Which OS'es

Discussion in 'Computer Science & Culture' started by Avatar, Apr 26, 2007.

?

Which OSes?

  1. Windows Vista

    15.8%
  2. Windows XP

    68.4%
  3. OSX

    13.2%
  4. Fedora Core (Linux)

    10.5%
  5. Debian (Linux)

    7.9%
  6. Ubuntu (Linux)

    26.3%
  7. Mandriva (Linux)

    2.6%
  8. Gentoo (Linux)

    2.6%
  9. Other Linux

    10.5%
  10. BSD (open, free, other)

    7.9%
  11. Some other OS

    5.3%
  12. Windows 2000

    15.8%
Multiple votes are allowed.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    I use DOS 8
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Kunax Sciforums:Reality not required Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,385
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Nickelodeon Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,581
    Lies v2.1 is a crap OS.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Kunax Sciforums:Reality not required Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,385
    Foolish carton lover, why have you not updated the the new version "Lies 3: Even Less Trust worthy"
     
  8. Kunax Sciforums:Reality not required Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,385
    oh and you are derailing avatars thread, I should report us all for trolling... where is the mass report button, bugger that.
     
  9. river-wind Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,671
    /me puts GeoffP on an iceflow and pushes him out to sea.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Its more fun to use the well-hung windows, huh?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Bah! I've never had a single hang on the machine I'm using. Compare that to a Mac where god-knows-where the hell anything is, or how to get there, or make it do what you want. Man. Working on a Mac is like trying to trick a particularly stubborn rock into doing something you want.

    And trust not in the words of Jeff Goldbloom, for he is an idolater and deceiver. Hath he not shilled computers on the basis of their frigging colours? Please.
     
  12. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Hmm so you're merely an ignoramus, since a Mac is an obvious OS for those with the capacity for critical thinking.:bawl:
     
  13. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Pfft! Whatever, sister. Mac is a baby's toy. Nothing to change or modify. No programs. One-button mice. Even copying and pasting attains this insane pastiche of internal perspective: if it makes sense to the Mac, then it must make sense to you. Bollocks. My PC does what I bleeding tell it to.
     
  14. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    And, I might add, your icon is crying, which is an obvious Freudian reference to the fact that you secretly hate your Mac.
     
  15. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    More user-friendly, huh?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I have fond memories of blue screens and that ignominious character called General Failure who kept reading my drive.

    *sigh*
     
  16. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    General Failure? I think he's related to Major Overstatement.

    It's totally more user-friendly. Unless Macs were designed to be used by other Macs, or aliens (c.f.: Jeff Goldblum).
     
  17. Sock puppet path GRRRRRRRRRRRR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,112
    XP and OSX are equally good it is only a matter of personal taste and what you're most familiar with.

    There I have spoken end of story. *shoos Geoff and Sam away*
     
  18. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    When you reach a point where the easiest way to repair your computer is to reformat your hard drive, its time to change your OS.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Its been bliss ever since (though I must admit, I was wary of the geek tag attached to it).
     
  19. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    I used PC from 1990 to 2004. Only used Mac since I bought my Powerbook in 2004.
     
  20. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    How are you, Speekz Tu Sun?
     
  21. Sock puppet path GRRRRRRRRRRRR Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,112
    I use both OSs every week for different tasks.
     
  22. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    A fence sitter ! *disgust*

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. Jeremyhfht Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    386
    Anyone proficient in computing tends to lean towards windows 2000. Although before everyone else takes offense, allow me to explain:

    Windows 2000 provides everything windows XP does. From x64 support (I believe so, last I checked that is), to dual-core support.

    Windows 2000 also provides a performance boost XP is incapable of due to it's overbloated size and "shiny" layouts. I also have the opinion of numerous people, myself included, that the layout wording is far easier to discern for even the most illiterates (try to setup a "fake" LAN over the internet using microsofts software once. XP makes it confusing as hell).

    There is an opinion which I will tackle right now: XP is faster. No, XP only tends to have the benefit of being "faster" when your hardware has been uber-beefed to support the upgrade. So, duh, hardware = faster =OS = FASTER. My windows 2000 presently runs just as fast as windows XP does, on half the hardware. Cost efficient, and resource efficient.

    finally, I'd also like to make the assertion that (after SP4, all of my claims here apply to SP4 and greater ONLY) windows 2k is more secure than XP. As I've encountered no documentation of severe exploits after SP4. While XP lists continue to rise (partly due to it's popularity, partly due to how much it's bloated).

    All in all, windows 2k provides everything that XP does. Only faster, more efficient, and less of a headache. Both windows XP and Windows Vista (aka: the next flop) should never have been created, as the better OS design (windows 2k) already exists.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page