XP is garbage

[Guy Macon]

Frithiof Andreas Jensen wrote:

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote...

Yes. I am just thankful that my car does not need an operating
system to work.

Probably does - if it has an ECU or ABS

If it does, it runs on QNX or some other RTOS, not Windows.

 

[Clifford Heath]

Guy Macon wrote:

You are wasting your time replying to someone

Well, I wasn't really replying to him, but to reinforce
your point that VMware can almost civilise Windows, for
the benefit of others. That said, I was pushed onto XP
at work (so run Debian under it using VMWare), and it's
really quite good now. Has it's annoyances, but tolerable.

 

I managed to install Win2K over the crap that came on my Sony Vaio,
but it took me MONTHS of scrounging to get all the power control and
video features working correctly.

Win2K in a nutshell - it is crap, about as bad as a 1995 Win-NT with the
1999 "Windows Me" GUI glued onto it (which is what it really is).

We have it here, Corporate Install. So I get to compare with XP everyday.

Well then you microsoft shill, how come you don't seem to know that
XtremelyPissy is Windwoes2000? Where do you think Xp came from? It ain't
windows98 dude. Its windows 2000.

It took dingdong bill ten years to realized dos was dead, and finally he
used a decent kernel and made a fair product by adding video and hardware
support to a very good OS. Of course, adding that stuff hurts reliability,
but it takes a real microsoft fan to diss win2000 and prance around about
XP, when in fact, they are both pretty much the same thing...

You comments show that you don't even know where XP came from. I will help
you. Its NT, which came from OS/2.

 

In <d3j01f$7fl$1@newstree.wise.edt.ericsson.se>, on 04/13/05
at 01:38 PM, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen"
<frithiof.jensen@die_spammer_die.ericsson.com> said:

learning@learning.com> wrote in message
news:425bf81b$1$woehfu$mr2ice@news.aros.net...
In <Do6dnU3-G8SPacbfRVn-hw@buckeye-express.com>, on 04/12/05
at 12:13 PM, Mark Jones <abuse@127.0.0.1> said:

Let's take a look at that position..... Several hundred million users,
and you. You don't have problems, odds are some of those several million
users do. Therefore, the perception is that some people don't have
trouble, while many, many more have lots of troubles.

Errr:

Odds are very much *higher* that very, very few people out of serveral
hundred millions actually

a) have problems.
b) know that they do.
c) know enough to gripe about it on usenet.
d) but not enough to leave it be ...

From experience with tech support: the people who have problems with XP,
are people who cannot leave it well enough alone. Default Install *works*
-
because that is *the one* that was Tested - try anything else and *you
will suffer*.!!

*That's* how people break their installs.

PS:

Microsoft could eliminate 80% of the XP/Office failures by removing all
forms of interactivity from the installer!!

You are just a microsoft shill. Lots of them live in newsgroups to spread
the 'good news' that XP is great. People who use it, and dislike it, are
not going to be paying much attention to someone who talks like a
telemarketer, phrase after phrase after phrase.

When you explain, from a purely techincal point of view, why an OS would
have any problems when an application is located somewhere besides the
default, then you can gain some credibility, but a disk location is a disk
location, and even the mighty XP cannot look at the table, and decide that
something is not where it wants it to be, especially when the installation
program allows for someone to put stuff in a 'non standard' location.

I am dying to here why an XP machine with Photoshop on
C:\documents\apps\stuff\downhere\underneath\settings\othercrap\lookatme\adobe\bin\exe\files\photoshop
will run rock solid, and one with photoshop on D:\photoshop will crash and
burn twice a day.

Good luck with that one.

 

In <115q4547p3r5qa9@corp.supernews.com>, on 04/13/05
at 12:29 PM, Guy Macon <_see.web.page_@_www.guymacon.com_> said:

Clifford Heath wrote:

[deleted] wrote:

All VMware is, along with its cousins and brothers, is another layer of
bloat to add to whatever you are running.

VMWare is the first virtual PC that runs direct on the silicon without
interpretation - Windows under Linux is sometimes actually *faster*
than native on the same hardware. You do need more RAM, but that's a
fact of life anyhow.

You are wasting your time replying to someone who doesn't listen to
reason and who thinks that personal attacks strengthen his arguments. I
advise killfing and moving on to those of us who wish to have a civil
discussion about the topic at hand.

I think you should take his advice. I only know about this stuff from two
dozen years of designing such things. Using a virtual PC still requires
the use of the OS software, so if you don't like XP, using it in VPC
avails you nothing.

