Author Topic: Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.  (Read 38907 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline pikapika

  • Posts: 66
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #50 on: Sun, 10 October 2010, 17:35:08 »

Offline D-EJ915

  • Posts: 489
  • Location: USA
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #51 on: Sun, 10 October 2010, 23:35:31 »
Yep, glenda ish teh awesomo.  This used to be on my website's main page and I have glenda as my favicon :D


Offline WhiteRice

  • Posts: 850
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #52 on: Mon, 11 October 2010, 00:11:33 »
I've never personally seen the Windows kernel. I don't know if anyone here has.

I have seen the linux kernel, hell anyone can. There is some very beautiful code. Taking something as complex as memory management and breaking it down into elegant instructions.

Wait where was I going with this...

Offline Parak

  • Posts: 532
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #53 on: Mon, 11 October 2010, 00:18:45 »
Quote from: WhiteRice;232392
I've never personally seen the Windows kernel. I don't know if anyone here has.


http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2004/2/15/71552/7795

Close enough? Teehee.

Offline roaduck

  • Posts: 146
  • Location: Macucium
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000
« Reply #54 on: Sat, 16 October 2010, 01:26:01 »
Quote from: ripster;209913
I look forward to my toilet while peeing.
 
Now in Asia...
Show Image

 
God ripster that looks like a bidet on the floor - pee is gonna spraying everywhere and I wouldn't sit on one! And how did we go from Linux to a bog?
 
 
I prefer
BS : IBM 1391406
Other keyboards - don\'t ask

Offline zefrer

  • Posts: 299
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #55 on: Sun, 17 October 2010, 23:46:54 »
This is very disturbing.

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 368
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #56 on: Mon, 18 October 2010, 08:14:43 »
The hard drive in the computer designated as 'belonging' to my older daughter (a 5 or 6 year-old eMachine) just pooped itself. Since she's getting a lappy for Christmas, rather than putting in a new HD from NewEgg ($50 for .5tb? Crazy!), I installed an 8gb drive I found in my garage, slapped a copy of Win2k onto it (also found in my garage) and dragged it up my bedroom to play movies off our network (2tb on a PogoPlug NAS) and stream video off the internets.

Working fine so far.

Of course, juggling four different versions of Windows (Win2k on that box, Vista on my home desktop, XP on my work and personal laptops and Win7 on my wife's (newly rebuilt) laptop is interesting, but the basic concepts haven't changed; it's more a matter of remembering where they put this or that task in a given version.
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline D-EJ915

  • Posts: 489
  • Location: USA
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #57 on: Mon, 18 October 2010, 20:25:43 »
I thought you said garbage at first and thought your garbage has nicer stuff than MW and EIBM basements

Offline 8_INCH_FLOPPY

  • Posts: 183
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #58 on: Mon, 18 October 2010, 22:03:18 »
What is a "pieve of crap"?
Notable Switches I have tried:
black cherry, blue cherry, brown cherry, clear cherry, cherry M84, white alps, black alps, cream alps, Monterey blue alps, Fujitsu Peerless, Gateway2000 rubber dome, Keytronic rubber dome, Model M buckling spring, Model F buckling spring, futaba, black space invader

================================================
HAPPY HUNTING
================================================

Offline TexasFlood

  • Posts: 1084
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #59 on: Mon, 18 October 2010, 22:09:16 »
Quote from: 8_INCH_FLOPPY;235750
What is a "pieve of crap"?

Extended use of Windows (particularly Windows 98, ME or Vista) can cause stress induced spelling errors.  I recommend loading any Unix variant on any two of your computers and start another thread in the morning.

