I started to like 2k.
Anyway, I'd like to hear some opinions when you return, in monday.
| ClanKiller.com https://forums.clankiller.com/ |
|
| What to choose? https://forums.clankiller.com/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1120 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | RB [ Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | What to choose? |
I had WinXp with WinME (on two separated partitions). When I upgraded ME to Win2000, it screwed up WinXP somehow. I'm thinking about using only one operating system on my mech, but I don't know what to chose. What is more secure? XP or 2000? Any other dis- and advantages which could decide? |
|
| Author: | RB [ Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I started to like 2k. Anyway, I'd like to hear some opinions when you return, in monday.
|
|
| Author: | ElevenBravo [ Sat Jan 29, 2005 12:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Xp Unless your running some kinda of a server, you would be stupid to take 2000 over xp. |
|
| Author: | derf [ Mon Jan 31, 2005 6:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
XP. |
|
| Author: | RB [ Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I won't leave 2k so easy. My mech finally breath freely. Only possibility of security issues can change my mind. So? |
|
| Author: | ElevenBravo [ Mon Jan 31, 2005 2:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
XP |
|
| Author: | Satis [ Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
xp is a better overall O/S, in my opinion. At least once you turn off all the retarded prettiness and make it look more like win2k. 2k just runs slow, imo, especially boot times. XP is alot snappier. The hard part about xp is tweaking it to operate properly (which is kinda part of my website). You can think of XP as an enhanced version of win2k, since it runs off the NT kernel too. |
|
| Author: | derf [ Tue Feb 01, 2005 6:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Lol, for a laugh, i installed this Linux thingy on a partition. Its called FreeBSD. I thought it would atleast have a GUI. Lol, i was wrong. |
|
| Author: | Arathorn [ Tue Feb 01, 2005 8:30 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
*BSD is not Linux, it's an Unix flavour. |
|
| Author: | Satis [ Tue Feb 01, 2005 11:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I could've sworn FreeBSD ships with X-Windows. And what's with the hangup on a gui? GUIs aren't necessary...in fact, in many cases they can be a hindrance. They're certainly rough on memory and cpu usage. Bah....you guys are GUI bigots. |
|
| Author: | ElevenBravo [ Tue Feb 01, 2005 11:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The free download of Red Hat comes with a GUI and so does Mandrake if im not mistaken. Personaly I have SUSE. |
|
| Author: | derf [ Tue Feb 01, 2005 1:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Mandrake does come with a GUI. Am i right i saying that when you say "free download" its actually a limited trial? |
|
| Author: | ElevenBravo [ Tue Feb 01, 2005 2:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Last time I downloaded Red Hat it was free. But that was about a year ago. |
|
| Author: | Satis [ Tue Feb 01, 2005 3:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
All of it is free. That's part of the open-source world...the source code has to be made freely available. If the source is free, then someone, somewhere will compile it into binaries for you (usually the company giving out the source). The way they make money is selling the stuff on CD, bundling it with support of some sort (phone, tech, software, etc) and stuff like that. IE, anything that says 'Free' is free...no time limit, no limitations, nothing. Any 'pay' version has some sort of value-added something or other, like tech support or dedicated download servers or books or whatever. |
|
| Author: | RB [ Wed Feb 02, 2005 2:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|