Try to remember also, that some people just cannot stand to be wrong, and
other people think that having a keyboard and a monitor is all that is
required to be considered wise and skilled.

If it needs more RAM to be faster, its not faster. It just has more RAM.
Give your regular XP more RAM, and guess what? Yep, it runs faster. Forget
the hype, and the web page liars, and use a little common sense. It will
do wonders for you. Not everything you read on a web page is a true fact

 

[Frithiof Andreas Jensen]

<learner@learner.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:425d272b$1$woehfu$mr2ice@news.aros.net...

but it takes a real microsoft fan to diss win2000 and prance around about
XP, when in fact, they are both pretty much the same thing...

I don't care what you think you know:

Win2000 sucks daily in all work areas, it is ugly to look at and slow, and
hardware support clearly on par which NT which sucked at that too -and I
have installed NT enough times to know that entirely too well - XP actually
works, if you leave it alone, hell, one can even print properly off the web.

That is good coming from Microsoft. It should be appreciated.

You comments show that you don't even know where XP came from. I will help
you. Its NT, which came from OS/2.

Oi, lamer@lamer.com exactly what part of "about as bad as a 1995 Win-NT
with the 1999 "Windows Me" GUI glued onto it (which is what it really is)."
did you not did you not care to comprehend?

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 08:01:01 -0600, learner@learner.com wrote:

You comments show that you don't even know where XP came from. I will help
you. Its NT, which came from OS/2.

The NT design was lead by one of the (of I think, two) co-authors of
Dec's VMS kernal. They finally got desperate enough to bring in a real
programmer. Too bad that, given the existing Microsoft constraints, he
couldn't make it as good as VMS.

John

 

[Frithiof Andreas Jensen]

<learner@learner.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:425d2945$2$woehfu$mr2ice@news.aros.net...

You are just a microsoft shill. Lots of them live in newsgroups to spread
the 'good news' that XP is great.

And You are just a lame flamer who are too pussy-whipped from being the last
kid collected in kindergarten to even dare have a name to hang your random
babble onto. There, I can do names too. happy?

People who use it, and dislike it, are
not going to be paying much attention to someone who talks like a
telemarketer, phrase after phrase after phrase.

Like I care - as if people who perpetually whinge and whine, all the while
still putting up with whatever they whine about are known to pay attention;
hell, they are not even listening to themselves fer ricekakes.

When you explain, from a purely techincal point of view, why an OS would
have any problems when an application is located somewhere besides the
default, then you can gain some credibility, but a disk location is a disk
location, and even the mighty XP cannot look at the table, and decide that
something is not where it wants it to be, especially when the installation
program allows for someone to put stuff in a 'non standard' location.

Have you ever noticed how MS seem to re-implement all kinds of functionality
such as dialogs, menu schemes, shortcuts and so on across the different
applications?

They probably do not talk much between departments - obviously not enough to
share common features - and maybe they are even competitive enough to have
their own special libraries to handle icky things like configuration parsing
and file import/export... an organisation will do what it takes to reach the
performance figures set by management. Deadlines Rulez.

If one performance figure is loading word really fast, then maybe it is not
so important that word may not load in *all* cases - after all, the bonus
money is recieved for reaching targets set by Management, not by keeping
users happy.

I am dying to here why an XP machine with Photoshop on
C:\documents\apps\stuff\downhere\underneath\settings\othercrap\lookatme\adobe\bin\exe\files\photoshop
will run rock solid, and one with photoshop on D:\photoshop will crash and
burn twice a day.

A Wild Guess: The developers hard-coded something in the way paths are
handled, the testers never bothered to check because the tests specification
did not mention testing configurability, and since most users just slap the
applications in wherever they want to go it works for them and not enough
bug reports are generated to exceed the noise floor and make it into a
service request.

 

[Ted Edwards]

Joerg wrote:

Problem is, unless you can touch stuff you don't know whether it is
solid or on the flimsy side. So I only buy what I already know, in my
case Dell.

Another option at present is refurbished IBM. I just got 2 T23
ThinkPads, one for my daughter and one for myself. I'm very pleased
with them.

Ted

 

[Joel Kolstad]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:6fcq51da862dkaa38usuqjlh43gs84gnt8@4ax.com...

The NT design was lead by one of the (of I think, two) co-authors of
Dec's VMS kernal.

