XP, To hate or not to hate. that is the question

[binary hero]

yep, the fag pic beats the finger pic - sorry phily

[fwgx]

Fag pic is passe. I win

[binary hero]

it may be passe but the finger pic looks awful somebody needs to learn how to draw


now we can confuse each other now we have 2 fag pics!

[fwgx]

I demand more respect from you b_h!

[binary hero]

yo. respec' man.

[binary hero]

let's all join

[jon_joy_1999]

Originally posted by binary hero
www.litestep.net
www.litestep.org
www.litestep.info
www.litestep.com (?)

ehhh SQREW LITESTEP it's all about Explorer NEKKAyay we got the post count back

[The Valkyrie]

No, seriously going back to the topic. I might use WinXP if I could tweak it to use the LEAST memory it can ever go. I would really like to throw all the animations, all the skinning, all the alpha-blending and huge true-color icons shit out. These graphical extra craps are utter waste of memory which could have been used for something far better, like add a few fps to Jedi Knight 2.

For now, I'm stuck with my very own tweaked WinME. Maybe I'll have to consider XP craps when Microsoft force me to use 64-bit apps, but I'm happy with what I got for now. It ain't pretty, and the BSOD does get at me sometimes, but runs like a dream, never lagging even in the most heated of CS battles.

I tried Litestep once, and it was fine - just a little crashy. Besides, I could never get fully used to the absence of the Start Button. But the biggest reason I refuse to use Litestep is because Litestep.net is such an asshole - it won't let me download a theme twice. I format my comp often, so I'm bound to forget to backup a few things, but none of them shouldn't be irreplaceable. I hope someone from Litestep.net reads this. You're all fucking assholes, you hear me???!!!

Sorry, I'm just still very bitter.

I love System Shock 2. I love the Thief Games. Looking Glass was a company full of game designing geniuses - right from the days of terra Nova. Too bad they weren't marketing geniuses. (sobs)

[Some1]

Windows may not be perfect, but it's the best there is..Linux isn't a viable alternative by any stretch of the imagination, and it won't ever be, until it can run every single one of my Win32 based applications as good as or better than Windows itself does.

[fwgx]

Does it really have to do that? or will software that does the same thing surfice, presuming you can convert your stuff over.

[wuaffiliate]

Originally posted by The Valkyrie
No, seriously going back to the topic. I might use WinXP if I could tweak it to use the LEAST memory it can ever go. I would really like to throw all the animations, all the skinning, all the alpha-blending and huge true-color icons shit out. These graphical extra craps are utter waste of memory which could have been used for something far better, like add a few fps to Jedi Knight 2.

For now, I'm stuck with my very own tweaked WinME. Maybe I'll have to consider XP craps when Microsoft force me to use 64-bit apps, but I'm happy with what I got for now. It ain't pretty, and the BSOD does get at me sometimes, but runs like a dream, never lagging even in the most heated of CS battles.

I tried Litestep once, and it was fine - just a little crashy. Besides, I could never get fully used to the absence of the Start Button. But the biggest reason I refuse to use Litestep is because Litestep.net is such an asshole - it won't let me download a theme twice. I format my comp often, so I'm bound to forget to backup a few things, but none of them shouldn't be irreplaceable. I hope someone from Litestep.net reads this. You're all fucking assholes, you hear me???!!!

Sorry, I'm just still very bitter.

I love System Shock 2. I love the Thief Games. Looking Glass was a company full of game designing geniuses - right from the days of terra Nova. Too bad they weren't marketing geniuses. (sobs)

umm if you want more fps in jk2 you can with xp you WILL get a performance improvement over ME.

i use none of the crap skinning and animations of winxp, its all off and i use the classic windows theme.

winxp uses AS much ram as when i ran 2k for years.

your facts = not strait, ME mem usage is horrible it has no control and leaks all over the place. you need a mem dump program to have good mem usage how great is that lol.

i guess you are stuck with a tweaked ME, where as im stuck with a tweaked XP which is faster have fun.

