A correct "mojave" experiment for Vista

September 21, 200816 yr

"Ringmaster" <bigtop@VistaGeneralCircus.net> wrote in message

news:6q9dd49jv4lreqv1hk3gv8djjrcn9k1la1@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 15:41:37 -0400, "D. Eth" <death@thedoor.nxt>

> wrote:

>

>>"Ringmaster" <bigtop@VistaGeneralCircus.net> wrote in message

>>news:qm7dd4p6k58as75mb13cjr60h6vg38icb2@4ax.com...

>>> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 22:16:21 +0300, "gerooky" <g@ish.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>>hey they sent people to the moon using computers far less powerful than

>>>>a

>>>>486

>>>

>>> Yea, and rest assured it didn't run under Windows. It wouldn't have

>>> even made it 10 feet off the launch pad if Microsoft wrote the OS

>>> code.

>>>

>>

>>The OS does little in that first 10 feet.

>

> If controlled by Windows it would have had a BSOD and flamed out.

>

> This is how "good" Vista is:

>

> http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/03/14/mega-blow-to-microsoft-as-us-government-departments-ban-vista/

Cost was a factor.

If they could upgrade their "legacy hardware" ...who knows.

For all I care...the US government could run ubuntu.

Those morons would be right at home with it.

And with the money saved...Congress will all embark on trips to Switzerland,

Africa and any other vacation site they can dream up to get "ubuntu

training".

Using what the government does as an example of intelligence doesn't really

fly.

--

Ens causa sui

Fit caedes omnibus locis

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

In article <48d6a461$1@newsgate.x-privat.org>, gerooky <g@ish.com> wrote:

>

>Do you have any tips for making them work a bit better before I see them

>off?

>

Replace the disc drives and max out the memory. Both are cheap

to do if you have a good source of used pull parts.

What really slows those old boxes down are ancient 5400 drives and

tiny amounts of ram.

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

Yes ..you are right about the HDD speed.

I just put a couple days ago, a 4 gig hard drive with xp on it

on a p4 1800, and that pc went incredibly slow do to the old drive...

Im not sure what HDD's these PII 300 Mhz can take though....

Im not sure if the bios will recognize any new ones that I can find.

The ones they currently have are 2 gig quantums... lol

What are the ones you have on them?

"the wharf rat" <wrat@panix.com> wrote in message

news:gb6ar1$9uh$1@reader1.panix.com...

> In article <48d6a461$1@newsgate.x-privat.org>, gerooky <g@ish.com> wrote:

>>

>>Do you have any tips for making them work a bit better before I see them

>>off?

>>

>

> Replace the disc drives and max out the memory. Both are cheap

> to do if you have a good source of used pull parts.

>

> What really slows those old boxes down are ancient 5400 drives and

> tiny amounts of ram.

>

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

"gerooky" <g@ish.com> wrote in message

news:48d6b546$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...

> That article was from 2007,

>

> up until now vista has been rejected by almost all big companies, and

> organizations of the state.

>

> Everyone is skipping vista because it has nothing to offer more than XP

> but a lot of headaches and money down the drain.

>

> These reports are all around the internet... its not some stupid

> blogger....

>

> They are waiting to see if windows7 is any better

>

No ... dink that lives in a cave.

Companies are waiting on the economy.

Companies aren't gonna invest in Vista when sales are falling...now are they

!

They aren't gonna lay off 4000 workers, then run out and buy a new OS ...

now are they !

I don't track this kinda stuff, nor do I really care to, but I am sure you

will find sales of lots of computer stuff slacking off.

You're little news sites (bloggers, beggars, what-ever-you-wanna-call-them)

, have all found an easy issue to tackle.

They are desperate !

(A show was recently on PBS that showed some type of "blogger

convention"...one guy needed his "readers" to raise the money for bus fare

to the convention).

These people are unsuccessful jokes .

Period.

Bless them...one and all ! LOL

--

Ens causa sui

Fit caedes omnibus locis

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

"gerooky" <g@ish.com> wrote in message

news:48d6a3c4$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>I didn't say that. I said MS should give a good price for those upgrading

>from vista to win7 as a plead for forgiveness for the mistakes they made

>with vista.

>

> HOWEVER....

>

> Im sure you got your copy of vista for free.. didn't you ? Hmmmm?

>

> the truth now! lol

>

> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote in message

> news:#RLp63BHJHA.456@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>> "gerooky" <g@ish.com> wrote in message

>> news:48d69200@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>>>> And you are always right, yes?

