ah, this reminds me of the PC/Mac debates . . .
OS wars ftw!
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
Same here. I've had to disable hibernate altogether.joker3327 wrote:
I have Win 7 Pro...and the only problem I have is that it wont come out of Standby... I had no problems with the Beta or the RC coming back up but the retail version actually Blue screens..
ROFL seriously.mikkel wrote:
Installing something like Debian or Fedora for desktop use doesn't take much more than 20 minutes. It's all the issues that arise later on that'll waste your time.burnzz wrote:
so max - how long did your install take?
But honestly, I have installed ubuntu a couple of times on a couple of computers. Its never been any faster or less painful then a windows install TBH.
9.10 is ALOT better in this respect.max wrote:
lol
I'm the first to admit that Linux has it's fair share of issues. No gaming, ati hardware support is flakey, Flash is still a pain, etc ... but it's still worth it to me. <insert all the usual linux agruments here>
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously. ♥
Wow, I've had it with Windows 7, I'm back to Vista
Linux > Windows 7 RC > Windows Vista > Windows 7
How can the official release be buggier than the RC and beta ffs.
And max, how is flash buggy? Just grab flashplugin-nonfree from synaptic and you have full 64-bit flash 10.
Linux > Windows 7 RC > Windows Vista > Windows 7
How can the official release be buggier than the RC and beta ffs.
And max, how is flash buggy? Just grab flashplugin-nonfree from synaptic and you have full 64-bit flash 10.
Sydney, try reinstalling it. I was fucking pissed off the first day I installed it; nothing seemed to work right. Reinstalled it and it's all working fine, just like the RC.
Already done that, same problems. And those problems don't appear to happen in Vista.
I think he his agreeing with you, the initial install is fine. He is saying that down the road you have the potential of wasting time figuring out issues. This obviously does not apply if you just install it and do nothing but surf the web and check email.VicktorVauhn wrote:
ROFL seriously.mikkel wrote:
Installing something like Debian or Fedora for desktop use doesn't take much more than 20 minutes. It's all the issues that arise later on that'll waste your time.burnzz wrote:
so max - how long did your install take?
But honestly, I have installed ubuntu a couple of times on a couple of computers. Its never been any faster or less painful then a windows install TBH.
I haven't had any issues with recent Ubuntu release that couldn't be fixed in 5 minutes with some googling.jsnipy wrote:
I think he his agreeing with you, the initial install is fine. He is saying that down the road you have the potential of wasting time figuring out issues. This obviously does not apply if you just install it and do nothing but surf the web and check email.VicktorVauhn wrote:
ROFL seriously.mikkel wrote:
Installing something like Debian or Fedora for desktop use doesn't take much more than 20 minutes. It's all the issues that arise later on that'll waste your time.
But honestly, I have installed ubuntu a couple of times on a couple of computers. Its never been any faster or less painful then a windows install TBH.
Windows is a lot more problematic imo.
Windows 95?Sydney wrote:
Windows is a lot more problematic imo.
Any Windows..Sup wrote:
Windows 95?Sydney wrote:
Windows is a lot more problematic imo.
A lot of it is because I know windows.... But I almost never have problems in windows, and those that I do I can often fix pretty painlessly. Its been easier to find support because more people use it, and it normally takes less time then dealing with all the console commands.Sydney wrote:
Any Windows..Sup wrote:
Windows 95?Sydney wrote:
Windows is a lot more problematic imo.
there has never been a single thing linux has to offer me that I haven't been able to do in windows, but I sure cannot say the same statement the other way around.
I only quoted him to agree that the most time spend is trying to get it to work right.... My second comment was about the fact that installing ubuntu is much faster then installing windows.jsnipy wrote:
I think he his agreeing with you, the initial install is fine. He is saying that down the road you have the potential of wasting time figuring out issues. This obviously does not apply if you just install it and do nothing but surf the web and check email.VicktorVauhn wrote:
ROFL seriously.mikkel wrote:
Installing something like Debian or Fedora for desktop use doesn't take much more than 20 minutes. It's all the issues that arise later on that'll waste your time.
But honestly, I have installed ubuntu a couple of times on a couple of computers. Its never been any faster or less painful then a windows install TBH.
But really the fact is that besides getting a free OS to check email with, or running a server... I have just never found a single specific reason or advantage to using linux. Especially if you already have a windows key available.