[Atmo]

I'll take XP with its occasional (i've never had too many probs) incompatibility with older software over the built on a house of cards stability of 9x.

Actually, my experiences with 9x werent as bad as some, i used to get perhaps one bsod a fortnight, but i didnt leave my system on all the time.

With XP (im using home at the moment) i perhaps get a bsod once every few months, and then its because of a driver or something.

Only once have i had it fuck up to the point a complete re-install was necessary (even though i have re-installed a few times as preventive maintenance).

So yeh, i think XP is the best microsoft os since dos 6.22.

[Some1]

Does it really have to do that? or will software that does the same thing surfice, presuming you can convert your stuff over.

Alternative software would suffice, but only if it had the same look, feel, and design as the windows stuff, and performance that was as good as or better than the windows couunterparts.

[The Valkyrie]

wuaffiliate,

Cacheman. Possibly the best memory manager in the world - and it's free! My majorly-tweaked WinME + skillfully-set Cacheman = ownz XP any day.

[Atmo]

Originally posted by The Valkyrie
Cacheman. Possibly the best memory manager in the world - and it's free! My majorly-tweaked WinME + skillfully-set Cacheman = ownz XP any day.

Cacheman can also be used in XP, but there's really not much point. All those cacheman settings can be done with regedit anyways...

Disabling the paging executive and setting a large I/O page lock limit is all thats necessary...and that takes like 30 seconds with regedit.

[The Valkyrie]

That's the beauty of it! Cacheman does not add any nasties like all the other optimizers, so I never have to worry about it turning my comp into a steaming pile of plastic and metal!

Now take a look at the pic below and bite on it. I spent hours on Norton Registry Editor to get this far, so I'm pretty sick of regedit.

Besides , have a little common sense. If WinXP is so lean, mean and green then why does XP Home Edition need a 866Mhz with 133Mhz FSB and 512MB mem to run smoothly as opposed to 600Mhz 256MB for WinME?

[Atmo]

I've never said XP is lean. Its a system resource terrorist compared to 9x. However, all those resources arent just being used for nothing....Take a look at all the background services (not the tasks) that are running on a default XP install and you'll see what i mean.

Getting your mem used after boot down to 17mb isnt all that great btw. It basically mean that most of the core parts of the os arent kept in ram, so if a dll is required, it must be loaded from the hard drive, then when its done being used cacheman will unload it, then if its needed again it has to loaded from the hard drive.

Most of the memory management tweaks i do are to keep as much often accessed data in ram, rather than being paged out. My system has used over 200mb (of 512) of data in ram after booting, so when a program needs to access a dll or driver, it never has to load it from the page file.

This makes for a much more responsive system. Even pc133 ram will have a data throughput of around 500mb a second, the fastest of ide hard drives would be lucky to have a throughput of 60mb per second, so the difference is very much noticeable.

[jon_joy_1999]

[edit]

Originally posted by The Valkyrie
That's the beauty of it! Cacheman does not add any nasties like all the other optimizers, so I never have to worry about it turning my comp into a steaming pile of plastic and metal!

Now take a look at the pic below and bite on it. I spent hours on Norton Registry Editor to get this far, so I'm pretty sick of regedit.

Besides , have a little common sense. If WinXP is so lean, mean and green then why does XP Home Edition need a 866Mhz with 133Mhz FSB and 512MB mem to run smoothly as opposed to 600Mhz 256MB for WinME?