>>>

>>> I am not always right on everything, but in things like this where I

>>> have researched them for endless hours and have personal experience not

>>> only on my machines but others as well, and when I hear the same story

>>> from everyone..

>>>

>>> well I must be right. You even see microsoft trying to figure out how to

>>> make people accept vista somehow...

>>>

>>> Its wasted time, all those stupid advertisements, and mojove experiments

>>> will have no effect, they should hurry up and make windows7 as best as

>>> possible fixing all vista blunders,

>>> and give a super good discount to people upgrading from vista.

>>>

>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote in message

>>> news:#5U#1XBHJHA.3932@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

>>>> "gerooky" <g@ish.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:48d68dab$2@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>>>>> You are more of a troll than I. You insist on glorifying a faulty

>>>>> product and claiming its everyone else's fault but vistas!

>>>>>

>>>>> Look on google and see how much people "love" (im saying this

>>>>> ironically of course) vista.

>>>>>

>>>>> I don't hate vista, heck I use vista, but I have full understanding of

>>>>> its qualities and shortcomings.

>>>>>

>>>>> "Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:eAiQMHBHJHA.4956@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>>>>>> "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

>>>>>> news:5a1dd49m2igvqmmtnot0m2v65emibhld9g@4ax.com...

>>>>>>> "gerooky" is obviously a troll. I can't understand why everyone is

>>>>>>> replying to him/her.

>>>>>>

>>>>>> True, but it is Sunday, the day of rest from normal work, and time to

>>>>>> have fun.. :-)

>>>>>>

>>>>>> --

>>>>>> Mike Hall - MVP

>>>>>> How to construct a good post..

>>>>>> http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm

>>>>>> How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..

>>>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc

>>>>>> Mike's Window - My Blog..

>>>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

>>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> And you are always right, yes?

>>>>

>>>> --

>>>> Mike Hall - MVP

>>>> How to construct a good post..

>>>> http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm

>>>> How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..

>>>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc

>>>> Mike's Window - My Blog..

>>>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

>>>>

>>

>> Ah, I get it now.. you want everything for free.. You should have said so

>> at the beginning..

>>

>> --

>> Mike Hall - MVP

>> How to construct a good post..

>> http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm

>> How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..

>> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc

>> Mike's Window - My Blog..

>> http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

>>

Yes, I was part of the beta test. We all gotten one..

But, anybody buying a pre-installed system gets the OS for virtually

nothing..

For many, Vista has worked well. It has for me. The biggest problems are

aways behind Vista now, other than the tarnished image which it doesn't

deserve despite protestations from people like you..

--

Mike Hall - MVP

How to construct a good post..

http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm

How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc

Mike's Window - My Blog..

http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

Non Sequitur. Your Facts are Uncoordinated.

If vista had some grand advantage then they might have upgraded

fact 1) vista sales are mostly on new pc's and mostly forced onto people who

really would prefer xp

fact 2) Its not only bloggers that are saying that vista is being ignored..

everyone is saying it.

Even microsoft!

If you want to ignore everyone ok.. go ahead... but don't say that its not

reflecting what is going on

"D. Eth" <death@thedoor.nxt> wrote in message news:gb6dl8$8mt$1@aioe.org...

> "gerooky" <g@ish.com> wrote in message

> news:48d6b546$1@newsgate.x-privat.org...

>> That article was from 2007,

>>

>> up until now vista has been rejected by almost all big companies, and

>> organizations of the state.

>>

>> Everyone is skipping vista because it has nothing to offer more than XP

>> but a lot of headaches and money down the drain.

>>

>> These reports are all around the internet... its not some stupid

>> blogger....

>>

>> They are waiting to see if windows7 is any better

>>

>

> No ... dink that lives in a cave.

>

> Companies are waiting on the economy.

> Companies aren't gonna invest in Vista when sales are falling...now are

> they !

> They aren't gonna lay off 4000 workers, then run out and buy a new OS ...

> now are they !

>

> I don't track this kinda stuff, nor do I really care to, but I am sure you

> will find sales of lots of computer stuff slacking off.

>

> You're little news sites (bloggers, beggars,

> what-ever-you-wanna-call-them) , have all found an easy issue to tackle.

>

> They are desperate !

>

> (A show was recently on PBS that showed some type of "blogger

> convention"...one guy needed his "readers" to raise the money for bus fare

> to the convention).

>

> These people are unsuccessful jokes .

>

> Period.