Last edited by VicktorVauhn (2009-10-31 18:13:14)
If games supported linux I'd be running it on all my computers.
So I'm downloading Windows 7 Professional (x64) for free (legally lol) thank you MSNDAA.
I'm currently on XP, here are my specs:
Games are in development that are DirectX10 compatible only (Shattered Horizon is and has already been released) so I don't think I can put off the OS upgrade much longer.
So.. should I install Win7 with my current set up or would I be better to upgrade my machine?
I'm currently on XP, here are my specs:
Games are in development that are DirectX10 compatible only (Shattered Horizon is and has already been released) so I don't think I can put off the OS upgrade much longer.
So.. should I install Win7 with my current set up or would I be better to upgrade my machine?
Current machine wil run W7 perfectly. If you don't have enough money to do a complete upgrade, then just upgrade your RAM.
Cheers Zim.
I keep thinking my 8800gt is going to waste without Dx10. lol
I keep thinking my 8800gt is going to waste without Dx10. lol
So I set-up Win7, like the look and feel. Running fine.
Try to set up my internet connection. Go through the usual steps. Suddenly it's not working as it should.
The only drivers that aren't supported with Win7 are for my D-Link modem.
FFFFUUUU-
The one thing that you really need to start going along nicely and I can't have it.
I went to the D-Link site and I can't even d\l drivers for XP or Vista. It keeps timing out when I start the download. I think they haven't properly hosted the drivers. And the XP drivers which I do have backed up, don't work anyway.
It's not fair! lol
Try to set up my internet connection. Go through the usual steps. Suddenly it's not working as it should.
The only drivers that aren't supported with Win7 are for my D-Link modem.
FFFFUUUU-
The one thing that you really need to start going along nicely and I can't have it.
I went to the D-Link site and I can't even d\l drivers for XP or Vista. It keeps timing out when I start the download. I think they haven't properly hosted the drivers. And the XP drivers which I do have backed up, don't work anyway.
It's not fair! lol
lolUSBAussieReaper wrote:
So I set-up Win7, like the look and feel. Running fine.
Try to set up my internet connection. Go through the usual steps. Suddenly it's not working as it should.
The only drivers that aren't supported with Win7 are for my D-Link modem.
My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.
The modem also has ethernet. If I used that would it work?Cheez wrote:
lolUSBAussieReaper wrote:
So I set-up Win7, like the look and feel. Running fine.
Try to set up my internet connection. Go through the usual steps. Suddenly it's not working as it should.
The only drivers that aren't supported with Win7 are for my D-Link modem.
What's USB got to do with it? Also, Aussie, I connect my laptop with ethernet because my Vista throws hissy fits over wireless, and it works fine.AussieReaper wrote:
The modem also has ethernet. If I used that would it work?Cheez wrote:
lolUSBAussieReaper wrote:
So I set-up Win7, like the look and feel. Running fine.
Try to set up my internet connection. Go through the usual steps. Suddenly it's not working as it should.
The only drivers that aren't supported with Win7 are for my D-Link modem.
i.e. Should work fine because it (probably) doesn't need a driver.
Last edited by some_random_panda (2009-11-07 00:48:44)
The modem wouldn't need a driver if he were using Ethernet all along.some_random_panda wrote:
What's USB got to do with it?AussieReaper wrote:
The modem also has ethernet. If I used that would it work?Cheez wrote:
lolUSB
My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.
oh wtf I disable peer guardian to open steam and suddenly the downloads all start.
I'll try the vista drivers and then try it though Ethernet instead of usb if it still doesn't work.
fucking peer guardian
I'll try the vista drivers and then try it though Ethernet instead of usb if it still doesn't work.
fucking peer guardian
How about, USB modems can eat a dick. Put it on fucking Ethernet already.
My state was founded by Batman. Your opinion is invalid.
Just fucking did and I'm in.
Fuck USB modems.
Only reason it was on USB is so I could connect a laptop to the modem at the same time.
Thanks cheez.
Now to go find drivers and everything else... From this point it's easy. lol
Fuck USB modems.
Only reason it was on USB is so I could connect a laptop to the modem at the same time.
Thanks cheez.
Now to go find drivers and everything else... From this point it's easy. lol