wrong quote[/edit] I dont know what you've been reading but I'm using XP pro with EVERYTHING enabled (all the little visual doohickys and stuff) on a 657 MHz PIII 96 MB of Ram 4MB Vid Card 100 MHz FSB and it works faster than 98 EVER ran. I can load Need For Speed in 18 seconds, compaired to 40 seconds on 98. 2000 loads it at 25 seconds) and the framespeed difference between 2000 and XP (on the same game) is a MAJOR improvement. I have not once BSODed (but there was the first time I tried to load Application Sharing and indavertntly crashed my PC. it bogged down a whole bunch and I hit ctrl-alt-del to try to fix it, lets say I got a little impatent with it. I have no idea how many times I hit ctrl-alt-del. but I just gave up. I used the trusty powerswitch and let my computer sit for a couple of hours)

[Atmo]

I dont know what you've been reading but I'm using XP pro with EVERYTHING enabled (all the little visual doohickys and stuff) on a 657 MHz PIII 96 MB of Ram 4MB Vid Card 100 MHz FSB and it works faster than 98 EVER ran.

Where did i mention anything about 98 being faster or slower than XP??

and the framespeed difference between 2000 and XP (on the same game) is a MAJOR improvement.

Strange. If there is a difference im pretty sure its because of a newer driver and not because of the OS. The XP (nt 5.1) kernel is very similar to the 2k (5.0) kernel, so performance should be virtually identical. Even though there appears to be a lot of changes on the outside, underneath, xp is very similar to 2k.

[jon_joy_1999]

Originally posted by Atmo
Where did i mention anything about 98 being faster or slower than XP??



Strange. If there is a difference im pretty sure its because of a newer driver and not because of the OS. The XP (nt 5.1) kernel is very similar to the 2k (5.0) kernel, so performance should be virtually identical. Even though there appears to be a lot of changes on the outside, underneath, xp is very similar to 2k.

atmo that post wasnt directed at you
I hit the wrong Quote button" rofl.
s{thWAK}
However I would like to address the comment of having a new driver. first off No. I dont have a new driver (only driver that has been installed/updated is my Webcam Driver and that was when I accidently installed the 98 drivers (niether drivers were signed and I was dead tired that night) so I'm using <let me check, man I love the Win-Pause-break shortcut> Nope. no vidcard updates (tell me if this is an update)
Intel 82810Graphics Controller
Diriver version 5.1.20001.0
Driver Date 6/6/2001
provider is Microsoft

I dont recall the win2k drivers offhand but I think they are the same. not sure tho. anyways in 2k I had to run everything in a low or medium setting (in order for the game to have some speed). in XP it's as if its the only thing running even with everything at the MAX! I LOVE IT!i!i!i!i!i!i!i!i! , althogh when I run my webcam (internet stream VIA Yahoo Messenger) there is a small but noticable drop in the frame rate

[cooky560]

i dislike XP
its slow and unstable on every system i know of. ive sued me, and apart from a scandisk prob it has never crashed on me (apart from during scandisk)

[jon_joy_1999]

Originally posted by cooky560
i dislike XP
its slow and unstable on every system i know of. ive sued me, and apart from a scandisk prob it has never crashed on me (apart from during scandisk)

XP Slow, Unstable?!i?!i what type of sys were you using it on? ?!?!?!!? a Mac?

Originally posted by cooky560
ive sued me

how'd you pull that off?
Did you win, if you did how much money did you get?

[Merlin]

I, too, would rather have stability for when I'm working than the chance to run some older video games. Since I don't leave my system on overnight (what's the point, I don't use it while sleeping) I've encountered very few crashes. XP's a great operating system.

XP already had and automatically installed the correct drivers for every single piece of hardware in my laptop and in my desktop. I voluntarily updated the Nvidia drivers, just to ensure that games run properly. Plus, I get to run StyleXP, which I love.

[Picaune]

Merlin, you must be a wizard to run Style XP and like it. I had the old version with no extra doohickey crap, but SP1 nuked it. The new one with the extra doohickey crap deserves to die horribly!

[Atmo]

I run stylexp and like it, though the version i have is the first release that worked with sp1 installed. I havent bothered to update....and if its that bad i probably wont until i absolutely have to.