>

> Bless them...one and all ! LOL

>

> --

> Ens causa sui

> Fit caedes omnibus locis

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

that's a very small portion of the nicks I have used....

It would be thousands...

I change one when I get bored of the old one, or spanky de monkey this

newsgroups troll gets on by back by assuming my identity and posting

stupitidy.

The lasts ones that I use indeed are like some of the users in here, but

that's only to misguide spanky so it will get of my back.

You know spanky de monkey don't you...

why don't you give us some statistics of "that" (Im saying that because its

not a boy or girl, I don't know what the fuc it is!)

If you want to go a-troll hunting I am not a troll... see about spanky de

monkey it is the worst troll in here..

even worse than Frank

"Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

news:5pfdd4d0hgebpbtnuhajuc542gi6et8pgi@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 13:45:09 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"

> <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote:

>

>>"Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

>>news:5a1dd49m2igvqmmtnot0m2v65emibhld9g@4ax.com...

>>> "gerooky" is obviously a troll. I can't understand why everyone is

>>> replying to him/her.

>>

>>True, but it is Sunday, the day of rest from normal work, and time to have

>>fun.. :-)

>

> "gerooky" is also:

>

> "ringmaster" <r@ish.com> (note the small "r")

>

> "Bill Yanaire" <Bill@Yainaire.com>

>

> "Non Sequitur!" <only@rret.com>

>

> "Span Key The Money key" <Iam@idiot.com>

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 00:55:19 +0300, "gerooky" <g@ish.com> wrote:

>that's a very small portion of the nicks I have used....

No doubt. The list I gave only covers the previous five days or so.

>It would be thousands...

>

>I change one when I get bored of the old one, or spanky de monkey this

>newsgroups troll gets on by back by assuming my identity and posting

>stupitidy.

>

>The lasts ones that I use indeed are like some of the users in here, but

>that's only to misguide spanky so it will get of my back.

>

>You know spanky de monkey don't you...

>

>why don't you give us some statistics of "that" (Im saying that because its

>not a boy or girl, I don't know what the fuc it is!)

>

>If you want to go a-troll hunting I am not a troll... see about spanky de

>monkey it is the worst troll in here..

Same time period (NNTP-Posting-Host: 99.131.63.182):

"Spanky deMonkey, ESQ"

"Ringmaster's Psychiatrist" <ring@nutcase.net>

"Span Key The Monkey key" <Iam@idiot.com>

<kevpan815@comcast.net>

"Theory of Nothing" <Theory@nothing.net>

>even worse than Frank

Frank must be smarter than most: during the past five days his

aioe.org IP has only been used by "Frank".

>"Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

>news:5pfdd4d0hgebpbtnuhajuc542gi6et8pgi@4ax.com...

>> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 13:45:09 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"

>> <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote:

>>

>>>"Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message

>>>news:5a1dd49m2igvqmmtnot0m2v65emibhld9g@4ax.com...

>>>> "gerooky" is obviously a troll. I can't understand why everyone is

>>>> replying to him/her.

>>>

>>>True, but it is Sunday, the day of rest from normal work, and time to have

>>>fun.. :-)

>>

>> "gerooky" is also:

>>

>> "ringmaster" <r@ish.com> (note the small "r")

>>

>> "Bill Yanaire" <Bill@Yainaire.com>

>>

>> "Non Sequitur!" <only@rret.com>

>>

>> "Span Key The Money key" <Iam@idiot.com>

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

But at least they did it.

What did aPPLE do when it came out with OX 10?

--

Richard Urban

Microsoft MVP

Windows Desktop Experience

"the wharf rat" <wrat@panix.com> wrote in message

news:gb61vm$d4p$1@reader1.panix.com...

> In article <5quBk.27095$QF5.5964@newsfe08.iad>,

> Charles Tomaras <tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:

>>

>>forward. Microsoft has had some of the best legacy support of any OS maker

>>over the years and in many ways it has handicapped them from advancing in

>>anything other than market share.

>

> Most complete? Yes. Best? No. They accomplished that support

> simply by leaving all the old cruft in place rather than by replacing it

> and providing an interface layer.

>

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

"D.Eth" <death@thedoor.nxt> wrote in news:gb63ec$ee$1@aioe.org:

>> That's not true at all. You can easily verify that for yourself.

>> A PII-400 using a 8MB video card and 256MB will run XP just fine, and

>> even play games that were current at the time such as quake.

>>

>

> Not true ^

>

> I run XPsp2 on a PIII-600 with a 64MB Geforce400 and 384MB RAM and it

> runs...but is real laggy. My son hated playing CS on that PC .