David Cutler, who I've heard described as "one of the most disagreeable
persons you might ever meet." Of course, having never met the man, I
wouldn't know, but I take this to mean that Dave probably had strong
opinions about how an OS should work and didn't care to debate the topic
with those who disagreed. (Although he was occasionally overruled -- in NT,
mutuxes are called "mutants" internally because Cutler didn't like the way
they were implemented.)

 

[Joel Kolstad]

<learner@learner.com> wrote in message
news:425d2945$2$woehfu$mr2ice@news.aros.net...

I am dying to here why an XP machine with Photoshop on
C:\documents\apps\stuff\downhere\underneath\settings\othercrap\lookatme\adobe\bin\exe\files\photoshop
will run rock solid, and one with photoshop on D:\photoshop will crash and
burn twice a day.

This is far more likely to be Adobe's problem than Microsoft's...

Frithiof is living in some la-la land where apparently the "default
configuration" of the machine works well enough for him; the idea that it
"should" work well enough for everyone else is of course naive. Heck, even
the default configuration has plenty of bugs and security problems, as
witnessed by the many service packs and security patches Microsoft provides.

Although I still think XP is a decent OS...

 

[James D Baker]

I think it's a virus. It spreads. It mutates. It crashes.
It's the most successful Trojan virus ever. Firewalls can't
stop it.

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Joel Kolstad
<JKolstad71HatesSpam@Yahoo.Com> wrote (in
<sJGdnQAYcOKX1cDfRVn-1g@comcast.com&gt about 'XP is garbage', on Wed, 13
Apr 2005:

Although he was occasionally overruled -- in NT, mutuxes are called
"mutants" internally because Cutler didn't like the way they were
implemented.)

mutux - defn. - an extremely small item of male formal evening wear.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
There are two sides to every question, except
'What is a Moebius strip?'
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 19:09:40 +0100, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that Joel Kolstad
JKolstad71HatesSpam@Yahoo.Com> wrote (in
sJGdnQAYcOKX1cDfRVn-1g@comcast.com&gt about 'XP is garbage', on Wed, 13
Apr 2005:
Although he was occasionally overruled -- in NT, mutuxes are called
"mutants" internally because Cutler didn't like the way they were
implemented.)

mutux - defn. - an extremely small item of male formal evening wear.

Actually, it's a mutex, which is a form of semaphore.

semaphore - defn. - two.

John

 

In <425d3971$0$73732$edfadb0f@dread14.news.tele.dk>, on 04/13/05
at 05:23 PM, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen"
<frithiof.jensen@diespammerdie.jensen.tdcadsl.dk>

You are just a microsoft shill. Lots of them live in newsgroups to spread
the 'good news' that XP is great.

And You are just a lame flamer who are too pussy-whipped from being the
last kid collected in kindergarten to even dare have a name to hang your
random babble onto. There, I can do names too. happy?

Good, I got your attention. That's better now.

People who use it, and dislike it, are
not going to be paying much attention to someone who talks like a
telemarketer, phrase after phrase after phrase.

Like I care - as if people who perpetually whinge and whine, all the
while still putting up with whatever they whine about are known to pay
attention; hell, they are not even listening to themselves fer
ricekakes.

If you don't care, why did you let me get under your skin, and get you to
drop down to my level? That was the plan, and you did good.

When you explain, from a purely techincal point of view, why an OS would
have any problems when an application is located somewhere besides the
default, then you can gain some credibility, but a disk location is a disk
location, and even the mighty XP cannot look at the table, and decide that
something is not where it wants it to be, especially when the installation
program allows for someone to put stuff in a 'non standard' location.

I am dying to hear why an XP machine with Photoshop on
C:\documents\apps\stuff\downhere\underneath\settings\othercrap\lookatme\adobe\bin\exe\files\photoshop
will run rock solid, and one with photoshop on D:\photoshop will crash and
burn twice a day.

A Wild Guess:

No wild guesses allowed. I asked for the technical reason. You see, you
ranted about people who like to do things there own way, and unless you
can come up with a real, justifiable explanation for why choosing a custom
option causes problems, you have no credibility. You are just touting
something you don't understand.

Do you really believe that M$ would subject themselves to the grief they
get, if they could cure the problem by simply taking away some of the
choices people make? You need to get a better understanding of where XP
came from, and how M$ does coding. Once you grasp that, you will see that
it has little to do with where the software is on the drive, or which icon
you clicked, and more to do with just heaping lines of code on top of
lines of bad code, resulting in more bloat, and potential problems.

Lots of people like XP. Lots of people hate it for lots of reasons. You
think its only okay for people like you to rave about it, and those who
are pissed at it, and dislike it, are not allowed to voice their opinion?

