WTF ... IS WTF!?
We are a collective of people who believe in freedom of speech, the rights of individuals, and free pancakes! We share our lives, struggles, frustrations, successes, joys, and prescribe to our own special brand of humor and insanity. If you are looking for a great place to hang out, make new friends, find new nemeses, and just be yourself, WTF.com is your new home.

Tonight ... we lay Win2k to rest and move on to XP

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
5
102
#1
It was a hard fought battle, but tonight ... I said goodbye to windows 2000 forever and installed Windows XP. I clawed, screemed and kicked ... but my wife just laughed as she hit ESC to do a fresh install.
*sigh* I sure will miss you WIN2K, may you find peace, where ever you may have gone.
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,998
2,267
487
#2
Yay for actually current technology?



Countdown to "OMG XP is teh suXor, Server 2003 4lyfe" retardation.
 

Descent

Hella Constipated
7,686
165
157
#3
breakology said:
It was a hard fought battle, but tonight ... I said goodbye to windows 2000 forever and installed Windows XP. I clawed, screemed and kicked ... but my wife just laughed as she hit ESC to do a fresh install.
*sigh* I sure will miss you WIN2K, may you find peace, where ever you may have gone.
:(...

:cry:!

I'm going to whip out my 2K3 disc...After I finish up my schoolwork.

Microsoft is going to get hell for this.

Junglizm said:
Yay for actually current technology?



Countdown to "OMG XP is teh suXor, Server 2003 4lyfe" retardation.
:rolleyes:

Before you talk shit, download the trial, use the MSFN Guide, and run it on a decent box for a few weeks.

Then let me know what ya think ;).

I've never owned a car, so I don't badmouth car manufacturers. Got it?

It may not work as a great server environment in your mind, but ya may enjoy it as a workstation OS.
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
5
102
#4
To add injury to insult I had to sit idley by while SP 2 installed itself. It only took liek an hour, and 3 restarts. Yippee! *sux* ... I'll prolly try to just skip over 2003 and swallow longhorn when it is forced on me.

LOL ... the army just approved the use of XP on DOD networks about 5 months ago. Go Army! :mfinger:
 

Fire_ze_Missles

Martha Fuckin' Stewart
1,622
12
38
#5
I still don't see why so many people hate XP. I have had no problems with it.
 

breakology

Kiss my Converse
1,890
5
102
#6
Fire_ze_Missles said:
I still don't see why so many people hate XP. I have had no problems with it.
no so much that i hate, as i don't see *the point* of it.
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,998
2,267
487
#7
Descent said:
Before you talk shit, download the trial, use the MSFN Guide, and run it on a decent box for a few weeks.
I'm pretty sure we've already been through this several times... I've had at least two ears experience running Server 2003, although not as a "workstation" because there is no such thing. Someone just made that up after they enabled audio and DirextX. I'm also certified on it by Microsoft. :rolleyes:
It may not work as a great server environment in your mind, but ya may enjoy it as a workstation OS.
I seriously doubt I've ever said that it was a bad server OS; I quite like it compared to 2000 server. Linux/BSD are better for certain things, but Active Directory and Exchange are pretty scalable and make my life easy. Hence, I'm quite fond of them.
breakology said:
no so much that i hate, as i don't see *the point* of it.
It's newer and more stable than 2000. I used to get crashed in 2000, but I've never had an OS related crash in XP. Ever. It also handles memory A LOT more efficiently.

I'm sure you'll like XP after a few days. I didn't want to switch originally, I actually bought a pre-built PC in the army and installed 2000 when XP came loaded on it. I finally got tired of the little quirks in 2k though, and it only took a few days to get used to and start liking XP.
 

Descent

Hella Constipated
7,686
165
157
#8
junglizm said:
It's newer and more stable than 2000. I used to get crashed in 2000, but I've never had an OS related crash in XP. Ever. It also handles memory A LOT more efficiently.
It's eats up my megabytes on my laptop. It has 160MB of RAM.

Did I mention how many times programs crashed under XP, and how many times I got the "welcome" screen freeze hangup bug, which once happened while installing 3Dfx's OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED Voodoo3 driver for XP on a virgin install?

My bro and friend have had the welcome screen glitch. It stays at it for five minutes, then runs Windows like a dog. A reboot fixes it.

As to Server 2003 not being "designed" ( :rolleyes: ) to run on a workstation, a minivan was never designed for a one person family, now was it?

But a single guy can still use it. And they are probobly a rapist, as most 2003 owners are pirates.
 

