Dual core, Quad core??

[Edwardo Piet]

Just to say my bit on the matter, for whatever it's worth (not sure if it's really worth anything or not!):

I would try linux or some other OP...but I myself consider it a waste of my time because Ive been using windows for 14 years, and basically hours every day for 14 years - never really been a problem for me. The biggest problems I've had have been fixed with just a bit of persistence. And as for usage- I find it very easy to use. And I find it is getting better too. I found XP easier than win 98 and Vista I think I find even better than XP. I would say in some ways 95 was actually superior to 98, but overall I preferred 98 still. I can't really complain myself.

And as for macs I've used them a couple of times and found them practically unusable. I think it's just what I'm personally used to. But those macs without a right mouse button!!....I think... "Why?! What's easier? Clicking with another finger or holding down the 'apple key' with a finger on the other hand and pressing the same button and having to let go and hold it again all th time? Wtf? Do microsoft own a monopoly on right mouse buttons or something?!" - I've heard not all apple macs hav ehad no right mouse button though... But for the ones that do...I still wonder : "Wtf is that all about?"

Just my two cents (/pennies!)

EvF

[Samson]

EVF, I'm with you on this one....

I've been using Windows since 95, However if I wanted to give a breakdown of why I use what I use and comparisons of the other, I would say this...

1. Mac is great for multilingual graphics software and regardless of how much more Windows upgrades their program, I do not see them passing Mac anytime soon in that category.

2. Linux is very stable and I love their servers/software, and is great for privacy use in anti-virus type programs. (But keep in mind the world usage of Windows in comparison to Linux. I would venture to say that it would be a different story if the scenario were reversed)

3. Windows out of dumb luck and a bit of piracy happens to be the world leader at this current moment in time. So what this means and what has happened is every other software and hardware company out there is simply going where the money and demand is. Yes, they do make programs for all 3 and the top 2, but there is still an enormous demand for Windows based H - S.

I have seen a major turn in the past 7 years, (Vista did not help in matters for Microsoft's continued climb), but it will still be a while before Linux, Mac, or any other type desktop software takes over the throne.


I would say to all Linux and Mac users......Enjoy the freedom while you can.......LOL

[Tiberius]

2. Linux is very stable and I love their servers/software, and is great for privacy use in anti-virus type programs. (But keep in mind the world usage of Windows in comparison to Linux. I would venture to say that it would be a different story if the scenario were reversed)

Actually, this is a common misconception.

Although there are some viruses in the Linux world, none of them can do the damage that Windows ones can for the simple reason that they cannot write themselves into system files. The only viruses I currently know of in Linux use known exploits in Gnome and KDE desktop managers, although they do require a somewhat stupid user to double click an email attachment.

http://www.geekzone.co.nz/foobar/6229

That said, if you set some permissions wrong you could easily invite viruses into your system, but it is safe to say that the threat of viruses on Linux will remain low.

Of course, as the number of users grows, the number of people who read over the code and attempt their own exploits will increase. The good thing is that because the code is open source, more people are able to fix the exploits. The old view was the closed source code was better because less people could exploit it, but this lead to worse actual code being written, so that when people decompiled it they were able to create viruses very easily. With open source, there are going to be more exploits being spotted, but also more being fixed, and the code itself will be better.

I'm glad I took an Information Security course this year

[Edwardo Piet]

@ Samson....I've been using windows since 3.1 when all the big programs were run on DOS - back when I was 6 years old

I am too used to windows to change now I think. I don't know why I'd want to change - I love it too much lol hehe. So fucking familar - and it's nostalgic!

EvF

[Samson]

Of course, as the number of users grows, the number of people who read over the code and attempt their own exploits will increase. The good thing is that because the code is open source, more people are able to fix the exploits. The old view was the closed source code was better because less people could exploit it, but this lead to worse actual code being written, so that when people decompiled it they were able to create viruses very easily. With open source, there are going to be more exploits being spotted, but also more being fixed, and the code itself will be better.

A.H. this was pretty much what I was getting at. I know Linux has a great anti-virus software, but just as you stated here: Of course, as the number of users grows, the number of people who read over the code and attempt their own exploits will increase.

Now, I will agree, just as you also stated that they will be able to fix the exploits faster, but you know as well as I do, if it can be fixed, it can be broken....
It was the only reason I mentioned about the amount of users involved in comparison to Windows.

Don't worry brotherman, I'm not knocking on Linux...lolol.....Hell, I'm a computer geek and love it all.....

---

@ Samson....I've been using windows since 3.1 when all the big programs were run on DOS - back when I was 6 years old

I am too used to windows to change now I think. I don't know why I'd want to change - I love it too much lol hehe. So fucking familar - and it's nostalgic!

EvF

Oh, if you want to go old school, that is not a problem. I've used the same and dos was my friend/enemy back in the day....I was around the same age as you when I got my first computer, which was around 1980 .....Just wish I would have had a mouse with it.......LOL

As far as today, I've been part of the same gaming clan since 1999 in a game called Counter-Strike. I'm an Admin and own one out of our 3 servers and one website for this...We try and put together at least 3 Lan games per year... Matter of fact we have our next on July 18th. We usually get a turn out of 80 to 100 people, but we have had as low as 50. (The most to date was 243 ppl)...