> And god help you if you do an AV scan ... useless PC for 20 minutes.

> And that setup is with ~ 12 running processes and using ~70MB ram post

> boot.

>

> Not true based on my opinion.

I have NEVER seen an XP machine running with 12 processes and only 70 megs

of RAM directly after boot unless in safe mode....even then the 70 megs RAM

is really pushing it. And a full AV scan on that would take way more than

20 minutes...more like 2 hours.

That is totally BS.

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

"Mike Hall - MVP" <mikehall@remove_mvps.com> wrote in

news:eAiQMHBHJHA.4956@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl:

> True, but it is Sunday, the day of rest from normal work, and time to

> have fun.. :-)

And more importantly, a Sunday on which the Bills won again....

3 and 0 baby !!!!!!!!

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote in message

news:Xns9B20EB701A683thisnthatadelphianet@85.214.90.236...

> "D.Eth" <death@thedoor.nxt> wrote in news:gb63ec$ee$1@aioe.org:

>

>>> That's not true at all. You can easily verify that for yourself.

>>> A PII-400 using a 8MB video card and 256MB will run XP just fine, and

>>> even play games that were current at the time such as quake.

>>>

>>

>> Not true ^

>>

>> I run XPsp2 on a PIII-600 with a 64MB Geforce400 and 384MB RAM and it

>> runs...but is real laggy. My son hated playing CS on that PC .

>> And god help you if you do an AV scan ... useless PC for 20 minutes.

>> And that setup is with ~ 12 running processes and using ~70MB ram post

>> boot.

>>

>> Not true based on my opinion.

>

> I have NEVER seen an XP machine running with 12 processes and only 70 megs

> of RAM directly after boot unless in safe mode....even then the 70 megs

> RAM

> is really pushing it. And a full AV scan on that would take way more than

> 20 minutes...more like 2 hours.

>

> That is totally BS.

I put an ~ for approx.

I just booted in....16 processes right after boot, 15 once the winupdate

goes away.

perhaps you don't know how to disable services.

82 MB used mem right after boot ... once again, you maybe can't tweak an XP

system.

A full AV scan on that PC takes 20 minutes monkey boy...its only a 20GB HD.

But , ya , idiot...you know my PC's better than me.

Better stick to flippen burgers

--

Ens causa sui

Fit caedes omnibus locis

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

In article <uAaFdoDHJHA.944@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl>,

Richard Urban <richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

>What did aPPLE do when it came out with OX 10?

>

They provided the Classic Mac emulation layer and made it easy

to run OS9 and OSX on the same box.

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 09:12:42 -0700, "Charles Tomaras"

<tomaras@tomaras.com> wrote:

>

>"+Bob+" <uctraing@ultranet.com> wrote in message

>news:cvqcd49cqtibjs294uovn33nmjtlmqbo0a@4ax.com...

>

>> But there were plenty of XP compatible drivers. Why couldn't MS build

>> an interface back to those drivers? They either did it intentionally,

>> or simply declined to spend the money to do it.

>

>At some point, legacy support has to be compromised for things to move

>forward. Microsoft has had some of the best legacy support of any OS maker

>over the years and in many ways it has handicapped them from advancing in

>anything other than market share.

>

First, I'm not talking about "over the years" - I'm talking about XP

to Vista.

Second, I invite you to tell me how Vista has advanced anything.

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 09:44:27 -0700, "Kerry Brown"

<kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote:

>Try comparing apples to apples instead of apples to oranges (pun intended).

>Here's the minimum and suggested minimum recommendations for XP.

>

>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314865

>

>What is the user experience like with that setup? It's about as good as

>Vista with the suggested minimum recommendations. Microsoft has never been

>very good with either minimum or suggested minimum requirements. Here's some

>more that are way off.

The point is that Vista requires twice the hardware and still runs

slower.

I invite you (too) to tell me what improvements Vista has that merit

the increase in hardware.

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 21, 200816 yr

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 03:53:31 +0800, "David A. Spicer"

<vista_ultimate_fan@hotmail.com> wrote:

>My wife's 6 year old Gateway notebook, which only has 512 MB of RAM, runs Vista Basic just fine.

Does she use any applications? I doubt it.

>If it was running a preinstalled version, if there was one, it would more than likely bring it to

>its knees. I'm going to put XP back on it, but only because there are no Vista drivers for

>her webcam.

Another Vista success!