Fire_ze_Missles

Martha Fuckin' Stewart
1,622
12
38
#9
Descent said:
It's eats up my megabytes on my laptop. It has 160MB of RAM.

Did I mention how many times programs crashed under XP, and how many times I got the "welcome" screen freeze hangup bug, which once happened while installing 3Dfx's OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED Voodoo3 driver for XP on a virgin install?

My bro and friend have had the welcome screen glitch. It stays at it for five minutes, then runs Windows like a dog. A reboot fixes it.
Isn't your laptop really old though?

I've never had the welcome screen "glitch", nor do very many programs crash, if at all. Yahoo Messenger mostly, but that's because that thing was gehy, and got the boot off of my machine.

I guess, knowing how you are the hardware guru, you aggressively change system settings and mess with the innards of the OS. So, I can understand why you have all these problems.
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,998
2,267
487
#10
Descent said:
It's eats up my megabytes on my laptop. It has 160MB of RAM.
Well holy shit, the recommended minimum amount of ram for XP is 128MB. That's an absolute lowball number. Anyone who has used XP and has some common sense will tell you that it likes at least 256MB of RAM to play with. Anything less and you'll be paging a lot of unnecessary crap to VM.

Microsoft is fucking us again!
Did I mention how many times programs crashed under XP, and how many times I got the "welcome" screen freeze hangup bug, which once happened while installing 3Dfx's OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED Voodoo3 driver for XP on a virgin install?
That doesn't surprise me, you have infinite hardware and software problems.

I switched my family over to XP about a year after it came out, guess what; no problems there either! I have workstations at work with uptimes of well over 6 months. This is the 'norm,' not an exception, so obviously XP is quite stable.
My bro and friend have had the welcome screen glitch. It stays at it for five minutes, then runs Windows like a dog. A reboot fixes it.
Never had that on either of my XP computers, my girlfriend's XP computer, any of my family's XP computer's or the 2000 XP Pro boxes at work. How odd.
As to Server 2003 not being "designed" ( :rolleyes: ) to run on a workstation, a minivan was never designed for a one person family, now was it?
Well quite obviously a $1000 enterprise class OS wasn't designed to be run as a workstation, nor is it marketed or sold as such. I'm sure people run it as that, but it still doesn't change the fact that your little guide is nothing more than enabling audio, DirectX and a few other things. It doesn't make it a "workstation OS." No more than enabling IIS on XP makes it a "server OS."
 

tzedek

Original Member
2,515
5
38
#11
junglizm said:
Yay for actually current technology?



Countdown to "OMG XP is teh suXor, Server 2003 4lyfe" retardation.
current?
 

Descent

Hella Constipated
7,686
165
157
#12
Junglizm said:
Well quite obviously a $1000 enterprise class OS wasn't designed to be run as a workstation, nor is it marketed or sold as such. I'm sure people run it as that, but it still doesn't change the fact that your little guide is nothing more than enabling audio, DirectX and a few other things. It doesn't make it a "workstation OS." No more than enabling IIS on XP makes it a "server OS."
Well, naturally...And that guide is much more than that. It changes allocation of processing resources, shutdown event tracker, etc. etc.

And furthermore, PLEASE stop arguing about opinions. I do not like XP. Can it just stand as that? I've had problems you've never had - so what? It's a PC. It's going to vary. I'm not going to bother replying to another "XP is better than 2000 Pro/Server 2003 OMG!" post because it all boils down to opinion. You can post all the specs and features you want, but it won't phase someone's opinion about their OS of choice if they have run it. I still much prefer PC-DOS 7.0 over any OS to date for it's nostalgic value and breakneck speed - but you don't see me bragging about my opinion.

tzedek said:
Amen to that, man. I've run everything I have run on XP on 2K with no issues, and it's also much faster and more stable.

Junglizm can argue with me all he wants on this, but it's still rather stupid to stop supporting an OS with such similarities to a current-gen architecture. Let alone it's massive install base.
 

UberSkippy

a.k.a. FuckTheBullShit
7,529
63
142
#13
Descent said:
And furthermore, PLEASE stop arguing about opinions. I do not like XP. Can it just stand as that? I've had problems you've never had - so what? It's a PC. It's going to vary. I'm not going to bother replying to another "XP is better than 2000 Pro/Server 2003 OMG!" post because it all boils down to opinion. You can post all the specs and features you want, but it won't phase someone's opinion about their OS of choice if they have run it. I still much prefer PC-DOS 7.0 over any OS to date for it's nostalgic value and breakneck speed - but you don't see me bragging about my opinion.
You know, it occurs to me that you've had a lot of problems running a pirated version of an OS on hardware that's below its reallistic minimum requirements. Perhaps if you'd just load a nice legal copy of XP and leave it the fuck alone (stop tweaking shit you know nothing about) you'd probably find that it works just great. Hacked copies of OS's cause problems. Someone took something out and you have no idea if he fucked it up, what he took out, how he took it out or what else was affected.