[wuaffiliate]

Originally posted by The Valkyrie
wuaffiliate,

Cacheman. Possibly the best memory manager in the world - and it's free! My majorly-tweaked WinME + skillfully-set Cacheman = ownz XP any day.

no it does not you can dump you ram with cache man all you want to it still is not good mem managment. like Atmo xp uses ~200mb of my 512 on boot i have about ~340 free after boot.

when i close a program ALL the ram is free, me leaks mem whenb programs are closed even with cache man. 3rd party will never be as good as made for MS by MS kernel innerworking .

you can hate XP all you want guy, you are the one who is NOT getting new drivers and who is losing performance. as if im going to waste my system (p4 1.6a@2.5ghz) or a crap OS based on the 9x kernel. you may all you like ignorance is bliss innit?

btw i run xppro on p2 300s and p3 450s at home and they work perfectly.

[jon_joy_1999]

I use a third party Ram freeing program called Free Ram XP Pro it does a pretty good job of freeing memory. although some times the OS just reloads what FRXP placed in the disk cache. but it frees about 10 megs each time it does its thing (I have 96 mb)

[sanosuke]

well in my opinion XP is just 2000 with better graphics. I have used 98SE, 2K and XP home. I upgraded my laptop computer to 2000 from 98SE coz networking 98 to Xp is a real pain. besides 98 does not have alpha blending. the reason y i am not using xp coz i heard it does not run smoothly on 128mb of ram.

[Atmo]

Originally posted by sanosuke
well in my opinion XP is just 2000 with better graphics. I have used 98SE, 2K and XP home. I upgraded my laptop computer to 2000 from 98SE coz networking 98 to Xp is a real pain. besides 98 does not have alpha blending. the reason y i am not using xp coz i heard it does not run smoothly on 128mb of ram.

XP has a few more changes than just graphics, but underneath XP and 2k are basically the same. I think of XP as 2k with a great big fat service pack with a redesigned gui, updated drivers and better support for games.

XP does run ok on 128mb systems, as long as it's set up correctly. But i do reccomend 256mb as a minimum if it'll be a gaming system, and 512 if you want to do anything serious with it. I'd probably stick with 2k for a system with 128mb or less, and 98se or nt4 for systems with 64 or less.

[mikm]

i hate XP, but I give it a couple of good points
*NT core
*easy to network

reasons I hate XP
*big brother
*microsoft sucks
*the candy-coated interface
*the search assistant
*the constant notifications about no network being availible
*bill gates
*no hearts over a network
*messed up DOS
*expensive
*Windows Media Player (joke by Atero in AVS forums)
*Windows messenger is hard to zap
*some functions IMPOSSIBLE to find
*microsoft never bothers to fix bugs in its OSs before releasing new ones. it already has an Alpha version of its next operating system. half the bugs haven't been found
*you have to activate the software
*activation is messed up if hardware changes
*no 24-bpp color (a balance of quality and speed)
*it bugs you every time you have an unregistered driver or whatever crap it says
*too many background services
*error reporting

[Atmo]

Originally posted by Michaelthecat
i hate XP

Your reasons.

*big brother ???
*microsoft sucks Lame.
*the candy-coated interface can be turned off.
*the search assistant can be turned off
*the constant notifications about no network being availible can be turned off
*bill gates Lamer.
*no hearts over a network Oops, thats something most people could never live without.
*messed up DOS Then dual boot if you need to run old dos apps.
*expensive Xp pro's cheaper than 2000 pro, XP home is the same price as 98se/me
*Windows Media Player (joke by Atero in AVS forums) Old joke, and you dont have to use WiMP if you dont want to.
*Windows messenger is hard to zap No it isnt.
*some functions IMPOSSIBLE to find Such as?
*microsoft never bothers to fix bugs in its OSs before releasing new ones. it already has an Alpha version of its next operating system. half the bugs haven't been found I dont find XP to be a buggy OS, after nearly 18 months i've only had a few problems, and most are driver related. Cant blame MS for that.
*you have to activate the software Whoop dee doo..If you bought your copy theres nothing to worry about.
*activation is messed up if hardware changes No it isnt. The only hardware in my system that was there when i first installed XP is the cpu and ram. EVERY other piece of hardware from the motherboard to the monitor has been replaced, and without a single issue with activation.
*no 24-bpp color (a balance of quality and speed) 24 bit color doesnt support alpha blending (the last 8 bits).
*it bugs you every time you have an unregistered driver or whatever crap it says Can be turned off. Primarily put there to stop people trying to run 9x drivers.
*too many background services They can be turned off. They chose to have the most common services people would need running automatically so people wouldnt have to otherwise know how to start them.
*error reporting Can be turned off.

