Windows 7

[JBroll]

Moonlapse, *NIX systems run on far more systems than Windows. Those programmers have no trouble with new and esoteric architectures, technological innovation, or stability. The problem is Microsoft, not Microsoft's oh-so-tragic position in the computing world.

Jeff

 

[Ermz]

But how large is the user base of those OS'? What percentile of people use *NIX operating systems for gaming, media, daily surfing, audio production, graphic design, video editing over OSX or Windows? My impression was that UNIX/Linux and the like were used mainly for workstation and server applications for their great security and stability. How many hardware and software manufacturers make drivers and programs that need to support those operating systems compared to Windows?

I understand that Microsoft and their approach are largely to blame for many things, but there have to be other factors at play here. There is so much room to err when the userbase is so amazingly large and their purposes for the OS can differ so greatly. The gamers want a barebones O/S with the bare essentials, to squeeze every FPS out of their games they can. The audio users want stability, support & good drivers. The every day user wants everything to be simple and branded into their eyeballs out of fear of straining their brain trying to think laterally for a second. The media center guys want something that looks pretty and serves as a front end to run their DVDs, Bluray, audio CDs etc. etc. There are so many bases to cover, and no doubt if the *NIX systems did it that well or had the support I'd be using them in a heartbeat. I'm essentially just waiting for a chance to jump ship from Microsoft onto something better.

The thing about Windows XP is that I use it for everything, and I mean EVERYTHING, man. One installation, I'm currently web browsing, chatting and listening to music. I also run digital TV right into my PC, watch DVDs on it, play games and of course record, mix & master audio. I use it for graphic work, data entry, web design & I've even edited together a documentary on it with full HD video. They need to cover all those bases and make Windows at the very least functional and ideally stable at each of those applications. All things considered I find it almost remarkable that it doesn't topple over onto itself when you add in how much hardware and different driver sets all have to interact with each other at once to make all this happen.

 

[Razzee]

don't play mp3's with windows 7 if you are getting the beta thats released tomorrow. First patch it! There's a fix for that bug.
Seems like wmp (?) cuts off the first secounds of a track. Something like that

 

[Notuern]

I do honestly believe that its a "conspiracy".

Think about it, Microsoft have some of the worlds greatest minds in the IT-Business, why wouldn't they be able to release a rock solid OS?

Microsoft don't want to release a perfect OS, because they already are the "standard" and people don't want to move away from it, no matter how much it sucks, and with each release people have to go out and buy the new version to get a couple of buggfixes.

 

[Temps]

I don't understand where everyone is coming from with this Windows instability thing. All of our work computers are Windows XP, we run Microsoft on our server (which has only had about one week downtime over the past seven years), I've run XP at home since it came out with absolutely no crashes and no major issues until last night, my brother's computer has Vista and it has never crashed either, etc... the last version of Windows that I remember being totally horrible was Windows 98 (I gave ME a miss).

Microsoft has a lot of PR problems. I use Windows because then I can game, and everything works with it. I'd use a Mac if I only used iProducts and wanted to be trendy, but I'm not about to learn how to use a different OS - especially one that only comes on such massively overpriced computers. I'd only use *NIX if I wanted a computer that is basically useless

 

[JBroll]

I'd like to see how *NIX systems are 'useless'...

Jeff

 

[SocialNumb]

Well you're special and in favor with the MS Gods. :Smug:

The rest of us are just retarded and not in favor. :Smug:

 

[abyssofdreams]

I'd say the only disadvantage *NIX systems have is the somewhat limited amount of software it offers for certain workareas, e.g. anything sound production related. Sure there are some workarounds and alternatives but it is still unattractive, at least for me. Also, it needs a kinda passion to get into, granted with each year they get more user-friendly but it is still not on par with Mac or Windows, IMHO. And I work with 'em every day.

 

[Temps]

I'd like to see how *NIX systems are 'useless'...

Jeff

Useless for me. I don't host websites, and don't like id software games. I couldn't play Far Cry, Fallout, Mass Effect, etc. couldn't run Cubase, couldn't use Wavelab, etc.

 

[Razzee]

I do honestly believe that its a "conspiracy".

Think about it, Microsoft have some of the worlds greatest minds in the IT-Business, why wouldn't they be able to release a rock solid OS?

Microsoft don't want to release a perfect OS, because they already are the "standard" and people don't want to move away from it, no matter how much it sucks, and with each release people have to go out and buy the new version to get a couple of buggfixes.

there will never be a perfect system. there's always somewhere a bug. my opinion.

 

[Notuern]

I don't understand where everyone is coming from with this Windows instability thing. All of our work computers are Windows XP, we run Microsoft on our server (which has only had about one week downtime over the past seven years), I've run XP at home since it came out with absolutely no crashes and no major issues until last night, my brother's computer has Vista and it has never crashed either, etc... the last version of Windows that I remember being totally horrible was Windows 98 (I gave ME a miss).

Really?
I didnt use XP the first 2 years that it was out, because i got bluescreens every 15 minutes(Same thing happened to all my friends that used it.).
Vista was surprisingly stable on my machine, i still get bluescreens because of some memory issue from time to time, sometimes as much as 5 times a day, but usually its a couple of times a month.
Something to remember about Vista is that it works perfect on some computers, and on other you cant run it for more then 5 minutes before something goes to hell(And yes, i know my fair share about building a "Windows Compatible machine".).

