| Archive for NEEPS North East Eco-friendly People's Site |
| baldowrie |
vista updates could cause problemshttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7205059.stm |
||
| IainC |
Re: vista updates could cause problems
I think that slightly worse is that there are some "pre updates" that caused the machines to go into an "updating" loop which basically screwed your machine over before you'd even started on SP1. |
||
| Diana |
I'll stick with Macs thanks 
|
||
| IainC |
Main reason that they have less issues is that they have seriously restricted the amount/kinds of software that get to run on them and also the kind of hardware that they run on. PC's get so much software written for them by so many people and there are so many differing kinds of hardware to build together to make a PC that it must be nigh on impossible to test on every variation. |
||
| Smooth Hound |
is there a way to stop these downloads on vista, mine seems to do it on its own when i go to shut down, it tells me i mustnt stop it :? do i just leave it doing it or what 
|
||
| Martin |
Ubuntu on this one, Xandros on the Asus EEE - two fingers in the air to Bill Gates!
Updates?- automatic! Available software - absolutely buckets, and it's all free! - fast, safe, doesn't run everything you do through Echelon......superior in every way! In comparison, Windoze is just so.........20th century! 
Wouldn't have Vista in the house on principle, it is no less than fully-fledged spyware for the homeland security wallahs in the US of A - everything you do on your computer is reported back to Uncle Bill! And I'm kinda old-fashioned, I tell the computer what websites to go to, what software to download and run, not some b**** mid-western spymaster! (I DID try it, on a friend's laptop, after a day of horrors I removed it, and installed Ubuntu)
|
||
| IainC |
Never really have understood the whole Anti-MS or Anti-Mac types 
Have used a number of Linux versions both at home and in the workplace and depending on what you are doing there isn't a lot of difference between using any of them. The one main difference is that most people know how to get about Windows compared to any of the others, which is probably one main reason so many people use it. |
||
| niceguyrichy |
they all have their own strengths, but unfortunately windows is the only OS that ticks every box. you can't use linux or a mac for gaming see. but you can with windows, and use it for everything else that the other 2 do. I did build a sff box that I used in the living room for a while soley for internet access that I ran ubuntu on, and that was absolutely fine and dandy. but of course, to play counter strike or DoW I had to come upstairs to my study.. and if I ever had the money to invest in a comp purely for music production purposes, I'd almost certainly get a Mac. but I don't have the money, and I like to play the odd game here and there, so the only obvious choise is the dreaded Windows I'm afraid. (linux is great if all you do is check email...) |
||
| Martin |
I'll tell you why!
To gain it's world lead, Microsoft used some of the dodgiest tactics known to man, and as a result became rightfully much loathed by the "geek" community. In an effort to gain complete control, they tried to "kill" other browsers by incorporating a "built-in" one (about which there were some long drawn-out court cases).:? Windoze is itself a "kludge" - it's inherently appalling and inefficient programming, that is full of intrinsic security holes, and is layer upon layer of patched rubbish - in other words, it's a miracle it works at all! - It is incredibly "resource heavy" - every new layer that they add means there is the requirement for even faster processors, more memory, more Ram - everything has to expand just to keep the blessed thing ticking over! :? Last but not least - "security" - they keep cracking on about it - in simple terms, Windoze is designed with all the "doors" wide open, Linux starts with them all shut (guess which is intrinsically far safer!) - Because of the basic design flaws, and because Microsoft has upset virtually every geek in the world, Windoze is the target for almost all the hacking going on...... Taking Ubuntu as an example, this is built by people worldwide who do the programming for the love of it - they give it to the world for free, because they believe that the world should have the right to the best without being tied to one megalomaniac US company - most of the internet backbone runs on Linux, and a great deal of the third world! I first tried Linux around a year ago - I was running this aged laptop with Windoze XP, and it was getting sooooo slow that I was wondering if it was time to get a new computer - like most people I was worried about taking a major leap of faith into a new operating system........then along came "Wubi"
You download a tiny programme, fire it up, choose "Ubuntu", and then leave the computer to download 700mb - then you go for "install" and the computer grinds away for around half an hour doing so.......thereafter, every time you boot up, you have the choice of Ubuntu or Windoze.....
Since then, I've booted up Windoze about half a dozen times only, just to retrieve things I'd "forgotten". The laptop speed increased incredibly running Linux, Ubuntu is easier to "learn" than Vista, is immensely secure, and is FREE...........As and when I buy a new computer, it will have Linux installed from day one..... 8) Last but not least, I do find the Vista "spy in your sitting room" makes it an operating system that I won't have on the premises as a matter of principle - I choose what programmes I want, not Microsoft, I choose who sees my documents, photos, emails etc. not Microsoft........Vista was programmed in league with the US "Homeland Security" wallahs, and it reports every single thing you do back to Microsoft, and runs it through their "security" filters - it will also do fun things like removing programmes IT doesn't like, disable programmes, or report you for downloading a few mp3s............ 
|
||
| IainC |
Ummm... guess Homeland security isn't interested in all the things that I've found on our Vista machines at work then...