Unless you have installed it and run it on hundreds of PCs, using hundreds
of apps in dozens of ways, all you have is an opinion. That is great, as
we are all entitled, but when you speak, you must speak either as that
opinion, or as an expert, and there are no experts on XP. The user base is
too large for anyone to claim to be able to know how it runs, and how it
works across all those user bases, under all circumstances. Therefore, all
you have is an opinion, and I have mine.

When you can come and say that putting a program on another drive does
"yadda yadda yadda" to the registry, and causes crashes, then call M$ and
let them know, as I am sure they would be interested.

Until then, cease to call those who install, use it, crash it, and decide
to hate it, any names, and cast no dispersions upon them, for you do not
know if they are crashing because of how they install, or because the
software sucks. You cannot declare with any credibility that if one
installs everything default, and does nothing but run the apps in a
'standard mode' that XP will function perfectly. That is just simply not
true, based on comments here, and all over the net, and the office. Some
combos are pretty solid, others are not so lucky.

That is about all the facts there are. The rest is just your opinion, to
which you are certainly most welcome.

Just because XP is not as bad as that trash known as W9* does not qualify
it to be considered anything but barely adequate.

People like you, and jerks like me, deserve a heck of a lot better than XP
after all these years. If in twenty or so years, XP is the best we can
expect, then it sure does not deserve many pats on the back, for it is
trully an embarassment to the PC community to have to deal with it.

JB

 

[Guy Macon]

Change from "learner@learner.com" to "learning@learning.com" in
order to avoid killfiles noted. Complaint sent to abuse@aros.net.
I encourage others to also send complaints. Morphing to avoid
being killfiled is net-abuse.

I am now killfiling anything with an IP address in the range
66.219.192.0 - 66.219.255.255 (the range assigned to aros.net)
in the NNTP-Posting-Host field or with "aros.net" in the Path
field. I look forward to seeing you attempt to change those
aspects of your posts.

 

[Joerg]

Hello Frithiof Andreas,

Yes. I am just thankful that my car does not need an operating system to
work.

Probably does - if it has an ECU or ABS

No ABS, only ECU and that has a micro controller in there. uC firmware
programmers tend to be a bit more thorough. One of the reasons for
thoroughness is the rather limited memory space. They can't leave memory
leaks or create bloatware.

Oh, and no electric windows, no central lock, no climate control and all
that other stuff that makes for an increase in downtime. Just a plain
people and equipment mover on a truck chassis.

Maybe some day my toaster will but then I'll just roast my bread
on the Weber barbeque.

Probably Toaster has joined Legion too - my pop-up toaster has a CPU in it.

I wouldn't have bought it. With those things I tend to be a minimalist,
in the firm belief that if the old non-electronic scheme has worked
mankind probably doesn't need an electronic variety.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[Joerg]

Hello Guy,

Probably does - if it has an ECU or ABS

If it does, it runs on QNX or some other RTOS, not Windows.

Usually no OS at all.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 19:23:06 GMT, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

Hello Guy,

Probably does - if it has an ECU or ABS

If it does, it runs on QNX or some other RTOS, not Windows.

Usually no OS at all.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

I know some people who program jet engine control units, the ones that
mount under the cowling. They don't use any RTOS... there's none
they're willing to trust.

John

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 13:38:05 +0200, "Frithiof Andreas Jensen"
<frithiof.jensen@die_spammer_die.ericsson.com> wrote:

learning@learning.com> wrote in message
news:425bf81b$1$woehfu$mr2ice@news.aros.net...
In <Do6dnU3-G8SPacbfRVn-hw@buckeye-express.com>, on 04/12/05
at 12:13 PM, Mark Jones <abuse@127.0.0.1> said:

Let's take a look at that position..... Several hundred million users,
and you. You don't have problems, odds are some of those several million
users do. Therefore, the perception is that some people don't have
trouble, while many, many more have lots of troubles.

Errr:

Odds are very much *higher* that very, very few people out of serveral
hundred millions actually

a) have problems.
b) know that they do.
c) know enough to gripe about it on usenet.
d) but not enough to leave it be ...

From experience with tech support: the people who have problems with XP, are
people who cannot leave it well enough alone. Default Install *works* -
because that is *the one* that was Tested - try anything else and *you will
suffer*.!!

You mean, like installing applications, maybe? Or actually using Word
to produce a document? Silly of me, I guess... I should just admire XP
exactly the way it came.

John