Offline chimera15

  • Posts: 1441
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #60 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 01:24:03 »
Aren't there like 8 sp's for windows 2000? I thought there were more than 4.  Security is the problem.  Every script kiddie can hack windows 2000, there's like a bazillion exploits for it.  I set up a windows 2000 system just to practice on when I was learning hacking.
Alps boards:
white real complicated: 1x modified siiig minitouch kb1903,  hhkb light2 english steampunk hack, wireless siig minitouch hack
white with rubber damper(cream)+clicky springs: 2x modified siig minitouch kb1903 1x modified siig minitouch kb1948
white fake simplified:   1x white smk-85, 1x Steampunk compact board hack
white real simplified: 1x unitek k-258
low profile: 1x mint m1242 in box
black: ultra mini wrist keyboard hack
blue: Japanese hhk2 lite hack, 1x siig minitouch pcb/doubleshot dc-2014 caps. kb1903, 1x modified kb1948 Siig minitouch
rainbow test boards:  mck-84sx


Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 368
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #61 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 06:39:08 »
Meh. It's not a mission-critical box.
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline instantkamera

  • Posts: 617
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #62 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 07:09:29 »
Quote from: chimera15;235791
when I was learning hacking.


Are you learning that at the same school you are learning your javascript from ?? :D
Realforce 86UB - Razer Blackwidow - Dell AT101W - IBM model MCST  LtracX - Kensington Orbit - Logitech Trackman wheel opticalAMD PhenomII x6 - 16GB RAM - SSD - RAIDDell U2211H - Spyder3 - Eye One Display 2

Offline 8_INCH_FLOPPY

  • Posts: 183
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #63 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 14:09:50 »
You guys think Windows2000 has poor security?  Anyone here ever used Windows ME?  It's probably the least secure windows OS ever.
Notable Switches I have tried:
black cherry, blue cherry, brown cherry, clear cherry, cherry M84, white alps, black alps, cream alps, Monterey blue alps, Fujitsu Peerless, Gateway2000 rubber dome, Keytronic rubber dome, Model M buckling spring, Model F buckling spring, futaba, black space invader

================================================
HAPPY HUNTING
================================================

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 368
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #64 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 17:29:09 »
Windows ME was complete **** in every conceivable way.
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #65 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 17:36:40 »
Quote from: 8_INCH_FLOPPY;235750
What is a "pieve of crap"?


A type-o.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #66 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 17:37:20 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;236120
Windows ME was complete **** in every conceivable way.


It was better than Windows 98 though.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline TexasFlood

  • Posts: 1084
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #67 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 17:48:48 »
Quote from: microsoft windows;236127
It was better than Windows 98 though.

Not sure I'd agree with that one, but would agree they're both crap compared to other releases.

Offline TexasFlood

  • Posts: 1084
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #68 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 18:03:34 »
Quote from: microsoft windows;236127
It was better than Windows 98 though.

Not sure I'd agree with that one, but would agree they're both crap compared to other releases.  Well, I never liked Vista and in general all Microsoft releases are questionable until a service pack or two come out.

Offline TexasFlood

  • Posts: 1084
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #69 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 18:06:31 »
Quote from: kishy;236133
The DOS-based Windozes:

98SE > 98 > ME > 95(all)

Pre-95 is too bad to even qualify on a relative scale...
My order:
98SE > 95 (relatively speaking as a consumer product for the time) > 98 > ME
As far as pre-95, Windows for Workgroups v3.11 was Ok, again considering the time.

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #70 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 18:12:25 »
You can still get a lot done on WFW 3.11. I still use it to this day.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline zefrer

  • Posts: 299
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #71 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 18:52:19 »
You live in the past though. You and John Connor.

Offline TexasFlood

  • Posts: 1084
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #72 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 19:22:49 »
Well.  If you have some older hardware, might make sense to run an older OS and application software on it.  Depending on what you want to do, might be perfectly adequate.  Software bloat isn't noticed if masked newer hardware with faster processors, bigger memory & disk.  More powerful hardware helps sell more feature laden bloated software which helps sell more powerful hardware...  But you can sure see the bloat if you load the software on older hardware as it starts to crawl as it chews up the CPU but even more than that uses all the memory and starts paging & churning the hard drive.

