Like Tree13Likes

What OS do you guys Use and why?

This is a discussion on What OS do you guys Use and why? within the General Discussions forums, part of the Community Boards category; I dual-boot Vista and Ubuntu 12.04( awaiting for the 12.10 ). I use Vista because it was installed in my ...

  1. #31
    Programming Wraith GReaper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    1,625
    I dual-boot Vista and Ubuntu 12.04( awaiting for the 12.10 ).
    I use Vista because it was installed in my laptop in the first place but also because it's much more efficient with videos and games. The majority of PC games are written for Windows only for this reason.
    Ubuntu I use for fast boot/reboot, convenient update mechanism, reliability and security( if you're no n00b ), and also because it contains all the necessary tools for developing my OS.
    Devoted my life to programming...

  2. #32
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    23,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Elkvis View Post
    so you're saying that in windows 8, there's no way to disable UAC? I guess I'll be sticking with 7 for a couple more years then.
    It does contain a way to disable UAC. But if you do that, then Metro apps will stop working, which almost defeats the point of having Windows 8 in the first place.
    Maybe you could use the built-in account, but I have never tried it. Still, if you do that, you lose the benefits of a Microsoft account (ie syncing and stuff).
    But I'm sure people will find a way to get around all of this crap in time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  3. #33
    Registered User Nukinfuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    Windows 8 is broken because due to forcing UAC on you. It will remain broken until I have found a way to get rid of that problem.
    Um no, it isn't. UAC is not force on you, in fact Vista and 7 force it on the user in comparison to 8. While I'm a Linux guy at heart Microsoft deserves praise on W8. Please do not call something broken just because you fail to successfully operate it.

  4. #34
    Master Apprentice phantomotap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,415
    While I'm a Linux guy at heart Microsoft deserves praise on W8.
    From all I've heard, it is a step backwards in almost every way from user (more "hoop jumpery" to get to familiar operations) and developer (problematic API and some ridiculous requirement on "metro") perspectives.

    I'm not sure that doing what they've done before only not as well deserves praise.

    That said, I consider mandatory access control a solid win when implemented correctly. Of course, having no experience with "Windows 8" I can't speculate on its implementation.

    And I'm a "BSD" guy despite having no form of "BSD" installed on any of my machines.

    Soma

  5. #35
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,590
    I've always liked the minimalist approach that the unix-derived operating systems take. the OS doesn't need to provide all the services. many of them can be added as applications, and keeping the operating system modular helps to give people a better user experience by not installing a bunch of extra crap that you don't need.

  6. #36
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    23,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Nukinfuts View Post
    Um no, it isn't. UAC is not force on you, in fact Vista and 7 force it on the user in comparison to 8. While I'm a Linux guy at heart Microsoft deserves praise on W8. Please do not call something broken just because you fail to successfully operate it.
    How is an operating system not broken if a programmer and even a computer enthusiast cannot operate it?
    And how is Vista and 7 forcing UAC on you, while 8 is not? You could disable it in those OSes without any side effects that I am aware of. Yet, this cannot be done in 8.
    Yes, Microsoft did some good things in 8, or least put in the foundation work for it. Metro is an absolutely necessary development, and restricted as it is, they should be applauded for putting effort into creating it. Though, as it is now, it seems pretty bad, and Microsoft has a lot of work to do to fix it for the next version of Windows.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  7. #37
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    Metro is an absolutely necessary development
    what's so necessary about it? people are used to the "standard" desktop model, and it is quite efficient. what does metro do, that a typical modern desktop does not?

  8. #38
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,598
    I have always believed the only company that can beat Microsoft is itself. There have been some really oddball decisions made at MS in the past few years...more oddball than usual that could make my first statement a reality. Essentially they built a very good OS and threw a crappy tablet type UI on top off it and then force fed it to PC users. Why they would build a GUI to target a market they do not own and in the same process abandon the one they do is beyond me.

    Though, as it is now, it seems pretty bad, and Microsoft has a lot of work to do to fix it for the next version of Windows.
    After 20 years I am a little tired of having to put up with the crap first to get to the diamond in the rough.
    Last edited by VirtualAce; 09-02-2012 at 12:03 PM.

