This is just like every other time that there is an OS change from MS. All people do is ***** about how bad it is, how unstable and/or how many resources are now being sapped. I still hear people complain about how XP was not stable until SP2, BS. I have used XP since it came out and never had a problem, in fact I was impressed that I no longer had to dig out all of those darn driver dics. O.k., it sucked for ancient hardware like, a Voodoo 3; god I got tired of people bitching about not getting drivers for old *** hardware. True, the activation thing is getting a little old and the issues with piracy are kind of hard to swallow when your worth like 900 billion dollars, or something. Clearly someone is buying your stuff.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Getting tired of Anti Vista articles
- Thread starter Oroka Sempai
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
In my opinion, MS operating systems all are horrible. The only reason I use them at all is because:
A. I'm in information technology, so I have to learn them as best as possible.
B. There is like 1 or 2 games that I play that can be run on microsoft.
I pretty much use freebsd or linux for everything, except for fiddling with microsoft because I have to be knowledgeable of the product, also there are certain types of games that can only be ran on windows, because microsoft competes on the API level in such a way that all applications become incompatible with other OS platforms. It has become so bad that other OS platforms have began trying to emulate the MS API's instead of developing thier own robust API's that would be able to compete. Believe me, its not because the talent and organization to create massive development projects is not there, its because the CUSTOMERS don't invest in anything other than MS. The CUSTOMERS even let MS clean out thier pockets, its absolutely pathetic.
If game developers would actually use cross platform API's, there would likely be alot more development in cross platform API's. Microsoft is a commercial operating system. LInux is not really a competitor because its not even commercial, it cannot really even throw money at a problem in any form. Mac OSX is the only commercial competitor but it is far too small to even offer any level of competition except in a very small market segment where people care about only a few differentiations, typically people who don't even play games.
I play alot of racing games with FF steering wheels, at this time I do not know of any linux racing games with realistic physics that support force feedback. Developers need a input library that can work with force feedback wheels to impliment it into thier programs. Nobody is getting paid to do that.
At this point, microsoft just does everything it can to get more developers working on MS based applications, crushing the competition in a way where they cannot even facilitate a project to build a suitable API, and the risk involved is extremely high, because even if you write one, what if nobody makes applications for it? What if the OS doesn't sell? You even have to buy visual studio.net if you want to program applications on new windows platforms like vista, so they have made even their own developers into thier customers. The developers are accustomed to using all these libraries, why switch to unix programming which is difficult and cannonical? I assure you, there is somebody out there who could do a much better job than MIcrosoft, but nobody is giving them the chance. The war is pretty much already lost and the only hope is that open source can keep the dream alive.
I just envision things being different and a whole lot better than what microsoft has shown me.
A. I'm in information technology, so I have to learn them as best as possible.
B. There is like 1 or 2 games that I play that can be run on microsoft.
I pretty much use freebsd or linux for everything, except for fiddling with microsoft because I have to be knowledgeable of the product, also there are certain types of games that can only be ran on windows, because microsoft competes on the API level in such a way that all applications become incompatible with other OS platforms. It has become so bad that other OS platforms have began trying to emulate the MS API's instead of developing thier own robust API's that would be able to compete. Believe me, its not because the talent and organization to create massive development projects is not there, its because the CUSTOMERS don't invest in anything other than MS. The CUSTOMERS even let MS clean out thier pockets, its absolutely pathetic.
If game developers would actually use cross platform API's, there would likely be alot more development in cross platform API's. Microsoft is a commercial operating system. LInux is not really a competitor because its not even commercial, it cannot really even throw money at a problem in any form. Mac OSX is the only commercial competitor but it is far too small to even offer any level of competition except in a very small market segment where people care about only a few differentiations, typically people who don't even play games.
I play alot of racing games with FF steering wheels, at this time I do not know of any linux racing games with realistic physics that support force feedback. Developers need a input library that can work with force feedback wheels to impliment it into thier programs. Nobody is getting paid to do that.