Have NEVER had Vista EVER uninstall something I wasn't uninstalling myself, it's never disabled a program either and whether it reports back anything else or not I dunno (or care)... your ISP has all the info any government would need anyway so why bother programming it into an OS
I agree though, most of the MS OS's are more bloated than they need to be. I also know all about the MS "history" where they are far better "developers" than "innovators"... almost everything they have done has been based on or copied from other people, just they then made it fit in with the same look/feel as their other MS stuff which made it easier for people to find their way around it. Similar to Nokia phones in a way, its a std look/feel/layout and some people don't swap from them due to that, even if something else is a lot better. I've been using the likes of Linux, etc on and off for the last 10-15 years, still have the laptop as a dual boot XP/Vista machine. I do keep going back to other newer versions of linux to try them out but have never thought of one being so good or so much better to be bothered shifting away from MS completely. Also, your point about viruses, etc is correct in that people wanting to do the most "damage" generally aim for the largest set of users, MS and IE users are by far in the majority, hence the fewer viruses, etc made for Macs, Linux, etc. There are holes in all of these OS's but generally no-one tends to look/find them in the other OS's due to it not being worth their while, plus as the *nix versions are open source and far more configureable what is a security rick on one machine might not even exist on another one due to the kernal being built without that part being installed, etc. That plus being open source the fix can be put in place far quicker. |
||
| Martin |
My day with a friend's laptop finished me for Vista...........
He called me, and said "you know computers, can you get my new one up and running for me?" - (he's a total computer newbie) :? Having got used to the speed and ease of Ubuntu, I was appalled........brand new laptop, with a much faster processor and more memory than mine......at first I thought it was faulty it took so long to fire up!.......... :? Then I thought, right - AVG, Zone Alarm, Firefox, Thunderbird..............firstly you have a god almighty battle to stop it installing the totally useless Norton Security (which would have slowed an already snail's pace computer into reverse!) - I switched off layer upon layer of "security" bilge, and went to install Firefox - the browser didn't want to go to "Mozilla.org", threw an epic wobbler, and fired up innumerably warning windoze basically informing me that the site was unsafe, full of viruses, was not of the true faith, and I could not go there!!!!
At this point, I got cross! - switched off more security cr*p, and eventually managed to download and install Firefox...........having got sufficiently "aerated" I decided it was time to walk away for a while before I put an axe through the screen - it then took 45 minutes to switch off (with the internet link going full tilt all the while) - upon reboot, "Firefox" had disappeared, and all the security bilge had switched itself back on.......... at that point, it was "Wubied"
What annoyed me (apart from the dreadful slowness) was the way in which they'd petrify any newbie into "doing it their way", as it does a Violet Elizabeth Bott, stamps it's foot, and loudly announces "If you don't do what you're told, I'll thcream and thcream until I'm sick" - sorry buster, you're an operating system, you do what I tell you to do, or you're toast!
|
||
| IainC |
Ah see there is the problem... Norton. Had to remove that from a neighbours machine that had started crawling after it had been installed... added to which they'd still managed to get viruses even with it on.
I know it's a personal thing, but why would you want to go and install another browser on the system when IE works fine? Also, first tip with Vista, disable UAC... its meant to help add another security layer but all it does is wind you up and most people would still click okay without reading it anyway
I guess I just spend the first while with a new install/machine removing all the crap from it that I know I won't use or don't need. That way it only has the stuff I need on it. Vista with less than 2Gb of RAM is pointless though IMO. |
||
| Martin |
IE works fine?..........hrrrumph! (it's SOOOO slow!) - it's another "principle of it" things - having done some webdesign, I saw Microsoft's attempts to make the web their own by ignoring "web standards", and foisting off the unutterably dreadful "Front Page" and "extensions" on an unsuspecting public, and have used Firefox virtually since it's inception, as it's had the decency to "stick to the rules"......... and yes, I was the bloke, who when he went to a website that said "optimised for IE only", or exhorted me to download the rubbish said
"ahh, they don't want my business - fair enough!" (you still get the odd one!)
