYI, Linux still can't support AGP 8x even.
quote:
Mine didnt . |
Which vendor did you use?
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29.
Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-06-2003 06:22
Don't tell me you're not bright enough to figure out how to use MS Word...
|