Seriously, have you ever used XP for any ammount of time or do you just feel like bashing MS???

If you dont like MS thats fine, there's many alternatives, but please dont try to rubish a product without thinking about what you're saying.

[edit] Sorry if i sounded a bit harsh, kinda tired and not in the best of moods ATM [/edit]

[Merlin]

Took the words from my mouth, Atmo.

[MajorFubar]

Don't know if it's the system or the machine. I bought a new Compaq 6016, 512 m, 1.5 gig, 60 m HD, 16x toaster. Don't have all the bells and whistles, but am working on it. I've had more trouble with this machine than all the computers I've ever owned........and I started in '75!! [FONT=courier new][COLOR=firebrick]

[anubis2003]

Um. you didn't use the tags correctly.

Keyword in your statement is Compaq. Their not the worst, but I would recommend deleting all of the stuff they installed on it(or just reformat). This is true with most major companies today. The first thing I do with a new computer is format.

[MajorFubar]

I know it!!
New to this..........[B]still trying to figger it out! I DO try to get rid of all I can, except what I want. The absoloot first kill program is AOL. What a POS!!
But I got the machine in AUG and in late Jan, it started going into hibernation mode from the boot screen. Grrrrrrrrrrr
Wouldn't accept the restore disks after re-formatting 3 times! They finally sent me a new HD. Keeping my eyes and toes crossed.

[Atmo]

Originally posted by anubis2003
Keyword in your statement is Compaq. Their not the worst, but I would recommend deleting all of the stuff they installed on it(or just reformat). This is true with most major companies today. The first thing I do with a new computer is format.

A fresh install is always a good idea, unfortunately its likely MajorFubar didnt recieve a windows cd with his compaq, usually big brand pre-builts just come with a rescue disk to restore it to factory presets. It's gotta be the #1 thing i hate about pre-built systems.

Run msconfig and take a look at how much crap they've thrown in there. Click the services tab, tick 'hide all microsoft services' and disable anything you dont think is absolutely necessary. Leave anything to do with firewalls or anti virus' alone. Just about anything else can safely be removed, and you can always come back later and reset those services to start automatically if something stops working.

Then click the starup tab, and cross reference all entries with this page > http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup...artup_full.htm

The ammount of crap most brand name manufacturers have running at startup is rediculous.

Once you've got as close to a clean boot as possible, take a look at tweaktowns exelent
from reformat to relax guide to tweaking XP. I reccomend anyone running XP to take a look, it only takes about an hour to go thru and make the changes, and the performance gains on most systems are well worthwhile.

[anubis2003]

Sounds like something I might have to do on my other computer.

[offtopic]Love the new sig Atmo[/offtopic]

[MajorFubar]

ATMO.............thanx for the helpful tips. I always want a lean, mean machine! FuBar

[Picaune]

The thing with activation is that if 3 things of (cpu, memory, IDE controllers, motherboard, another one) change, you need to reactivate. This is to prevent hard drive cloning.

Of course, you could activate on 1 of your 6 exactly-alike pc's and clone your motha-f**king heart out!

[AjStone]

...


Lets get back on topic.

XP Rules, Linux Drools!!