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 22, 200816 yr

"+Bob+" <uctraing@ultranet.com> wrote in message

news:c3ndd4lng78ihtmra7pv0g2vo2op1sua2f@4ax.com...

> On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 03:53:31 +0800, "David A. Spicer"

> <vista_ultimate_fan@hotmail.com> wrote:

>

>>My wife's 6 year old Gateway notebook, which only has 512 MB of RAM, runs

>>Vista Basic just fine.

>

> Does she use any applications? I doubt it.

>

>>If it was running a preinstalled version, if there was one, it would more

>>than likely bring it to

>>its knees. I'm going to put XP back on it, but only because there are no

>>Vista drivers for

>>her webcam.

>

> Another Vista success!

The same has been true of all Windows OS.. the minimum runs the OS.. if you

want to run more, you need more resources..

--

Mike Hall - MVP

How to construct a good post..

http://dts-l.com/goodpost.htm

How to use the Microsoft Product Support Newsgroups..

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?pr=newswhelp&style=toc

Mike's Window - My Blog..

http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/default.aspx

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 22, 200816 yr

"DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote in message

news:Xns9B216DEAAA61thisnthatadelphianet@85.214.90.236...

> "D. Eth" <death@thedoor.nxt> wrote in news:gb6kt5$3oq$1@aioe.org:

>

>> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote in message

>> news:Xns9B20EB701A683thisnthatadelphianet@85.214.90.236...

>>> "D.Eth" <death@thedoor.nxt> wrote in news:gb63ec$ee$1@aioe.org:

>>>

>>>>> That's not true at all. You can easily verify that for

>>>>> yourself.

>>>>> A PII-400 using a 8MB video card and 256MB will run XP just fine,

>>>>> and even play games that were current at the time such as quake.

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Not true ^

>>>>

>>>> I run XPsp2 on a PIII-600 with a 64MB Geforce400 and 384MB RAM and

>>>> it runs...but is real laggy. My son hated playing CS on that PC .

>>>> And god help you if you do an AV scan ... useless PC for 20 minutes.

>>>> And that setup is with ~ 12 running processes and using ~70MB ram

>>>> post boot.

>>>>

>>>> Not true based on my opinion.

>>>

>>> I have NEVER seen an XP machine running with 12 processes and only 70

>>> megs of RAM directly after boot unless in safe mode....even then the

>>> 70 megs RAM

>>> is really pushing it. And a full AV scan on that would take way more

>>> than 20 minutes...more like 2 hours.

>>>

>>> That is totally BS.

>>

>> I put an ~ for approx.

>>

>> I just booted in....16 processes right after boot, 15 once the

>> winupdate goes away.

>> perhaps you don't know how to disable services.

>

> Uh, yeah. That's the first thing I do when I install Window for anyone.

>

>>

>> 82 MB used mem right after boot ... once again, you maybe can't tweak

>> an XP system.

>>

>> A full AV scan on that PC takes 20 minutes monkey boy...its only a

>> 20GB HD.

>>

>> But, ya , idiot...you know my PC's better than me.

>

> Why are you calling me monkeyboy and idiot ? Because you underestimated

> the processes running by ~25% and the RAM usage by ~18%. Even 16

> processes is FAR away from 12.

>

No...you said it was BS...it wasn't BS...it was an estimate.

I wasn't staring at the PC.

And my 15 is including taskmgr...so once I close that ...it's 14....my

"guess was 12"

My mem usage of 82 included 4 for taskmgr....so 78...my guess was 70.

See how close that is ( without you trying to make it exaggerated by turning

it into a %).

And taken into the context of the conversation...it was about a poster

saying XP ran fine on a PII and 256M ram...if my tweaked down system can

barely run on a PIII 384M system...yet you chose to say MY statement was BS.

So if you cull out my post...call it BS (I got no reason to BS, unlike the

anti-Vista morons) ... then I don't mind coming right back at ya.

Can't take it ?

Don't respond.

> And just incidentally, this PC is running 18 services, not incuding the

> the apps I have open, and three of those are for AVG, so I guess I match

> your 15. Also, it's not my call on svchost processes. I have no control

> over Windows choosing to run 4 svchost processes, 3 hosting 1 service

> each and the remaining 1 hosting 14 processes. I'd say yes, I do know how

> to disable services, and stop apps from loading at startup, and a

> thousand other things.

>

> It's not enough to say...well, I just booted it and it's really 15

> processes and 82 megs ? No, you need to think you can show superiority by

> calling me names. That's so 5th grade.