  9. #39
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    23,022
    The standard desktop model is horrible because:
    - The WinAPI is a mess. It is difficult to use, has a lot of gotchas, and requires extreme amount of code to accomplish something.
    - Desktop is intrusive. It is difficult to use, and comes with a lot of freedom. Therefore you see lots of people writing bad, inefficient or intrusive code (seen any applications that suddenly pops up dialogs or browser windows out of nowhere lately?).
    - It's UGLY. It takes a lot of code, time and experience to write any kind of good GUI.
    - It's based on a synchronous model. Ever wondered why the hell the program suddenly freezes when opening a file open dialog (hint: Windows may need to read from floppies, spin up DVD drives, waiting for network locations, etc)?
    - Files are stored all over the place. Some applications spit out files to C:\. Some applications store configuration in the program files directory. Some store files in your local user (%appdata%) directory (where they should be!).
    - Every application must use their own installer/uninstaller. This puts a lot of work into getting those right and making them clean up after themselves.
    - Because applications store stuff all over the place (even in the registry!), it is difficult to know which files to backup or sync if you want your settings to remain constant on all your computers and recover them after a crash, etc.
    - Each program sits in the background, sucking up cpu power, memory and other resources, even when they don't need them (ever seen applications that love increasing the resolution of the timers in Windows?).
    - They all look different because there is no standardized way of doing things.
    - Applications are not sandboxed. They can modify your system settings like crazy (and likely they do!).

    Oh, I could go on, and on, and on.
    Microsoft is finally taking a step in the right direction to get rid of all legacy crap and making a new modern platform on which to develop applications. I also applaud Microsoft for their App Store, where they properly review applications do they don't do stupid things like desktop apps very often do.
    I seriously criticize Microsoft for only allowing installations of Metro Apps from the store, and from taking huge fines from developers.

    Quote Originally Posted by VirtualAce View Post
    After 20 years I am a little tired of having to put up with the crap first to get to the diamond in the rough.
    I can agree with that, though.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  10. #40
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,598
    Windows is Windows today because it allowed freedom for developers to do pretty much anything they wanted. While a more restrictive OS is a good move for MS as a company it is terrible for their developer and consumers.

  11. #41
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    23,022
    But with power comes responsibility. It's fine for them to do what they want, as long as they do it right, and that's why I say Metro is a step in the right direction.
    No one wants a horrible mess where the OS ends up unusable becomes of crapware. As I see it, if customers are happy, the companies get fewer complains and more praise, and perhaps as a consequence, more sales.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  12. #42
    Super Moderator VirtualAce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    9,598
    Only time will tell. Rather than make this a debate about the direction of Microsoft I will finish my thoughts by going on record as saying I think this is a move in the wrong direction. Since MS did not consult me about it in the end it really does not matter one way or the other.

  13. #43
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,762
    - It's UGLY. It takes a lot of code, time and experience to write any kind of good GUI.
    - They all look different because there is no standardized way of doing things.
    Because of these points I can only picture an ugly GUI that everyone copied and made a de facto standard, because it was some geniuses idea of "perfect". The standard look really has no artistic value to me and I get bored of looking at the same thing, no matter how functional it is. I rather expect software to stay consistent from version to version. If instead every application was laid out the same way, that would be silly. Yeah, so in example, winAMP can be as different as it wants from windows and it still makes sense. But move information or features around constantly (firefox), and I'll need a cigarette to get over it, and get used to the "new" thing.

    - Files are stored all over the place. Some applications spit out files to C:\. Some applications store configuration in the program files directory. Some store files in your local user (%appdata%) directory (where they should be!).
    - Every application must use their own installer/uninstaller. This puts a lot of work into getting those right and making them clean up after themselves.
    - Because applications store stuff all over the place (even in the registry!), it is difficult to know which files to backup or sync if you want your settings to remain constant on all your computers and recover them after a crash, etc.
    It's funny that something with no organization is still part of the model or even a model at all.

