Shaolin 0 Posted October 9, 2008 Maybe those 13 years are the main problem. Nobody knows the older parts anymore - they just stack new parts on top of them and hope it works (without too many too obvious problems)... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Caesar 305 Posted October 9, 2008 I'm standing off on Vista here, been running XP on my machine since 2003, never get BSOD's, and have very few software faults. Its as if Microsoft finally figured out how to make a decent OS and then said "oh, wait, this doesn't suck, we'll have to fix that." I figure with Win 7 coming in a year and a half, I can wait...and pray they don't d*ck that one up too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salamander67 0 Posted October 9, 2008 32-bit Vista here since a year back, no major problems whatsoever, especially since SP1 speed up the file transfer (moving files did take forever before SP1, admitted). And I'm no fan of Microsoft, for that matter. Running old games is no problem either for most part (all the way back to good ol'e Age of Empires ), although Jane's IAF didn't work out (yeah, I know it's old, but it was my first jet sim so it's a personal classic). Bottomline, I would say that Vista with SP1 is slightly better than XP with SP2, and the gap will probably increase over time as e.g. more drivers are tailor made for Vista. Yes, I know that not all of you are happy with it, but everybody has the right to their opinion, right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,875 Posted October 9, 2008 Windows 7 - cant believe that could only be a year away - One thing for certain is that someone somewhere will get a Blue Stop screen or the equivalent. Seen no end on Windows XP - doesn't matter what version you have - has often been HD related - in one instance it required a reinstall of wireless drivers (on a newly built XP machine!), once it was caused by Hyperthreading being turned on - and thats the beauty of it could be one of many things. Try different virtual memory settings(if you can in Vista), check everythings plugged together as well as it can be - try disabling things - like network cards for example and then playing a game to see if it still happens - your best hope (not short of deciphering the stop code ) is to try and narrow it down. I would be screaming at the thing by now myself too - reminds me of how stable Windows 95 was out of the box Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Zurawski 33 Posted October 10, 2008 Windows 7 - cant believe that could only be a year away - One thing for certain is that someone somewhere will get a Blue Stop screen or the equivalent. Seen no end on Windows XP - doesn't matter what version you have - has often been HD related - in one instance it required a reinstall of wireless drivers (on a newly built XP machine!), once it was caused by Hyperthreading being turned on - and thats the beauty of it could be one of many things. Try different virtual memory settings(if you can in Vista), check everythings plugged together as well as it can be - try disabling things - like network cards for example and then playing a game to see if it still happens - your best hope (not short of deciphering the stop code ) is to try and narrow it down. I would be screaming at the thing by now myself too - reminds me of how stable Windows 95 was out of the box IMHO, Windows95 (se) was a fairly rock solid OS because it didn't try to be "everything to everyone"... It was a OS first and foremost. It was ultimately the launch platform for what ever given app you were attempting to run. It didn't woo you with fancy desktop glitz... It didn't attempt to protect you from yourself... It didn't stick 101 thing between the OS and the running app... And it sure as hell came loaded down with as little extra crap as possible. Gaming was pleasure because it was easy... you made sure DirectX and drivers were up-to-date and the game ran.. period. One didn't have to cross their fingers, knock on wood and toss a pinch of salt while uttering a prayer just to play a game of Solitaire. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,875 Posted October 10, 2008 IMHO, Windows95 (se) was a fairly rock solid OS because it didn't try to be "everything to everyone"... It was a OS first and foremost. It was ultimately the launch platform for what ever given app you were attempting to run. It didn't woo you with fancy desktop glitz... It didn't attempt to protect you from yourself... It didn't stick 101 thing between the OS and the running app... And it sure as hell came loaded down with as little extra crap as possible. Gaming was pleasure because it was easy... you made sure DirectX and drivers were up-to-date and the game ran.. period. One didn't have to cross their fingers, knock on wood and toss a pinch of salt while uttering a prayer just to play a game of Solitaire. Yes but it wasnt a NOS - fine for a single person with technical knowledge sometimes - and some may have sentimental attachment - but for the average user it was worse than hopeless in everyway - tcp/ip wasnt even installed by default. The day I use that again is the day I stick a knife through my neck. Things are so much better these days with the NT line - although there will always be those who have problems with whatever OS - that will never change particularly running on PCs where the hardware always varies so much. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted October 10, 2008 Just as long as you're not using NT 4 or heaven forbid 3.5! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Zurawski 33 Posted October 10, 2008 My Utopian OS dream For as long as I can remember I’ve been advocating for MS to create a pure gaming OS. Think a console-simple OS layer to game from… Something that that would co-exist on a HD with something like Vista or XP… Basically a dual-boot option (or a solution that would exit out of Vista or XP and drop to the Utopian game OS like Win Me dropped to DOS)… We are talking about an OS that has nothing other than DirectX and TCP/IP function… Pure.. simple.. and fast. Considering the money being spent of consoles… you’d thing a PC equivalent would be a no-brainer? Why this hasn’t already happened baffles me… Granted it would not saturate like a full-blown OS, but name me one person that games for a hobby who would not buy something like this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shaolin 0 Posted October 10, 2008 Just as long as you're not using NT 4 or heaven forbid 3.5! They are still in use... (not by me - but a client of us still runs NT systems) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Salamander67 0 Posted October 10, 2008 Now, a really funny thing I've noticed, everbody I know who are Mac or Linux users keep on going about how great the system works, how crashproof they are, and so on, and so on, while nearly all Microsoft users are going on about how useless and unstable their computers are. Makes one wonder... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted October 10, 2008 Yet all the actual research I've seen indicates they have almost exactly the same number of issues on average as MS users. The difference is people have NO patience for MS while Mac and Linux lovers accept almost anything and don't blink. Think of it this way...someone takes a dump on your hand. If it's your infant baby, you don't mind. If it's your drunk next door neighbor, you mind. Yet the stats would show identically. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Zurawski 33 Posted October 10, 2008 Yet all the actual research I've seen indicates they have almost exactly the same number of issues on average as MS users. The difference is people have NO patience for MS while Mac and Linux lovers accept almost anything and don't blink. Think of it this way...someone takes a dump on your hand. If it's your infant baby, you don't mind. If it's your drunk next door neighbor, you mind. Yet the stats would show identically. That begs the question... "Is a crap in your hand worth two Macs in the bush?" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FastCargo 412 Posted October 10, 2008 Now, a really funny thing I've noticed, everbody I know who are Mac or Linux users keep on going about how great the system works, how crashproof they are, and so on, and so on, while nearly all Microsoft users are going on about how useless and unstable their computers are. Makes one wonder... Linux is anything but stable...a lot of things...there just isn't any support for specific hardware. It's great for limited applications, but not for a novice user. Mac OS is great, but Apple owns all the hardware. If you completely control the hardware, of course you can make a stable OS...you have control of every variable. Kind of hard to do with a PC. FastCargo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