>

> Welcome to m.p.w.v.general, I guess you'll fit right in with all the

> other nuts that can't help but resort to personal insult's, name calling,

> and, eventually resorting to farm animal innuendos.

>

>>

>> Better stick to flippen burgers

>

> I've NEVER flipped burgers. You don't know jack squat about me.

--

Ens causa sui

Fit caedes omnibus locis

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 22, 200816 yr

D. Eth wrote:

> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote in message

> news:Xns9B216DEAAA61thisnthatadelphianet@85.214.90.236...

>> "D. Eth" <death@thedoor.nxt> wrote in news:gb6kt5$3oq$1@aioe.org:

>>

>>> "DanS" <t.h.i.s.n.t.h.a.t@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t> wrote in message

>>> news:Xns9B20EB701A683thisnthatadelphianet@85.214.90.236...

>>>> "D.Eth" <death@thedoor.nxt> wrote in news:gb63ec$ee$1@aioe.org:

>>>>

>>>>>> That's not true at all. You can easily verify that for

>>>>>> yourself.

>>>>>> A PII-400 using a 8MB video card and 256MB will run XP just fine,

>>>>>> and even play games that were current at the time such as quake.

>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Not true ^

>>>>>

>>>>> I run XPsp2 on a PIII-600 with a 64MB Geforce400 and 384MB RAM and

>>>>> it runs...but is real laggy. My son hated playing CS on that PC .

>>>>> And god help you if you do an AV scan ... useless PC for 20 minutes.

>>>>> And that setup is with ~ 12 running processes and using ~70MB ram

>>>>> post boot.

>>>>>

>>>>> Not true based on my opinion.

>>>>

>>>> I have NEVER seen an XP machine running with 12 processes and only 70

>>>> megs of RAM directly after boot unless in safe mode....even then the

>>>> 70 megs RAM

>>>> is really pushing it. And a full AV scan on that would take way more

>>>> than 20 minutes...more like 2 hours.

>>>>

>>>> That is totally BS.

>>>

>>> I put an ~ for approx.

>>>

>>> I just booted in....16 processes right after boot, 15 once the

>>> winupdate goes away.

>>> perhaps you don't know how to disable services.

>>

>> Uh, yeah. That's the first thing I do when I install Window for anyone.

>>

>>>

>>> 82 MB used mem right after boot ... once again, you maybe can't tweak

>>> an XP system.

>>>

>>> A full AV scan on that PC takes 20 minutes monkey boy...its only a

>>> 20GB HD.

>>>

>>> But, ya , idiot...you know my PC's better than me.

>>

>> Why are you calling me monkeyboy and idiot ? Because you underestimated

>> the processes running by ~25% and the RAM usage by ~18%. Even 16

>> processes is FAR away from 12.

>>

>

> No...you said it was BS...it wasn't BS...it was an estimate.

> I wasn't staring at the PC.

> And my 15 is including taskmgr...so once I close that ...it's 14....my

> "guess was 12"

> My mem usage of 82 included 4 for taskmgr....so 78...my guess was 70.

>

> See how close that is ( without you trying to make it exaggerated by

> turning it into a %).

>

> And taken into the context of the conversation...it was about a poster

> saying XP ran fine on a PII and 256M ram...if my tweaked down system can

> barely run on a PIII 384M system...yet you chose to say MY statement was

> BS.

>

> So if you cull out my post...call it BS (I got no reason to BS, unlike

> the anti-Vista morons) ... then I don't mind coming right back at ya.

> Can't take it ?

>

> Don't respond.

>

>> And just incidentally, this PC is running 18 services, not incuding the

>> the apps I have open, and three of those are for AVG, so I guess I match

>> your 15. Also, it's not my call on svchost processes. I have no control

>> over Windows choosing to run 4 svchost processes, 3 hosting 1 service

>> each and the remaining 1 hosting 14 processes. I'd say yes, I do know how

>> to disable services, and stop apps from loading at startup, and a

>> thousand other things.

>>

>> It's not enough to say...well, I just booted it and it's really 15

>> processes and 82 megs ? No, you need to think you can show superiority by

>> calling me names. That's so 5th grade.

>>

>> Welcome to m.p.w.v.general, I guess you'll fit right in with all the

>> other nuts that can't help but resort to personal insult's, name calling,

>> and, eventually resorting to farm animal innuendos.

>>

>>>

>>> Better stick to flippen burgers

>>

>> I've NEVER flipped burgers. You don't know jack squat about me.

