man they just don't build them like they used to do they???
i mean shoot only 7 years out of this one case?? the power supply for my
AMD 1100 went south, so i decided to buy a new power supply and case as the
old case was short on a few features i wanted, mainly the front USB but to
my dismay when the hardware was transferred from one case to the next, i
suffered a file corruption that affected APT-GET needless to say after
much effort for all practical purposes the linux system was stuck as was.
no new software, oh well time to reload. i almost forgot how much fun it
was to reload a system because of a hardware failure. thankfully it hasn't
taken much to get back to where i was. just a few bugs to iron out.
well i guess that's the end of my little rant.
I'm sticking with KDE, besides i have a new powersupply and purdy case =)
i'll give you props on unix though... :P
It's basically XP SP4 with some fancy do nothing graphics.
Why do we need a new OS every few years anyways? Often the main desire
is for stability and compatibility. Companies still run decades old
software applications under Unix on modern computers. Our Unix server
has been rebooted a total of 5 times in 10 years not counting power
outages. Two of those times were when the server was upgrade. I reboot
any Windows PC a few times a week. I was hoping in another few years XP
would become stable...but now we have a new OS and start all over again.
Suddenly, without warning, miles exclaimed (7/4/2007 1:23 PM):
Why? I stayed with Windows 2000 until just recently, that was a very
stable system I only had to reboot every couple of weeks or so (not as
good as *nix but still not bad).
I need to tweak this XP load a bit I think, it's still needing a reboot
about once a week.
Just because there's a new OS out doesn't mean we *have* to get it.
Vista's doing a world of good for the Linux world, methinks :)
Well heck, I still have about 20 PC's at my company running DOS. They
run single application product testing applications 24/7 and do a great
job of it.
Was saying we had to upgrade to the latest OS. The point was that Unix
is a decades old OS thats still under development and continually
improved. The latest versions will still run decades old apps without
trouble. I feel that stability and compatibility is what many people
are after. 2000 and now XP's development is halted. Vista will be
around only a few years and then another new OS is made. Stability and
compatibility go down the drain.
I still love DOS! Even in XP I open a DOS box for certain tasks. The
file manager in windows sucks!! I can do many things unders DOS much
faster. My company still has about 20 PC's on our production line
I don't know a whole lot about 'putors. Sooo I depend on friends and those
on here that seem to have a clue about them. I haven't heard any of my
friends suggest vista, nor have any here. So to me that say's a bunch.
My last computer ran XP. I would leave it on for weeks, maybe months without
a reboot. It was stable as a rock. It died a horrible death a while back and
was replaced with a new HP running Vista. I was not impressed at first, but
after a few weeks of adjustment, (me, not the computer), it has been as good
as Win XP was for me. Like others have said it is just the next version of
The only thing that ticked me off is it does not like to accept older
hardware. If you go Vista, be prepared to replace you printer, and scanner,
and what ever you have plugged in 'cuz it most likely will not run. I had a
wireless mouse that Vista would recognize, and load drivers for, but it
would not run. Likewise with the cheap printer I had. Strange thing was I
dug in the closet and found a couple old printers. One of them I found
drivers for and it and it does run fine. Strange thing is, it is about 7
years old, but the manufacturer was supporting Vista, unlike the other
Suddenly, without warning, GeekBoy exclaimed (7/4/2007 12:38 AM):
Won't touch Vista with a 10' pole. I *like* Win 2000 Pro. No
activation, worked fine. Only upgraded as some of the software I want
to update won't run on 2K anymore. Also, wasn't sure if Win2kPro would
be able to fully utilize the two procs I have now...
For most users dual CPU's are useless. Along with an OS that can use
both they will also only speed up applications designed to spawn
processes off to the 2nd CPU. Otherwise the 2nd CPU sits and does nothing.
You may want to learn from a longer post on 2 Jul in the newsgroup
Computer Tech Support entitled "Power Supply keeps blowing?". Major
difference exist between supplies. Some benchmarks for identifying
inferior supplies are provided.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.