At this point, microsoft just does everything it can to get more developers working on MS based applications, crushing the competition in a way where they cannot even facilitate a project to build a suitable API, and the risk involved is extremely high, because even if you write one, what if nobody makes applications for it? What if the OS doesn't sell? You even have to buy visual studio.net if you want to program applications on new windows platforms like vista, so they have made even their own developers into thier customers. The developers are accustomed to using all these libraries, why switch to unix programming which is difficult and cannonical? I assure you, there is somebody out there who could do a much better job than MIcrosoft, but nobody is giving them the chance. The war is pretty much already lost and the only hope is that open source can keep the dream alive.
I just envision things being different and a whole lot better than what microsoft has shown me.
Last edited:
OP
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Location
- Port Elgin, Canada
- Thread Starter
- #23
@brakezone - Yeah, your dislike of M$ is quite evident, your thread VISTA- Microsofts secret weapon to destroy the PC! seems to quickly come to mind.
Seems like you think that unless M$ redevelops Windows to make it easy for other OS to be compatible, they are evil. Isnt that like forcing Ford to rework thier trucks to easily accept Dodge parts, or (to use someone elses analogy) Gillette to rework thier razors to accept Schick blades.
M$ is a company that exists to make money, and they are going to design thier OS in a way that works best for the OS, not a compromise for the 'me too' compeditors. If Mac made a PC compatible version of OSX, I would buy a copy just to try it. Linux is a real pain to set-up, to install drivers, and do anything other than the basic stuff. Get what you pay for I guess.
You want a evil corperation, try one of the Oil companys who charge rediculous prices for fuel, while crushing peoples attempts to create cars that dont need fossil fuels. M$ is just making money, Oil companys are making double and triple what M$ makes, at the expense of the enviroment.
Seems like you think that unless M$ redevelops Windows to make it easy for other OS to be compatible, they are evil. Isnt that like forcing Ford to rework thier trucks to easily accept Dodge parts, or (to use someone elses analogy) Gillette to rework thier razors to accept Schick blades.
M$ is a company that exists to make money, and they are going to design thier OS in a way that works best for the OS, not a compromise for the 'me too' compeditors. If Mac made a PC compatible version of OSX, I would buy a copy just to try it. Linux is a real pain to set-up, to install drivers, and do anything other than the basic stuff. Get what you pay for I guess.
You want a evil corperation, try one of the Oil companys who charge rediculous prices for fuel, while crushing peoples attempts to create cars that dont need fossil fuels. M$ is just making money, Oil companys are making double and triple what M$ makes, at the expense of the enviroment.
Mr.Guvernment said:
In my experience with a 512MB Core Solo Mac mini at work, with OS X I rarely encounter stuttering unless it is some braindead non-universal app such as Microsoft Office or any of the Adobe software, with universal binary software it works just fine with 512MB of RAM. When I run this same machine with XP using Boot Camp I all too frequently "experience" stutters or the mouse just plain quits responding for a few seconds at a time. That happens even without multitasking. I have some Shuttle XPCs at work with only 512MB of RAM, running XP, and those things suffer from the same stuttering as the Mini does while running XP, and this is while running Thunderbird and only Thunderbird. I think OS X runs much better on less RAM then Windows does (not trying to hijack this thread, sorry).
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
I know I may sound like I do not like Microsoft. I do like some things Microsoft does, but recently have become aggravated. I don't think Microsoft is evil, I just think that they are selfish and have all the control and will never take a step in the direction that will allow for competition. Competition is a good thing, just look at sports. Imagine if there was 1 player that had been playing for 10 years vs a bunch of newbies, they would not even have to try to win, thats Microsoft.