>

He might not have service packs installed...

sp2 upped the resources needed for it to run

plus you can tweak xp very much by disabling services..

or even making a custom install with programs like nlite.

there is also xp fundamentals version

see here its quite interesting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Fundamentals_for_Legacy_PCs

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 22, 200816 yr

Mike Hall - MVP wrote:

> "+Bob+" <uctraing@ultranet.com> wrote in message

> news:c3ndd4lng78ihtmra7pv0g2vo2op1sua2f@4ax.com...

>> On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 03:53:31 +0800, "David A. Spicer"

>> <vista_ultimate_fan@hotmail.com> wrote:

>>

>>> My wife's 6 year old Gateway notebook, which only has 512 MB of RAM,

>>> runs Vista Basic just fine.

>>

>> Does she use any applications? I doubt it.

>>

>>> If it was running a preinstalled version, if there was one, it would

>>> more than likely bring it to

>>> its knees. I'm going to put XP back on it, but only because there are

>>> no Vista drivers for

>>> her webcam.

>>

>> Another Vista success!

>

> The same has been true of all Windows OS.. the minimum runs the OS.. if

> you want to run more, you need more resources..

>

MS has adapted XP to run on slow machines, this was made in 2006

xp fundamentals version

see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Fundamentals_for_Legacy_PCs

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 22, 200816 yr

"+Bob+" <uctraing@ultranet.com> wrote in message

news:0pmdd4li1n2pue28rm718d88llkgsn6046@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 09:44:27 -0700, "Kerry Brown"

> <kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote:

>

>>Try comparing apples to apples instead of apples to oranges (pun

>>intended).

>>Here's the minimum and suggested minimum recommendations for XP.

>>

>>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314865

>>

>>What is the user experience like with that setup? It's about as good as

>>Vista with the suggested minimum recommendations. Microsoft has never been

>>very good with either minimum or suggested minimum requirements. Here's

>>some

>>more that are way off.

>

> The point is that Vista requires twice the hardware and still runs

> slower.

>

> I invite you (too) to tell me what improvements Vista has that merit

> the increase in hardware.

>

Built in search, better firewall, service hardening, IE protected mode,

better memory management, much better default user interface, 64 bit version

has much better driver support, can set a jpg file as the desktop background

without using active desktop, active desktop no longer exists, S3 sleep

support, Windows sidebar, snipping tool, photo gallery, DVD maker,

bitlocker, image based deployment, much better performance measuring and

troubleshooting tools, directx 10, Mobility Center, Windows Calendar,

Windows Contacts, scalable icons, breadcrumbs, usable parental controls,

ASLR, better DEP support, integrity control of applications, credential

providers instead of GINA, improved IPSEC support, better wireless

encryption support, ...

There's a few I can think of. I'm sure I missed more than I could come up

with off the top of my head. And before you say this can be added to XP -

Yes some of it can, but at what cost in both money and performance?

Another point is that the minimum recommended system for Vista is

considerably less expensive than the minimum recommended XP system was when

both OS's were released. More importantly a decent Vista system is about 3/4

the price of decent XP system at a similar point in the timeline of XP

development. If you take inflation into account it's actually less than 1/2

the cost.

I also take issue with your assertion that Vista runs slower than XP. If you

compare like with like i.e. a decent Vista system from today with a decent

XP system from 1 1/2 years after XP was released I think you'll find the

Vista system a better performer. Saying XP outperforms Vista on the same

hardware is like saying Windows 98 outperforms XP on the same hardware. Yes,

in both cases this is true. What is also true is that a typical XP system

would outperform a typical Windows 98 system and be much nicer to use. The

same holds true with Vista vs. XP. The point is the typical system changes

over time as hardware comes down in price and has better performance. Should

we ignore hardware improvements and only program for old, outdated hardware.

I don't know any OS that does that. Do you? I've been running Fedora since

it was Redhat 5.2. My first Redhat system was a PII with 32 MB. Do you think

Fedora 9 would run on it? Would Redhat 5.2 outperform Fedora 9 on a new

system? How about OS X on my old PowerCenter Pro?

Things change. Life and OS's move on. It's too bad some people can't deal

with this.

--

Kerry Brown

MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration

http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/

http://vistahelpca.blogspot.com/

Quote

Mark as Solution

September 22, 200816 yr

let me reply to every single one of those stupid things you list ok?

> Built in search,

Give me a break the vista search indexing is a buggy problematic horrid

defective piece of crap that I disable at once after I install vista!

>better firewall

The better features are hidden someone where no normal user will look.

Usless for the masses.

