12 posts • joined Wednesday 12th March 2008 09:41 GMT
People with XP either have very old hardware which can't take an upgrade or are living in the past. It's time to ditch that 9 year old, horrendous OS which I am unfortunately forced to use at work.
The fact that Opera have made it fit in with the Windows 7 interface shows they are thinking about the present and future, not the obsolete past.
Instead of having a temper tantrum, report the bugs if you really are an Opera user of 3 years, or are you just trolling????
Enjoy your switch to Firefox, revel in the performance drop lol.
Personally, I believe that this is the best Opera release ever, even though I think their development speed and dismissal of minor bugs to push out a release is unfortunate and it has been rushed.
However, what do I know, I only tested every snapshot they pushed out...but I'm afraid Chromium nightly is still my default browser. :-)
Hard drive capacities
I noticed a couple of people mention the 'issue' with hard drives where 1GB = 1000MB.
This is actually correct, as they advertise their hard drive sizes in Gigabytes, of which 1 = 1000000000 bytes and not Gibibytes where 1 = 1073741824 bytes.
You are actually getting a bigger 'gigabyte' for your money when you buy RAM, the hard drive manufacturers are using the term correctly and are not ripping anyone off.
Just to clear up any confusion. :-)
Vipre's detection rates are crap, which is probably why it doesn't use any resources because it lets everything in. Having had the misfortune to use it for a few weeks, I can safely say that I won't be using it again. And what is more, one of my friends tried it on a netbook and opening certain programs made Vipre use 100% CPU for about 10 seconds, so it's not much good for netbooks either.
Norton Internet Security / Norton Antivirus 2010 is very easy on CPU and RAM btw, extremely good detection rates also and very fast scanning speed.
I'm sorry, Apple *used* to have an eye for detail and be the best, but now they have too many fingers in too many pies and churn out generic crap much later than everyone else.
They should have concentrated on what they were good at, which was computers. Now they are not particularly good at anything and anyone who has used Apple products over the years has undoubtedly seen the standard of software released substantially lowering and any honest Apple fan will admit that. (But there ain't many of those about).
As for the iPhone v3 software, it's pretty much a non-event, move along people.
If they (The Government) can explain logically how exactly ID cards will stop a terrorist from blowing himself up in a public place then I might accept the need for them.
However, as far as I can see, foisting ID cards on law abiding citizens will not work, unless they propose to have checkpoints everywhere to check your card reminiscent of Nazi Germany.
It's time 'New' Labour got stuffed and jumped off a sodding cliff. :-) Now that would be worth seeing...
Who needs either a virus or a trojan on OS X? All you need is Apple and it's untested, shoddy updates to hose the system.
@Mark - In fact, the default user account when you first install OS X and create one is an Admin user account, which does have rights. Not as many as the root account (which is disabled by default) but it is still classed as an 'Admin' account and I would imagine that the majority of users use that.
Secondly, this malware is part of an installer, correct? Well, the user executes the installer for a supposedly legitimate program (which contains the trojan) it requests their Admin password (sudo) and hey presto, both iWork and the trojan are installed with the user believing it was a legitimate program which is what Social Engineering is about. ;-)
If you were to add antivirus into that equation, assuming the trojan has definitions or the AV heuristics pick it out, it will stop said trojan from installing, thats if the on-demand scanner didn't pick it out as soon as the download finished.
Your argument of 'Not running as admin' does not count here as it will not make any difference.
That is the value of antivirus software and you MacTards will learn that, the hard way.
Well, unfortunately the PC nobheads get their first, get 'offended' by something that really isn't anything to do with them, and spoil it for everyone else, but personally I just think they are sad attention seekers best ignored.
They should look at their own sad lives before criticising other people, because of numpties like this you cannot say anything in a humorous way these days without it 'offending' someone. Fucks sake.
It appears that many people are confused with the NT versioning scheme.
Windows NT had 4 released versions, NT3.0, NT3.5, NT3.51 and NT4.0.
Then there was 2000 which is NT5.0
XP which is NT5.1
Server 2003 and XP x64 which is NT5.2
Then Vista and Server 2008 which is NT6.0
Windows 7 which is NT6.1.
I'm confused as to where the nonsense that Vista SP1 and 2008 are NT6.1, because they ain't. They are build 6.0.6001, as opposed to 6.0.6000 thats the only difference.