If you think creating interconnect standards is so bad, then why don't they split Microsoft up into several companies? The analogies you give attempt to argue that it is unacceptable, even ridiculous, to force Microsoft to do anything that might allow for such a thing as a competitive market. Actually, they would not have to rework any of their software, they could introduce a compatibility layer, or give somebody the necessary information required to do that. Additionally, they would still be selling their products. This is a clear case, in my opinion, where a Monopoly is really hurting us, technologically, in more than one way.
Also, its not like forcing ford to rework their trucks or razors, in fact, trucks and razors are competitive markets so, there shouldn't necessarily be any action taken. If the operating system market was anything like trucks, I would not be trying to speak out about this. If you believe that regulations need to be developed in order to prevent monopolies from dominating a market, because total market domination prevents competition from bringing about change and innovation, then you might agree that in the situation, something must be done. If that is the case, my solution would be if Microsoft would sell some of their software and API components separate from the OS. It would also be nice if they could make it possible for them to run on other OS platforms. This is FAR more a reasonable action to take to solve the monopoly issue than actually splitting the company up into many fragments. In order to do that, they would not have to alter their software at all but only allow facilitation of a compatibility layer of some kind. Then, there would actually be some competition. Besides, if people used other OS's and bought internet explorer, Microsoft office, and direct X, Microsoft would still be making a killing, plus the customers would get what they want.
I wish that you would never have to form any regulations like that, but as long as nobody is investing in trying to beat Microsoft, theres no way in heck that there will be any reason for Microsoft to want such a thing as compatibility. Because of this, they would rather design all the hardware and write all the software for it, and by then they pretty much own you. Thats why I make the suggestion to begin with, because I truly believe that this would be whats best for the customer and technology. If we let Microsoft continue to dominate the market because they are a monopoly, the progression of software and hardware technology will become so linear that we will have really hurt our potential.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2004
I'm tired of it also.
Honestly, Vista is not an OS designed for computers out now, or ones that have came out over the past few years. I think that Vista is an OS for the future, and it's weight should be thought of as such. It'll feel much lighter as computers and technology get faster in the next few years. The SAME THING happened with XP, and I don't get why everyone has their nickers in a twist over it.
Honestly, Vista is not an OS designed for computers out now, or ones that have came out over the past few years. I think that Vista is an OS for the future, and it's weight should be thought of as such. It'll feel much lighter as computers and technology get faster in the next few years. The SAME THING happened with XP, and I don't get why everyone has their nickers in a twist over it.
OP
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Location
- Port Elgin, Canada
- Thread Starter
- #27
@ brakezone - you make some very good points there, but it comes down to the fact that M$ is a business, not a charity. It is not thier place to throw the competition (not that there really is any) a bone. How long do you think the share holders of M$ would sit and watch as some bonehead CEO allowed M$ to erode its foundation? Companys think with thier wallet, not thier hearts.
As for competition... there really is none, and that is not M$'s fault. Linux is a non-starter. No one really owns it. It takes capital to develop something like a OS, but no one can sell Linux, so there is no incentive to push it to its capability. Linux is a hobby, not really a serious OS. As for Mac... they are keeping themselfs out of the battle. Apple certainly has the capital to make a serious run at M$, and if they could get Google on thier side, it would be a hell of a fight. But no, Apple is keeping thier Mac OS in thier stable, only to be used on thier 1337 Apple hardware. Really, Apple is more of a compeditor to Dell than M$. Personally I dislike Apple hardware, propritary crap, but I like OSX, but I dont like Apple hardware, so no OSX for me, or the other 90% get to use OSX.
So who is left to give my money to?
As for competition... there really is none, and that is not M$'s fault. Linux is a non-starter. No one really owns it. It takes capital to develop something like a OS, but no one can sell Linux, so there is no incentive to push it to its capability. Linux is a hobby, not really a serious OS. As for Mac... they are keeping themselfs out of the battle. Apple certainly has the capital to make a serious run at M$, and if they could get Google on thier side, it would be a hell of a fight. But no, Apple is keeping thier Mac OS in thier stable, only to be used on thier 1337 Apple hardware. Really, Apple is more of a compeditor to Dell than M$. Personally I dislike Apple hardware, propritary crap, but I like OSX, but I dont like Apple hardware, so no OSX for me, or the other 90% get to use OSX.