>service hardening

The amount of services has increased too much, it's a bloat paradise! MS is

trying to REDUCE the amount of services in windows7

>much better default user interface

You can install a theme for XP, big deal!

>64 bit version has much better driver support,

32 bit version has much worse driver support than XP.. lol

>can set a jpg file as the desktop background without using active desktop

Big deal! One click was not that hard to save as bmp. The ram needed to

display the wallpaper is the same either in jpg or bmp.

>active desktop no longer exists

Many people are really mad about this since they used it for tasks!

>S3 sleep support,

XP could go in standby too.

>Windows sidebar,

Crap eyecandy, but if you insist google sidebar with google desktop and

yahoo gadgets all free.

>snipping tool

Winsnap free version, better than the stupid snipping tool

>photo gallery

Live photo gallery installs on XP and is also crap, XNVIEW is free and much

better.

>much better performance measuring

Yeah you need it to try to figure out what the heck is making vista so

SLOW!!!!!!!!1

>DVD maker

I never needed such an app but im sure there are alternative free ones out

there.

>bitlocker

Not on all versions of vista!!!! most people have home premium

>image based deployment

Boat deployment, XP installs faster and better and is more versatile than

vista

>directx 10

That's a marketing SCAM! there was no reason for it not to be given to XP

users.

In fact I have seen a version hacked that installs on XP and works great!

lol

>Mobility Center

Not many use it.. if you are going to point every small utility that comes

with crapista to try to make it look good

then I think I must point to UBUNTU that has THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of

free applications !!!!!

>Windows Calendar, Windows Contacts,

see live messenger, live mail desktop wave 3

>scalable icons

Insignificant improvement, just eyecandy

>breadcrumbs

GOD forbid this STUPID MORON IDEA!!!! available on XP with an explorer addon

though if you insist

NO UP BUTTON!!!! GoD VISTA IS STUPID!

>usable parental controls

See live wave 3 pls

> ASLR, better DEP support, integrity control of applications, credential

> providers instead of GINA, improved IPSEC support, better wireless

> encryption support, ...

Yeah yeah things that consumers don't give a heck about...

Look vista is just a pile of crap because it offers no significant

improvement..

all that stuff is mostly BLOAT, and not improvement on the OS itself.

The worse thing about this bloat is that it slows the OS itself down, unlike

linux

where it doesn't slow down, no matter how many apps you install!

I would like to see increase in performance and the ability for it to be

MORE compatible with applications and

hardware... then give me icons that can be scaled.

by the way the scalability of icons is MUCH worse than what was promised in

longhorn.

I know the story, I know the promises.. Vista is a stupid degraded crap OS

that was pushed onto people

by force.

Vista has BAD PERFORMANCE and COMPATIBILITY that's what people care about

most...

add on small programs and eye candy are the last things they care about.

better firewall, service hardening, IE protected mode,

> better memory management, much better default user interface, 64 bit

> version has much better driver support, can set a jpg file as the desktop

> background without using active desktop, active desktop no longer exists,

> S3 sleep support, Windows sidebar, snipping tool, photo gallery, DVD

> maker, bitlocker, image based deployment, much better performance

> measuring and troubleshooting tools, directx 10, Mobility Center, Windows

> Calendar, Windows Contacts, scalable icons, breadcrumbs, usable parental

> controls, ASLR, better DEP support, integrity control of applications,

> credential providers instead of GINA, improved IPSEC support, better

> wireless encryption support, ...

"Kerry Brown" <kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote in message

news:#bL7zTFHJHA.1156@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

> "+Bob+" <uctraing@ultranet.com> wrote in message

> news:0pmdd4li1n2pue28rm718d88llkgsn6046@4ax.com...

>> On Sun, 21 Sep 2008 09:44:27 -0700, "Kerry Brown"

>> <kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote:

>>

>>>Try comparing apples to apples instead of apples to oranges (pun

>>>intended).

>>>Here's the minimum and suggested minimum recommendations for XP.

>>>

>>>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314865

>>>

>>>What is the user experience like with that setup? It's about as good as

>>>Vista with the suggested minimum recommendations. Microsoft has never

>>>been

>>>very good with either minimum or suggested minimum requirements. Here's

>>>some

>>>more that are way off.

>>

>> The point is that Vista requires twice the hardware and still runs

>> slower.

>>

>> I invite you (too) to tell me what improvements Vista has that merit

>> the increase in hardware.

>>

>

> Built in search, better firewall, service hardening, IE protected mode,