what os?

NickF · 08-09-2004, 07:52 PM

what OS do you guys have? im running on windows xp home

HelplessNewbie · 08-09-2004, 08:20 PM

Mandrake Linux 10 on this box right now, also Windows XP Pro on my main comp, and then Unix that I'm trying to parallel process 2 old Compaqs.... yeah.

Killer_Kevin · 08-10-2004, 04:22 AM

lol sadly i got windows 98 but im trying to save for sum new parts and get windows xp

Fish Beans · 08-10-2004, 08:41 AM

**** XP, get 2000 Pro.

I'm currently using 2000 Pro SP3 (too lazy to upgrade to SP4). My previous computer ran Redhat 9 for a while, but I got tired of not being able to play my games, and was too lazy to repartition to dual boot, so I scrapped Linux for the time being.

CoLt · 08-10-2004, 09:31 AM

This Comp isnt mine, and its too ****ty to mess with anyways. (Win 98, 128mb Ram, 711mhz)

My old Comp at home is ****tier then this (Win98, 64mb Ram, 333mhz)

The New one (3 years old I think, so much for new) is decent, but I cant screw around with it, my parents would kill me. (Win Xp Home, 256mb Ram, 1.8ghz) So I cant screw around too much with any of them, since their not mine.

On the other Hand Fish, why is Win 2000 Pro Sp3 so good? I Googled it, and I still dont get it or is it just that Win98 Blows and Win Xp Blows so it falls to 2000?

ieatchildren · 08-10-2004, 09:46 AM

lol holy ****, im using windows 2000, and i have an extremely awesome 450mhz processor, and 320mb of ram... (two 128s and one 64) damn i love my worthless piece of ****

Dr. Silence · 08-10-2004, 10:33 AM

Im using the holy xp with the new server pack.
planning to go to linux due to its LARGER possibilities.

Fish Beans · 08-10-2004, 03:14 PM

Linux is not for you my friend.

Quote:

This Comp isnt mine, and its too ****ty to mess with anyways. (Win 98, 128mb Ram, 711mhz)

My old Comp at home is ****tier then this (Win98, 64mb Ram, 333mhz)

The New one (3 years old I think, so much for new) is decent, but I cant screw around with it, my parents would kill me. (Win Xp Home, 256mb Ram, 1.8ghz) So I cant screw around too much with any of them, since their not mine.

On the other Hand Fish, why is Win 2000 Pro Sp3 so good? I Googled it, and I still dont get it or is it just that Win98 Blows and Win Xp Blows so it falls to 2000?

First off, I don't think 1.8 ghz chips existed 3 years ago, so that computer is probably about 1 1/2 to 2 years old. Your "****ty" computers don't hold a candle to the one I used for the last couple years. Cyrix 150 mhz, 48 MB RAM, 1 MB Triton video card.

Also, Windows 2000 is better than XP because it does not eat so many resources. XP sucks your computer dry. XP was also designed for complete idiots to be able to use it, wheras 2000 had the power user in mind more.

nickolay · 08-10-2004, 05:48 PM

Well, it is possible that 1.8 ghz cpus did exist back then. I purchased my 2.53 approximately two years ago.

Fish Beans · 08-10-2004, 06:32 PM

Didn't the first 1.0 ghz chips appear in 2000? I didn't realize that the technology had advanced so rapidly, but then slowed down so much.

bulk_4me · 08-10-2004, 08:48 PM

I still own my old computer it has a cheap ass Cyrix Processor, 32 MB of ram from wich 4 were shared to use them as Video, 4GB HD..

XP Professional owns 2000 for the simple fact that eventhough it consumes a 'lil more RAM to run, it manages the rest swiftly, startups are faster, and it comes with flashy menus for the newbs!

HelplessNewbie · 08-10-2004, 08:58 PM

YAY!!! I GOT ONE OF MY OLD COMPS WORKING! 6 GB HARD DRIVE, 100 MhZ BIATCH!!! WINDOWS XP!

Fish Beans · 08-11-2004, 05:22 AM

HOw much RAM?

Quote:

XP Professional owns 2000 for the simple fact that eventhough it consumes a 'lil more RAM to run

A little? ****, XP sucks up RAM like it's candy. Did I ever tell you about my computer with 64 megabytes of RAM running XP Pro? That was painful.

bulk_4me · 08-11-2004, 05:27 AM

You were running on minimal requirements its like running 2000 with 32..

Fish Beans · 08-11-2004, 05:32 AM

I'm not basing my opinions on the 64 meg system (which is actually lower than minimum), I was just throwing that in as an aside. XP in general requires far more resources than any other OS out there.

bulk_4me · 08-11-2004, 05:39 AM

I've seen the performance of 2000 and XP, via comparing performance in two laptops with the same settings except OS of course, the one that had 2000 with 64 MB extra ram (128 vs. 192) and the laptop powered with XP professional owned..

Fish Beans · 08-11-2004, 05:42 AM

That's kind of funny, because at one point I had two computer set up, one using XP, one using 2000 Pro. The XP machine had much better hardware (nearly double the RAM), yet it didn't run nearly as fast as my 2000 Pro box.

bulk_4me · 08-11-2004, 05:45 AM

Same applications running/installed?