So who is left to give my money to?
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
Well, why do you think that apple doesn't try to compete directly with MS? Because Microsoft controls and monopolizes the entire software industry. I'm not saying any of your opinions are incorrect at all either. It isn't Microsoft's fault that there is no competition, its our fault that we let a company have so much control over the process.
Its too risky for apple to hire a bunch of programmers to work on direct X like components with opengl, sdl, and some input libraries. I wish they would but even if they did, who would write the games for them???? ID software is one of the ONLY serious developers who supports these libraries. I'm glad somebody out there has brains.
Microsoft specifically goes out of their way to make everything they do proprietary so that all the serious developers will feel that they will make the most money programming windows programs, which have absolutely no compatibility with other platforms. Microsoft loves this because they will never have to compete with anybody but themselves.
This ties in with the anti-vista articles because many of the anti-vista sentiment originates from Microsoft's monopolistic behavior towards the consumer. Off the top of my head, the fact that during an upgrade your copy of XP becomes deactivated, is just another fine example of what they are getting away with .
Its too risky for apple to hire a bunch of programmers to work on direct X like components with opengl, sdl, and some input libraries. I wish they would but even if they did, who would write the games for them???? ID software is one of the ONLY serious developers who supports these libraries. I'm glad somebody out there has brains.
Microsoft specifically goes out of their way to make everything they do proprietary so that all the serious developers will feel that they will make the most money programming windows programs, which have absolutely no compatibility with other platforms. Microsoft loves this because they will never have to compete with anybody but themselves.
This ties in with the anti-vista articles because many of the anti-vista sentiment originates from Microsoft's monopolistic behavior towards the consumer. Off the top of my head, the fact that during an upgrade your copy of XP becomes deactivated, is just another fine example of what they are getting away with .
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2000
- Location
- Lawrenceville, GA
kayson said:I'm just waiting for google to make an OS
LOL
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2001
Maybe all the flak Vista is getting is because it's... bad?
I've used Vista at work, on various types of hardware, from P3's to Dual Core Athlons. And I'm still thoroughly unimpressed. The bloat, the lack of performance. The ridiculous system requirements for Aero, rendering a few alpha blended quads requires a DX9 128MB card? Voodoo Rush cards could do that 15 years ago. Aero itself being completely unnecessary eyecandy. Highly noticeable performance drops in games. All the "security" nuisances bug me the most tho. Like I need FOUR warning popups to delete a shortcut from my start menu.
Face it, Vista is todays ME. I just wish there was an alternative.
I've used Vista at work, on various types of hardware, from P3's to Dual Core Athlons. And I'm still thoroughly unimpressed. The bloat, the lack of performance. The ridiculous system requirements for Aero, rendering a few alpha blended quads requires a DX9 128MB card? Voodoo Rush cards could do that 15 years ago. Aero itself being completely unnecessary eyecandy. Highly noticeable performance drops in games. All the "security" nuisances bug me the most tho. Like I need FOUR warning popups to delete a shortcut from my start menu.
Face it, Vista is todays ME. I just wish there was an alternative.
I don't think he expects them to. However, I agree with him that Microsoft holding a monopoly holds us back and prevents innovation. It's not about the best way to do something, it's only about the Microsoft way. That's never a good thing. Who wants one player in a game? We certainly don't think that way in hardware, and software/OS should be no different. I don't generally buy Intel processors, but I don't want AMD to be the only manufacturer of CPUs. Same for NVIDIA/ATi, same for Western Digital/Seagate/Hitachi, etc..etc. Competition is ALWAYS a good thing, as it strives everyone to move forward and it quickly moves flawed ideas into obsolescence in favor of more innovative ways of going at problems.