Linux is the future - not an antedeluvian behemoth that demands your money to steal your privacy.............
|
||
| IainC |
Works quick enough for me... never had any issues in it's speed that was a result of it being IE's fault. People have been saying *nix is the future for decades though and it still has a tiny share of the global market. The likes of the EeePC coming with it pre-installed though should help it gain a bit more share I'd have thought. For something like it I'd have though *nix was the best option but someone I know has one and he trialled it with both Linux and XP and although the Linux install was quicker to boot, etc he actually preferred leaving it as an XP machine as he found he could do more with it (don't ask me what). I think one of the main "issues" with Linux is that there are so many flavours, etc that for a computer newbie it's not easy to see which is the best option. Then you have the fact that the command line is nowhere near the same as DOS so you need to re-learn a huge amount of commands to use it and then you can have driver issues with certain things too. Tried getting Linux to run in a virtual machine... it's possible but not with a working GUI in a lot of cases. |
||
| Martin |
I'd agree, it's been waiting in the wings for ages - but I think it's time is now coming........despite my anti-Microsoft prejudices I'd clung pathetically to XP as I was of the belief that I "needed" the familiar OS - Wubi enabled me to "try before I didn't need to buy", and has been SO good, wild horses wouldn't drag me back to Windoze. I had the confidence to buy the Asus EEE with Xandros, and will never again waste money buying bloatware.
I wish we had the "anti trust" laws that the States has - my daughter recently bought a new laptop, and like many people insisted she "couldn't do without Windoze" (totally wrong, but it's her choice!), and I went with her on the rounds of the local retailers - not one would offer me a laptop without bloody Vista, unless I wanted a Mac - to my knowledge, the only mainstream manufacturer that offers Ubuntu as an option is DELL......To me that reeks of unfair competition, and Microsoft using it's marketing muscle to try to stifle the opposition! (yet again!) 
I don't like bullies, and am firmly of the opinion that there's only one way to deal with them - a bloody nose!
|
||
| IainC |
Another reason a lot of manufacturers only dish out the MS offering is the support that they then need to offer. With the MS offering they can call on a huge number of "experts" whereas with any of the linux offerings the support pool is a lot smaller, esp when you can have differences between each of the linux offerings as well.
That IMO is another reason that the MS offerings have got as popular as well. Someone who used windows 95 will be able to start getting to what they need if they jump onto a Vista machine, a Windows 2003 server machine, XP, 98, ME, etc they are all similar enough layoutwise that even a beginner knows where they are and how to get started. Completely different thing when you go to some linux distros... fairly sure you can configure them to start in X Windows or whatever but most of the earlier ones I used went straight to command line. While linux, etc probably will gain more share it's a LONG way from knocking MS off the top. Far too many businesses run on MS offerings and it is the standard for most businesses around the world. You would almost have to force everyone off it at the one time to make the change. |
||
| Martin |
Google runs on Linux - including their offices........so the revolution is beginning - as more and more companies find the benefits of Linux, Microsoft's days have to be numbered
I've been amazed at how well people with little computer knowledge have "taken" to Ubuntu - it "just does it" - I found it simpler to get my head around than Vista (even having gone dos-3.1, 95, 98, XP), add to that the speed and security boost (I reckon it can add 2 to 3 years to the useful life of a computer that you'd have given up with using snailish Windoze), it will catch on in increasing numbers.......
Having "been converted" gives me a whole new view......."PAY for software? - good heavens, why? (how old fashioned!) - security problems? - WHAT security problems? - help? - don't need any -it "just does it".......
I think they've shot themselves in the foot bigtime with Vista - many businesses already have "taken the plunge" and migrated, or have delayed upgrading and stuck with XP......
|
||
| niceguyrichy |
and that has nothing to do with the fact that ubuntu basically copied windows and works exactly like XP LOL ??? fanboi's are so very narrow minded. don't get me wrong, I hate M$ on general principal, but they are the only option that does what I need. you need to see the bigger picture mate. Gaming is still a dominating force in global markets, and mac and linux just don't cop it. live with (for now) |
||
| Martin |
why? - I don't "game", I don't know anyone who does, so why waste money on an awful system for the ability to do so?
If people want to "game",why not buy one of those psp thingummyjigglers! Open Office is better than Word The Gimp spanks the pants off Photoshop Firefox and Thunderbird are far better than Microsnot's offerings Things like "Xmms" are the dog's danglies for "sounds", Even the inbuilt cd burner is far better than Nero...........
Why on earth perpetuate something as awful, manipulative and expensive as Windoze?
|
||
| IainC |
I use Winamp for sounds... not found anything as good yet.
In what way is the cd burning stuff better than Nero? |
||
| Martin |
I can understand it!
That simple - it's intuitive, it's fast, it does the business - Nero has always tied me in knots, confused the bejaysus out of me, and caused me to install something like "CD burner pro" that I could understand........
Same thing with "Photoshop" - despite innumerable attempts to get to grips with it, I found it deliberately counter-intuitive, cost a bally fortune, then I discovered the Windoze version of "The Gimp"...........
|
||
| IainC |
Hmmm... I find Nero as intuative as you can get... mind you I've been using it for years (when a CDRW cost more than a tenner, etc )
|