Also, Windows 7 is most certainly NT6.1, not NT7.0, as it is basically the same kernel as Vista.
As for Windows 7, it's looking good, and I'm looking forward to getting my hands on an official x64 copy of the Beta to have a play with it, however, Vista x64 works fine for me at the moment anyway.
Why bother with VM's at all...
I have a Mac Pro, I tried Parallels, which I thought was poor, VMWare Fusion, which I though was better but still wasn't that quick when running certain Windows programs so after about 6 or 8 months of slow VM's and timewasting and not being able to play games etc I ditched OS X and installed Vista x64 on it. Much better than a VM. No crashes, no kernel panics or BSOD's, no slow speed issues and a much more useful operating system than OS X which is just a badly designed hack of an operating system.
Why bother struggling with VM's when native Windows is much better than OS X anyway? Macs do look good, but the operating system which comes with them isn't good.
By the way, Virtualbox is the best Virtual Machine software around, nice and light, fast, supports x64 guests on Windows x64...etc.
Well, I have to say, it works perfectly for me on a Sun Ultra 20 with 4GB RAM, ATI graphics, nForce chipset etc...nothing wrong with it what so ever.
I think a lot of the 'problems' on here are due to user error, cheap hardware, bad installs, lots of shit installed..etc. Someone above said that they had a corrupt ntoskrnl.exe, well that is most likely bad RAM or a bad disk which has caused that. Vista HATES bad ram, and it also hates cheap hardware. ECC ram is a good idea for Vista too, it certainly increased the stability on mine.
People switching to Linux? Please......whatever...lol. Hahahaha! Rofl! Pmsl! If you can't get Vista working then you are completely screwed with Linux, but feel free, and live with problems for the rest of your computing life.
I think I have tried every current OS out there for desktop PC, and the only 2 that I have stuck with is OS X and Windows (XP and Vista).
I have used Linux off and on for years, ever since Red Hat 5 actually and yes, while it is a nice geeky toy and it might make you look clever, it's not much use in the real world, unless you are running a server, and even then it is a pain in the arse. I can't really think of anything good to say about Linux on a desktop...um...incompatibilies, messing around, things not working, no decent software....but the fanboys will defend all that naturally, because they are used to working with lower class software.
However, the reason why I have OS X is because firstly I have a Mac Pro, and it makes sense to run it on that, also, it is simple, easy, normally 'just works' and is rock solid stable.
The reason why I have Vista is because it is a dependable, reliable stable operating system, which is easy to use and 'just works' most of the time also. Also, there is a lot of software available for it, and it runs perfectly well on my hardware, probably because it isn't cheap junk. For information as well, a fresh bootup of Vista uses less RAM than OS X by about 500MB. So which is the most bloated there? ;-)
All OS's have their good points, and all have their bad points. I think Vista gets a lot of bad press about nothing, as it runs perfectly well and is very stable on good quality hardware with plenty of RAM, so if you have problems, think to yourself, maybe it is my £200 laptop and not Vista that is at fault...
Anyone that has half a brain, and a decent box, install SP1, you will not regret it...
I agree entirely with what the Anon said above. Microsoft does innovate well, they spend a lot of time and money on innovation. They may not get it right every time, but they do try.
Even as primarily a Mac user, I think most of Apples so called innovations are quite lame, some of them to the point of stupid. It just bores me to be honest.
Why can't people just accept the good that all companies do in the market, instead of being fanboys for illogical, idiotic reasons?
I have been using FF3 for a while now, not the official beta's though, I build it from CVS every day or so. It's definitely improving, but the striking thing to me is the difference in memory usage, it uses next to nothing now, even with a lot of tabs open on pretty 'heavy going' sites.
Also, Firebug does work, but you need the beta version of it. Unfortunately, beta4 broke compatibility with Yslow though. :-(
Anyone who is running FF2....ditch it and get FF3 beta, or better still, build it from CVS. ;-)
- Facebook offshores HUGE WAD OF CASH to Caymans - via Ireland
- Microsoft teams up with Feds, Europol in ZeroAccess botnet zombie hunt
- Justin Bieber BEGGED for a $200k RIM JOB – and got REJECTED
- Review Bigger on the inside: WD’s Tardis-like Black² Dual Drive laptop disk
- Inside Steve Ballmer’s fondleslab rear-guard action