Back when we started the group Windows was the current waterfall for users in mass majority, so this was what we went with. And if I remember correctly Half-Life did not have a Mac version for online gaming of CS back during that time. We have simply "Followed the leader" since.

[Rob]

A.H. this was pretty much what I was getting at. I know Linux has a great anti-virus software

Linux doesn't have any greater anti-virus software than windows, the system is just inherently safer as it was built as a multi user environment which could keep users data and system files safe from the actions of other users. Where as windows was not built for a multi user environment and had the feature thrust upon it at a later date. It wasnt built with networking in mind either. In the early versions of windows they didn't even come with an IP stack. One had to be installed from a third party. These things together mean Windows just isn't fundamentally built for what its used for today. The best thing Microsoft could do at this point is rewrite it. Give it a proper safe foundation on which to build on. With a proper safe file system to match. When they do this, the impact of internet security threats will be greatly reduced.

[Edwardo Piet]

Oh, if you want to go old school, that is not a problem. I've used the same and dos was my friend/enemy back in the day....I was around the same age as you when I got my first computer, which was around 1980 .....Just wish I would have had a mouse with it.......LOL

As far as today, I've been part of the same gaming clan since 1999 in a game called Counter-Strike. I'm an Admin and own one out of our 3 servers and one website for this...We try and put together at least 3 Lan games per year... Matter of fact we have our next on July 18th. We usually get a turn out of 80 to 100 people, but we have had as low as 50. (The most to date was 243 ppl)...

Back when we started the group Windows was the current waterfall for users in mass majority, so this was what we went with. And if I remember correctly Half-Life did not have a Mac version for online gaming of CS back during that time. We have simply "Followed the leader" since.

I just spent 8-10 hours a day playing Age of empires 2, every day online for 4 years and then I spent a year and a half playing Call of Duty 2 for 12-16 hours a day and got top 20 ranked on Xfire - but - it was only on two specific sets, rifle only and deathmatch only (not separately, combined).

I have spent most of my life playing Age of empires two...lol...and 2nd most playing Call of Duty 2 perhaps lol (would have been more if I kept it up).

I stopped late 2006 because I lost my computer, among other non-computer related problems I had which I won't go into. Good job I stopped really cos I wasn't really going anywhere!

And there were no tournaments for Call of Duty 2 deatmatch only that I could find....especially that were also rifle only! - I was also used to 1 or two specific servers where I ranked all my kills up! Lol.

I am more familiar with computers than I am with the outside world. That's for sure - I'm not saying that's a good thing! Just a true thing lol.

Oh and when I used Dos and 3.1 when I was 6 I had a mouse LOL - I also learnt to touch type fully within 30 minutes on the first day of trying lol - and I have never used less than all fingers and thumbs, right from the beginning. In fact - I'm more comfortable with typing than I am talking.

And finally, on the matter of going to school (lol) I only went to school for a year. I was home-educated. So much more time for computers lol! (too much hehe).

And finally: I used to own an uncountable amount of PC games (mostly from the 90s). Not anymore cos I lost them all along with my previous comp

EvF

[Kyuuketsuki]

Where as windows was not built for a multi user environment and had the feature thrust upon it at a later date. It wasnt built with networking in mind either. In the early versions of windows they didn't even come with an IP stack. One had to be installed from a third party. These things together mean Windows just isn't fundamentally built for what its used for today. The best thing Microsoft could do at this point is rewrite it. Give it a proper safe foundation on which to build on. With a proper safe file system to match. When they do this, the impact of internet security threats will be greatly reduced.

You see again, you are talking ancient history because NT (the OS upon which ALL current versions of Windows are based) WAS built for networking and I believe that even OS2 (which preceded NT) was built for networking. Why do you guys do that? It's like me saying *nix was never designed for a GUI (and it wasn't in it's earliest incarnations).

Kyu

[Rob]

You see again, you are talking ancient history because NT (the OS upon which ALL current versions of Windows are based) WAS built for networking and I believe that even OS2 (which preceded NT) was built for networking. Why do you guys do that? It's like me saying *nix was never designed for a GUI (and it wasn't in it's earliest incarnations).

Kyu

Well in one instance i see no evidence that it has changed and in the other i see adaptation. I'm not talking ancient history, the flawed foundation is clearly still there. If it wasn't, the likes of viruses wouldn't be as rampant as they are now.

[leo-rcc]

OS/2 was supposed to be the next DOS, a protected mode DOS (It was supposed to be called CP/DOS).

OS/2 1.0 had no network support at all, 1.1 which IBM didn't sell outside its own client base had SNA support for connecting to IBM Mainframes. OS/2 1.2 was the first to have a networking engine supporting TCP/IP and IPX/SPX.

The first OS/2 that the general audience could buy with network support was OS/2 2.0 after the break-up with Microsoft.

NT 3.1 inherited the OS/2 1.2 LAN Manager networking engine, coupled with the improved BSD TCP/IP Unix stack.