Tell that to Redhat, IBM, or any of the other enterprise-level *nix distributors. They make bank, I assure you. Linux and UNIX are incredibly stable and secure when in the hands of a knowledgeable admin, and are used for a plethora of huge business applications (my friend is a systems admin at a regional hospital with UNIX and Linux mainframes). Banks, hospitals, universities, and many, many more make use of Linux on a wide-scale. And not to mention it's a great desktop system. My laptop runs Slackware Linux with GNOME for all of my web-browsing, email, music, video, Teamspeak, etc, and hasn't needed to be reformated, runs as smooth as day one. Keeps my Windows XP installation to games-only so the Windows-Rot fairy doesn't visit as often.
As for that not being Microsoft's fault... it kind of is, due to their business practices and closed APIs. That's the whole point. Every company should be allowed to do their thing and make money, but a monopoly hurts the industry as a whole. Hence the reason they're illegal.
OP
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Location
- Port Elgin, Canada
- Thread Starter
- #35
If companys are allowed to make money off Linux flavours, why not develope it more then? Now is the time... there is a whole generation of kids growing up in asia who will have those 'hundred dollar computers', running on a version of Linux, and with China pushing Linux cause they dont trust M$... that is a freeking HUGE market, all Linux. The could make a mint there alone, and if they charge say... $100 for the bells and whistles version, I bet alot more people would take that rather than a $500 copy of Vista Ultimate. Even if they can get it upto Windows 98 ease of use, it would be a huge success. mac is there, but wont even take the chance of making some money. If the Mac OS is so great, why are the scared to step up to the plate and have a swing.
As for games. If they can port a game for PC, Xbox 360, and PS3 (yes, I know Xbox is a windows kernal), why not to Mac or Linux? If someone will step up and give Linux or Mac the ability to play decent games, and people start buying Linux (or heaven forbid OSX for a PC) cause it is cheap... things will happen.
Look at IE vs Fire Fox. FF has what, 10-15% of the browser market now, could you imagine if Mac or Linux stole even 5% more from Windows? That is alot of money. So where is the problem?
I dont game much, so I couldnt care about DX10. Why do I use Windows? Cause nothing else out there is as easy to use, or has as many gadgets and stuff to make my computing time easy. If I had to compare Vista to Linux, I would say it would be like Vista to Win3.1... same BASIC ideas and options, but Vista is so much more refind.
As for games. If they can port a game for PC, Xbox 360, and PS3 (yes, I know Xbox is a windows kernal), why not to Mac or Linux? If someone will step up and give Linux or Mac the ability to play decent games, and people start buying Linux (or heaven forbid OSX for a PC) cause it is cheap... things will happen.
Look at IE vs Fire Fox. FF has what, 10-15% of the browser market now, could you imagine if Mac or Linux stole even 5% more from Windows? That is alot of money. So where is the problem?
I dont game much, so I couldnt care about DX10. Why do I use Windows? Cause nothing else out there is as easy to use, or has as many gadgets and stuff to make my computing time easy. If I had to compare Vista to Linux, I would say it would be like Vista to Win3.1... same BASIC ideas and options, but Vista is so much more refind.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
What is uneasy about linux? Is it dealing with drivers? Is it dealing with package installation? Is it the operating system installation that is difficult? How easy an OS is to use is not necessarily what I percieve as the end all important objective. We live in the 21st century with all kinds of new technologies, I would hope that the human races level of technical ability has improved. Please, don't make them any easier, I had no problem using DOS when i was 8.
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2001
Oroka Sempai said:
Limit the hardware OS X runs on and it's easier to code drivers for etc. Open it up to the whole realm of PCs and it becomes much harder to support everything and ensure stability.
Windows is one size fits all. (or with Vista, 6 or 7)
Linux is what you make of it. Want fancy desktop effects? Try XGL. etc.
