PDA

View Full Version : XP & 2k



Series X4 1.0
01-06-2002, 08:56 AM
WinXP IS Win2k with some more ****ing **** inside.

Win2000 is so ****ing worthless and simple. Fact: It's impossible to use Win2000 if you're doing something more advanced than writing in wordpad. It's unfortunately impossible to program anything interesting under win 2k or any other Windows version (especially while using DX). Because the **** is just crashing all the ****ing time. Microsofts own simple sample projects aren't working either, if you start the **** up more than 5 times the entire OS will die, so I'm not doing anything wrong of course. *sigh* So it's still impossible to program anything at all with a toy such as MS Windows.

I think I'm going to switch over to Linux entirely, and you should do the same unless you're a primitive monkey. DirectX was the only good thing Windows had to offer, so I guess I'll have to use OpenGL and Linux instead. At least the Linux kernel won't crash.

As fast as a program gets a little more advanced than a ****ing text editor Windows will ****ing CRASH. ****ING WORTHLESS ****. BURN IN HELL, MORON-WINDOWS.

Fact number 2 if the day: If your Windows is working OK you're a moron, and you're only using it to write gay-poetry in wordpad.

Pendragon
01-06-2002, 09:32 AM
[Rephrase...]

If your Windows is working OK it's a miracle.

[/Rephrase...]

I run Win 2000 Pro. It's reliable.
I used to run Win98SE which was not so reliable... It crashed a bit too often for my liking. The cause was usually the Microsoft Applications...they all go down at the same time. All my other applications worked perfectly.

Then again... if you think of how many lines of code make up an OS in total, how in hell can you make one that's 100% reliable? You can't. I'm mathematically impossible. Once you fix one bug, chances are another will be created.

I like Win 2000 Pro... it works and it works well and that's all I want.


It's impossible to use Win2000 if you're doing something more advanced than writing in wordpad.

Not in my experience.

It's only an OS... no need to get your hair off about it.

:)

-Pendragon

Shiro
01-06-2002, 09:49 AM
>...I'm mathematically impossible.

:-)


When using mathematical logic it is possible to

1. derive correct algorithms
2. prove an algorithm is correct

In real-time systems however, you can never be sure that the software works 100% correct, because of the real-time aspects. But you can decrease the risc of something going wrong. Medical systems, aerospace systems are designed in such a way that only once in 1000 years or more someting goes wrong.

But this is only on algorithm level. At language level there are also things to take care of. I can recommend this book:

Safer C:
"Developing for High-Integrity and Safety-Critical Systems"
ISBN 0-07-707640-0
McGraw-Hill, 1995
Les Hatton

Pendragon
01-06-2002, 09:59 AM
Shiro
>...I'm mathematically impossible.

:-)

OOPS! Typo! LOL! True but still... :D

The medical/aerospace systems have to have exceedingly high levels of security and reliability is cruicial. I dread to think how much it costs to develop software like that. Too much.

On a simple home OS... that's just not required.

Series X4 1.0
01-06-2002, 10:15 AM
Pendragon

Then again... if you think of how many lines of code make up an OS in total, how in hell can you make one that's 100% reliable? You can't. I'm mathematically impossible. Once you fix one bug, chances are another will be created.

The Linux kernel is "perfect" compared to Windows. Though KDE has actually crashed a few times, but the only thing I need to do is to press Ctrl+Alt+Backspace or Ctrl+Alt+F2 - and then type killall -9 [application] and startx (or some other similiar procedure). In Windows it's still just to press the reset button after I've compiled and tested my DirectX application a few times, why? *THAT ........ES ME OFF*. And furthermore, it's 'always' possible to configure something that isn't working in Linux. In Windows there is usually nothing you can do about a problem. If Linux could just get a Multimedia lib similiar to DirectX the world would be so beautiful.. :(


I like Win 2000 Pro... it works and it works well and that's all I want.

Disgusting. Ewwwww. You.. LiKe.. windows 2000 pro? *throwing up*. Personally I only like myself and Linux.


It's only an OS... no need to get your hair off about it.

What? ONLY AN OS? I hope you didn't included my Linux when you said that. One distribution with Linux RedHat 7.1 is more worth than my mother. Anyway, thanks for calming me down.

-KEN-
01-06-2002, 10:18 AM
>>Fact number 2 if the day: If your Windows is working OK you're a moron, and you're only using it to write gay-poetry in wordpad.<<

My WinXP is work just peachy, best get crackin at my gay poetry now, huh? How's this: "O, my boyfriend, how I love you so...." nice start, eh?


Windows isn't bad all the time...

Pendragon
01-06-2002, 10:26 AM
Windows isn't bad all the time...

How true... but still they could do some improvements with applications. My OS works fine. I don't think I'll upgrade to XP Pro so soon... I had a play around on it in PC world and I couldn't find anything. It was annoying but it'll save me a bit of cash.
::violinist appears::
Always handy for a poor, lowly student... ::punches violinist::

I quite like the hardware though from Microsoft except the internet keyboard.
I love my new MS ergonomic keyboard and intelli/sensor/loadsofbuttons mouse.

:D

-Pendragon

Sorensen
01-06-2002, 10:27 AM
And furthermore, it's 'always' possible to configure something that isn't working in Linux.

What re-write your video card drivers? I suspect that's crashing your Win2k if you've be playing with Direct X.

Pendragon
01-06-2002, 10:28 AM
I HATE SMILEYS!:mad:

;)

-Penny

Series X4 1.0
01-06-2002, 10:43 AM
Sorensen

What re-write your video card drivers? I suspect that's crashing your Win2k if you've be playing with Direct X.

I don't really understand what you're saying. I can guess though.

No, I havn't been playing with my video card drivers for win2k, nor have I been touching anything else I shouldn't touch. Windows and directX are both unstable, that's it.

Sorensen
01-06-2002, 10:53 AM
No, I was just suggesting the possiblity that you may have a bad driver. As drivers are one of the things that are capable of crashing an NT based kernel and you posted that you had been programming in Direct X, I put two and two together. But as you seem to have worked it out, I must have been be incorrect.

gnu-ehacks
01-06-2002, 01:00 PM
Hmm...I haven't had many problems with Windows 2000...Although I've never had a problem with Linux. I agree with you though, Windows XP is basically the same as Windows 2000 except it's more user friendly.

doubleanti
01-06-2002, 03:40 PM
>"O, my boyfriend, how I love you so...."

ken, sometimes i wonder about you...

and... hasafraggin 9:1 ratio...

and... hasafraggin 2k/xp non-conventional memory...