    Portable installation has mitigated these problems on the windows platform, as you've probably figured out. (I'm talking about programs being compressed and being usable after decompression, instead of needing tons of regkeys just to work.) I don't remember when this started showing up, but that was one development I liked in the world. In my opinion, it can be a better choice than your typical desktop installations and upgrades. Of course, with corporate software, you use what they put out and there are reasons behind that.

    But with power comes responsibility. It's fine for them to do what they want, as long as they do it right, and that's why I say Metro is a step in the right direction.
    I enjoyed having the responsibility, personally. I never thought of it as Microsoft's. I don't think anyone can stop what's happening though. Progress be damned! Koyaanisqatsi....

  14. #44
    Master Apprentice phantomotap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,415
    Metro is an absolutely necessary development, and restricted as it is, they should be applauded for putting effort into creating it.
    Wow. A "Windows" flavored Apple fanboy. ^_^

    The standard desktop model is horrible because:
    Some of those things are the only reason "Windows" is such a beast.

    Nope. I'm not joking.

    The popularity of "Windows" has always been because a lot of programmers and hardware vendors flocked to it; they went for it because of those "problems". I'll give you a couple of examples.

    Keeping the terrible API showed programmers that a serious effort was made to keep programs and drivers working.

    The freedom to do "whatever" gave Microsoft innovations from others that they would later copy into the core.

    It takes a lot of code, time and experience to write any kind of good GUI.
    I honestly can't tell if you are dreaming or just going fanboy; I'll start with this: it will always take a lot of code, time, and experience to make something useful (or fun), efficient, and secure.

    Microsoft can't change that.

    "Metro" can't change that.

    Some of the things that you are complaining about are only complaints because lazy or inexperienced programmers didn't want to follow industrial guidelines. If programmers aren't willing to put in the effort, "Metro" will only mask such problems and only for a time.

    Soma

  15. #45
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ!
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    23,022
    Quote Originally Posted by whiteflags View Post
    I enjoyed having the responsibility, personally. I never thought of it as Microsoft's. I don't think anyone can stop what's happening though. Progress be damned! Koyaanisqatsi....
    If I were handed a program written in C from someone regular on this board, I'd probably feel safe enough to use it. But if it were from Average Joe, then I wouldn't touch it with anything else than a 10 meter long pole.
    Thankfully everyone is this world is as seasoned and good at programming C as the regular members of this board... wait, no, that's not right. It's the inverse!
    Point being: while you like the responsibility (nothing wrong with that), I, as an end user, wouldn't want Average Joe to have that responsibility because you can be sure they'd screw it up.

    Quote Originally Posted by phantomotap View Post
    I honestly can't tell if you are dreaming or just going fanboy; I'll start with this: it will always take a lot of code, time, and experience to make something useful (or fun), efficient, and secure.

    Microsoft can't change that.

    "Metro" can't change that.

    Some of the things that you are complaining about are only complaints because lazy or inexperienced programmers didn't want to follow industrial guidelines. If programmers aren't willing to put in the effort, "Metro" will only mask such problems and only for a time.

    Soma
    I don't expect everything to work with a snap of the fingers, but I do expect it will be easier than before. If it's easier to achieve something than before without sacrificing critical functionality, then it's a win situation.
    How many programmers these days follow guidelines, or even know guidelines or can put implement them correctly? Answer: only a handful. Even professional software with tons of users have glaring problems, such as popping up dialog boxes just suddenly from everywhere, and this is precisely the problem. People are not going to change. The only way to change this nonsensical behavior is to smack them in the ass, or force them to do it the right way by taking away the ability to do it the wrong way.
    But then again, why do they pop up a dialog box instead of a notification? Perhaps because it's so damn convulted and difficult to make a notification instead of dialog box? Yes, there might be something in that... among other things.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Hey Guys, can anybody help?
    By MstrKurt in forum C Programming
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-05-2012, 01:37 PM
  2. Hello guys =)
    By carol.prime in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-22-2006, 11:25 AM
  3. hey guys
    By MoneyH20 in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-25-2005, 02:56 PM
  4. where are you guys!!!?????!!!!
    By Gades in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-22-2005, 11:56 AM
  5. ASP.NET, what do you guys think?
    By Kleid-0 in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 01-30-2005, 02:30 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21