08-09-2004, 07:52 PM	#1 (permalink)
NickF Do Not Return to Shelf Senior Member Gold Member Crusader Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: ShopRite Posts: 3,763	what os? what OS do you guys have? im running on windows xp home
$NickF 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-09-2004, 08:20 PM	#2 (permalink)
HelplessNewbie Advocate Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 256	Mandrake Linux 10 on this box right now, also Windows XP Pro on my main comp, and then Unix that I'm trying to parallel process 2 old Compaqs.... yeah. __________________ "That wasn't flirting. That was 'have a pleasant and restful evening.'" "No, that was 'I like your ass. Can I wear it as a hat?'"
$HelplessNewbie 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-10-2004, 04:22 AM	#3 (permalink)
Killer_Kevin Banned Advocate Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: New York Posts: 183	lol sadly i got windows 98 but im trying to save for sum new parts and get windows xp
$Killer_Kevin 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-10-2004, 08:41 AM	#4 (permalink)
Fish Beans Bass > Guitar Retired Staff Member Enlightened Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Hell, Alabama Posts: 3,105	**** XP, get 2000 Pro. I'm currently using 2000 Pro SP3 (too lazy to upgrade to SP4). My previous computer ran Redhat 9 for a while, but I got tired of not being able to play my games, and was too lazy to repartition to dual boot, so I scrapped Linux for the time being. __________________ This space still for rent.
$Fish Beans 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-10-2004, 09:46 AM	#6 (permalink)
ieatchildren Deviant Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 85	lol holy **, im using windows 2000, and i have an extremely awesome 450mhz processor, and 320mb of ram... (two 128s and one 64) damn i love my worthless piece of **
$ieatchildren 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

Remove advertisements
BWHacks Advertisement	Sponsored links

08-10-2004, 10:33 AM	#7 (permalink)
Dr. Silence ?▪▫▪ PaRaNoiA EvOlUtIoN ▪▫▪? Senior Member Messiah Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Dumpster (bearcave) Posts: 9,025	Im using the holy xp with the new server pack. planning to go to linux due to its LARGER possibilities.
$Dr. Silence 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-10-2004, 05:48 PM	#9 (permalink)
nickolay Retired Staff Member High Priest Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Marietta, Ga Posts: 1,717	Well, it is possible that 1.8 ghz cpus did exist back then. I purchased my 2.53 approximately two years ago.
$nickolay 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-10-2004, 06:32 PM	#10 (permalink)
Fish Beans Bass > Guitar Retired Staff Member Enlightened Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Hell, Alabama Posts: 3,105	Didn't the first 1.0 ghz chips appear in 2000? I didn't realize that the technology had advanced so rapidly, but then slowed down so much. __________________ This space still for rent.
$Fish Beans 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-10-2004, 08:48 PM	#11 (permalink)
bulk_4me F7 F1EF Senior Member Retired Staff Member Enlightened Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Torreón, Coah. México Posts: 3,232	I still own my old computer it has a cheap ass Cyrix Processor, 32 MB of ram from wich 4 were shared to use them as Video, 4GB HD.. XP Professional owns 2000 for the simple fact that eventhough it consumes a 'lil more RAM to run, it manages the rest swiftly, startups are faster, and it comes with flashy menus for the newbs! __________________
$bulk_4me 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-10-2004, 08:58 PM	#12 (permalink)
HelplessNewbie Advocate Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 256	YAY!!! I GOT ONE OF MY OLD COMPS WORKING! 6 GB HARD DRIVE, 100 MhZ BIATCH!!! WINDOWS XP! __________________ "That wasn't flirting. That was 'have a pleasant and restful evening.'" "No, that was 'I like your ass. Can I wear it as a hat?'"
$HelplessNewbie 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-11-2004, 05:27 AM	#14 (permalink)
bulk_4me F7 F1EF Senior Member Retired Staff Member Enlightened Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Torreón, Coah. México Posts: 3,232	You were running on minimal requirements its like running 2000 with 32.. __________________
$bulk_4me 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-11-2004, 05:32 AM	#15 (permalink)
Fish Beans Bass > Guitar Retired Staff Member Enlightened Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Hell, Alabama Posts: 3,105	I'm not basing my opinions on the 64 meg system (which is actually lower than minimum), I was just throwing that in as an aside. XP in general requires far more resources than any other OS out there. __________________ This space still for rent.
$Fish Beans 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-11-2004, 05:39 AM	#16 (permalink)
bulk_4me F7 F1EF Senior Member Retired Staff Member Enlightened Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Torreón, Coah. México Posts: 3,232	I've seen the performance of 2000 and XP, via comparing performance in two laptops with the same settings except OS of course, the one that had 2000 with 64 MB extra ram (128 vs. 192) and the laptop powered with XP professional owned.. __________________
$bulk_4me 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-11-2004, 05:42 AM	#17 (permalink)
Fish Beans Bass > Guitar Retired Staff Member Enlightened Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Hell, Alabama Posts: 3,105	That's kind of funny, because at one point I had two computer set up, one using XP, one using 2000 Pro. The XP machine had much better hardware (nearly double the RAM), yet it didn't run nearly as fast as my 2000 Pro box. __________________ This space still for rent.
$Fish Beans 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

08-11-2004, 05:45 AM	#18 (permalink)
bulk_4me F7 F1EF Senior Member Retired Staff Member Enlightened Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Torreón, Coah. México Posts: 3,232	Same applications running/installed? __________________
$bulk_4me 15 0FF11\|\\|3$