Descent said:
Junglizm can argue with me all he wants on this, but it's still rather stupid to stop supporting an OS with such similarities to a current-gen architecture. Let alone it's massive install base.
Massive install base? Where do you get that? Any system that's not currently capable of running Windows XP has already exceeded it's expected life cycle. Any system purchased in the last 2-3 years came with XP.

Microsoft spends a ton of money supporting these OS's and as one ages the install base actually drops off and the need to support it gets older and older. Again, it doesn't even support the newer technolgies.

I still run 2k at home. But that's because I'm a lazy bastard and don't feel like upgrading. XP is faster, more efficient, more stable and has better support. Yes, it's based on the same core kernnel but it's been re-architected all over the damn place. Is it perfect? No. But in order to move forward they have to drop the older stuff. Why can't you learn to accept that?
 

Jung

???
Premium
13,998
2,267
487
#15
Descent said:
And furthermore, PLEASE stop arguing about opinions. I do not like XP. Can it just stand as that? I've had problems you've never had - so what? It's a PC. It's going to vary. I'm not going to bother replying to another "XP is better than 2000 Pro/Server 2003 OMG!"
Look, I'm not arguing against your opinion, you're definitely entitled to that. I'm just saying that XP is quite stable, and it's proven itself in many places. I'm also not saying that XP is better than 2003; each have their place and do well for their intended purpose. I still don't think 2003 has any place on a desktop though, it's just unneeded. Furthermore, I don't think playing musical OSes is a way to fix problems with stability.
 

Descent

Hella Constipated
7,686
165
157
#16
UberSkippy said:
You know, it occurs to me that you've had a lot of problems running a pirated version of an OS on hardware that's below its reallistic minimum requirements. Perhaps if you'd just load a nice legal copy of XP and leave it the fuck alone (stop tweaking shit you know nothing about) you'd probably find that it works just great. Hacked copies of OS's cause problems. Someone took something out and you have no idea if he fucked it up, what he took out, how he took it out or what else was affected.
That copy of XP is legit. I bought it for $100 at a Staples back in 2002...I never actually installed on anything besides my laptop and my main box. Never once did I crack it.

UberSkippy said:
Massive install base? Where do you get that? Any system that's not currently capable of running Windows XP has already exceeded it's expected life cycle. Any system purchased in the last 2-3 years came with XP.

Microsoft spends a ton of money supporting these OS's and as one ages the install base actually drops off and the need to support it gets older and older. Again, it doesn't even support the newer technolgies.

I still run 2k at home. But that's because I'm a lazy bastard and don't feel like upgrading. XP is faster, more efficient, more stable and has better support. Yes, it's based on the same core kernnel but it's been re-architected all over the damn place. Is it perfect? No. But in order to move forward they have to drop the older stuff. Why can't you learn to accept that?

I have learned to accept it - I do all the time. I still ran 98 SE on two boxes when 98 was dropped. I just find it silly to drop support for 2000 Pro now - they just did NT4, which is quite believable. NT4 isn't even compatible with DirectX or plug and play technologies due to it's inability to perform low-level access on hardware. USB support can be added with a third party driver that costs about $30.

I still know many people who run Windows 2000 - I've got a buddy online who has a VERY nice machine that's pretty new, and he runs it. It's a self built one.
 

UberSkippy

a.k.a. FuckTheBullShit
7,529
63
142
#17
Descent said:
That copy of XP is legit. I bought it for $100 at a Staples back in 2002...I never actually installed on anything besides my laptop and my main box. Never once did I crack it.
Bull Shit. XP today for 239$

Descent said:
I have learned to accept it - I do all the time. I still ran 98 SE on two boxes when 98 was dropped. I just find it silly to drop support for 2000 Pro now - they just did NT4, which is quite believable. NT4 isn't even compatible with DirectX or plug and play technologies due to it's inability to perform low-level access on hardware. USB support can be added with a third party driver that costs about $30.

I still know many people who run Windows 2000 - I've got a buddy online who has a VERY nice machine that's pretty new, and he runs it. It's a self built one.
Self built running 2k = too cheap to buy a legal copy of XP. (Why do you think I run 2k?)

NT4 was dropped what, 2/3 years ago?