Microsoft has a lot of PR problems. I use Windows because then I can game, and everything works with it. I'd use a Mac if I only used iProducts and wanted to be trendy, but I'm not about to learn how to use a different OS - especially one that only comes on such massively overpriced computers. I'd only use *NIX if I wanted a computer that is basically useless

The funny thing here is that the only reason that i use Windows is because allot of the software i want to use is based around Direct X.
But it could have been based around OpenGL instead, which i would have liked more.

.. How come its almost only ID-Software that makes games with OpenGL? And how come that their games always are the first step in to the next generation of gaming(In the FPS-world that is.)?

Oh, and *NIX systems sure are useless, gosh darn it, imagine the Internet without *NIX.. ..

 

[Notuern]

there will never be a perfect system. there's always somewhere a bug. my opinion.

Yeah, of course, but when it comes to windows, the bugs are so many they cant be solved without rewriting the entire operative system, which leads to a new version with just as many bugs, but different.

They are capable of making a OS that is just as stable as OSX or *NIX, if they wanted to.

 

[AudioGeekZine]

I guess Kazrog wasn't impressed by the new Macbook Wheel
http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/05/macbook-wheel-revealed-by-the-onion-news-network/

 

[jhrv]

I guess Kazrog wasn't impressed by the new Macbook Wheel
http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/05/macbook-wheel-revealed-by-the-onion-news-network/

Really Funny!

 

[Razzee]

Yeah, of course, but when it comes to windows, the bugs are so many they cant be solved without rewriting the entire operative system, which leads to a new version with just as many bugs, but different.

They are capable of making a OS that is just as stable as OSX or *NIX, if they wanted to.

the biggest problem with windows compared to unix is, that windows doesn't use a graphical server such as X.
I had tons of problems with linux. Linux isn't that stable anymore if you install and use all things you use on a windows machine. I can't say anything for osx.
But in most cases where windows has problems it's due to the dumbness of the user. Thats what I learned from working in a pc repair shop.

 

[jhrv]

But in most cases where windows has problems it's due to the dumbness of the user.

+1

 

[Line666]

I had tons of problems with linux. Linux isn't that stable anymore if you install and use all things you use on a windows machine.

Totally agree, I always break from windows computing once every while to give various versions of linux a spin, and once I spend the hours of fiddling with the terminal to get my sound vaguely working and for the damn thing to find my wacom - support for which appears to have got worse over the years, I turn it off, and whenever I start it up again, what appears to have been a stable configuration has busted and then damn thing won't boot.

At least I know with windows, bar having suffered some hideous virus - which with proper anti-virus crap I have never had to endure, I can turn it on and know everything will work without struggling through millions of solutions to try and get something to go when I want it.

As for freezing up/general stability, I've had pretty much every major OS freeze up or crash on me several times, I wouldn't say Mac's are more stable than Windows, although with fixed hardware one would certainly assume that the actual system coding of OSX should be more efficient as it caters to a more limited range of internal peripherals.

 

[Notuern]

But in most cases where windows has problems it's due to the dumbness of the user. Thats what I learned from working in a pc repair shop.

I don't know about "dumbness".
I can manage Windows computers without getting much trouble, but the thing is that you have to LEARN Windows to be able to use it without encountering any troubles, thats not the case for OSX.
Now I'm by no means one of those Apple freaks that just cant stop talking about how ultra fast my 8-core iPwnage is, in fact, Ive only owned one Apple in my entire life, which ended up in a dumpster after a few weeks.

 

[Razzee]

I can manage Windows computers without getting much trouble, but the thing is that you have to LEARN Windows to be able to use it without encountering any troubles, thats not the case for OSX.

yeah. as said I have no clue of osx but it would supprise me if you had nothing to learn there.

The biggest problem is not the learning I think, but that you have to keep some things in its pathes. In most cases with third party software. Such as virus scanners (firewall = fail in most cases), spybot and CC-Cleaner.
Theres one of the things linux does best, letting you update all software via one programm. I'm using filehippo and Securnia PSI to get at least a bit of that comfort on windows. And windows defragger is fail to...

So my whishlist for the next windows version is for like 2 year:
- graphical server
- getting/updating your programms with one programm
- new filesystem (ntfs isn't up to par anymore)

 

[JBroll]

Linux isn't that stable anymore if you install and use all things you use on a windows machine...But in most cases where windows has problems it's due to the dumbness of the user.

I'd like to see how you reached that conclusion - some *very* poor setups can lose stability, but that's a very big claim to be making. In addition to being more robust and efficient, Linux desktop programs don't often take down the whole bloody kernel and graphics server when they crash unless you've been shooting acid into their eyeballs.

'Dumbness of the user' really just shows your biases going in... I'd say that it's dumb that a user has to use anti-virus software, not that it's dumb to not use anti-virus software. I'd say that it's dumb that the access control privileges are so borked that even 'limited' users can still fry the entire machine. I'd say that it's dumb to have something so fundamentally fucked as the Registry (accessible by any program that feels like it should be installed) holding as much importance as it does without preventing it from being such a catastrophic mess that can bring an entire system down irreparably if it's so much as breathed on the wrong way.

Jeff