Also, GNOME and KDE are miles ahead of Windows 3.11 in terms of usability while being much more customisable. Example: http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php?p=4926828&postcount=181
Develop it into what? Linux is an incredibly sophisicated and cutting-edge operating system. There are versions like Ubuntu and Fedora that have graphical installations as easy or easier than Windows, and are just as easy to navigate. There are already versions that aims at Windows users (Linspire, for example). I'm thinking that because you don't know much about Linux, you assume that it's difficult to use and not as advanced as Windows. Both are wrong, it's just different. When I first sat down to a DOS prompt, or a Windows 95 screen, I didn't know what I was doing until I learned.Oroka Sempai said:
As for Mac OS, I'd love to see them release one for normal PC hardware now. However, that's not really Apple's goal and mindset. Honestly, for people that don't game and just use a computer for internet, photos, music, etc, I would have no problem recommending a Mac over a PC these days. It's based on UNIX, compatibility is easy to determine, and things are overall simpler to maintain.
Plenty of games are ported to Mac already, since it's the second most common platform. However, it's getting more and more difficult, and this is where Microsoft comes in. DirectX is a closed API, and is all that's preventing other platforms from being game-friendly. OpenGL games (Quake 2, 3, 4, Doom 3, NWN, UT2K4, etc..etc..) run just fine natively on Linux. Until Microsoft opens their API, developers will continue to mostly ignore other platforms, simply because of spreading their resources thin. When you only have one shot, you aim for the biggest target.
It's going that way, just slowly. Mac is becoming more popular these days, thanks to their iPods and whatnot. Third-party applications to replace Microsoft's built in apps (like Firefox, Thunderbird) are becoming more prevalent. Linux is being used more, as well. But you have to realize that most "computer users" order from Dell or buy it at Walmart and the machine sits in the basement and does only the most basic of tasks. Neither Mac or Linux cater to this kind of user that only has a computer to play online poker and to replace their typewriter and knows NOTHING about a computer or has any heightened interest in integrated electronics (digital cameras, portable music players, etc).
Once again, this shows that you know nothing about Linux/UNIX/MacOS (yes, OSX is a form of UNIX). Without any knowledge of it, you automatically assume that it is unrefined because YOU don't know how to use it. There are things out there that are just as easy, have as many "gadgets", and ultimately might make your computer time far easier than on Windows (or maybe not, everyone's different). The fact of the matter is, you use Windows because you only know how to use Windows, and you like using Windows. Is there anything wrong with this? Absolutely not! But that's the real reason you use Windows, not because of the accusations you make towards other operating systems.
Last edited:
I have 4 systems running now.
3 have dual boot with linux
XP/PcLinuxOS SuperGamer2
XP/PCLinuxOS BigDaddy .93a
Win 2000/.94TR1 (Great) look for the .94 comming soon!www.PCLinuxOS.com
Vista 64 bit Ultimate edition pretty nice!
I recomend getting Vista on a new system made for Vista.
3 have dual boot with linux
XP/PcLinuxOS SuperGamer2
XP/PCLinuxOS BigDaddy .93a
Win 2000/.94TR1 (Great) look for the .94 comming soon!www.PCLinuxOS.com
Vista 64 bit Ultimate edition pretty nice!
I recomend getting Vista on a new system made for Vista.
OP
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Location
- Port Elgin, Canada
- Thread Starter
- #40
I have used Linux, I install it every year or so to see if it got any better. Last time I installed it, Ubuntu, I couldnt get my wireless nic to work, and couldnt get my Videocard installed. Tried looking for how to install the drivers, and damn, what a frigging pain in the ***. Format, back to XP. Ubuntu was pretty, but still the same ol Linux. Searched around for help, you get alot of 'mighter than thou' Linux peeps calling people trying to learn
n00bs.
Anyways, this is wayyyyy off topic.
Dont stop posting anti-Vista threads, just try to post something positive once in a while.
n00bs.
Anyways, this is wayyyyy off topic.
Dont stop posting anti-Vista threads, just try to post something positive once in a while.