Offline TexasFlood

  • Posts: 1084
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #73 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 19:24:00 »
Well.  If you have some older hardware, might make sense to run an older OS and application software on it.  Depending on what you want to do, might be perfectly adequate.  Software bloat isn't noticed if masked by newer hardware with faster processors with more memory & disk.  More powerful hardware helps sell more feature laden bloated software which helps sell more powerful hardware...  But you can sure see the bloat if you load the software on older hardware as it starts to crawl as it chews up the CPU but even more than that uses all the memory and starts paging & churning the hard drive.

Offline timw4mail

  • Posts: 1329
    • https://timshomepage.net
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #74 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 19:52:50 »
Quote from: TexasFlood;236178
Well.  If you have some older hardware, might make sense to run an older OS and application software on it.  Depending on what you want to do, might be perfectly adequate.  Software bloat isn't noticed if masked by newer hardware with faster processors with more memory & disk.  More powerful hardware helps sell more feature laden bloated software which helps sell more powerful hardware...  But you can sure see the bloat if you load the software on older hardware as it starts to crawl as it chews up the CPU but even more than that uses all the memory and starts paging & churning the hard drive.

You can definitely see software bloat on newer machines. Older machines are not USABLE with bloatware.
Buckling Springs IBM Model F AT, New Model F 77, Unicomp New Model M
Clicky iOne Scorpius M10, OCN-branded Ducky DK-9008-C, Blackmore Nocturna, Redragon Kumara K552-1, Qtronix Scorpius Keypad, Chicony KB-5181(Monterey)
Tactile Apple AEKII (Cream damped ALPS), Filco FKBN91M/JB (Japanese Tenkeyless), Cherry G84-5200, Cherry G84-4100LPAUS, Datalux Spacesaver(Cherry ML), Redragon Devarajas K556 RGB, Newmen GM711, Poker II (Cherry MX Clear), Logitech G910 Orion Spark, Logitech K840
Linear Lenovo Y (Gateron Red), Aluminum kiosk keyboard (Cherry MX Black)

Offline 8_INCH_FLOPPY

  • Posts: 183
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #75 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 22:24:08 »
Quote from: microsoft windows;236127
It was better than Windows 98 though.


NO.
Notable Switches I have tried:
black cherry, blue cherry, brown cherry, clear cherry, cherry M84, white alps, black alps, cream alps, Monterey blue alps, Fujitsu Peerless, Gateway2000 rubber dome, Keytronic rubber dome, Model M buckling spring, Model F buckling spring, futaba, black space invader

================================================
HAPPY HUNTING
================================================

Offline Brian8bit

  • Posts: 156
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #76 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 22:47:54 »
I remember Windows ME. I can't remember what caused the blue screening more, ME itself, or the **** P4 Advent computer I had that liked to cook itself.

Offline TexasFlood

  • Posts: 1084
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #77 on: Tue, 19 October 2010, 23:01:25 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;236120
Windows ME was complete **** in every conceivable way.


Quote from: microsoft windows;236127
It was better than Windows 98 though.


Quote from: 8_INCH_FLOPPY;236220
NO.

I'm with Shawn Stanford and 8_INCH_FLOPPY on this one that Windows ME was complete **** in every conceivable way.

Offline zefrer

  • Posts: 299
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #78 on: Wed, 20 October 2010, 06:46:08 »
Quote from: TexasFlood;236178
Well.  If you have some older hardware, might make sense to run an older OS and application software on it.  Depending on what you want to do, might be perfectly adequate.  Software bloat isn't noticed if masked by newer hardware with faster processors with more memory & disk.  More powerful hardware helps sell more feature laden bloated software which helps sell more powerful hardware...  But you can sure see the bloat if you load the software on older hardware as it starts to crawl as it chews up the CPU but even more than that uses all the memory and starts paging & churning the hard drive.


Actually, I like to install linux on old hardware exactly to see that it won't crawl to a stop :) To this day it is the only OS I have seen that can run equally well on old hardware as well as new.

Offline TexasFlood

  • Posts: 1084
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #79 on: Wed, 20 October 2010, 07:12:55 »
Quote from: zefrer;236281
Actually, I like to install linux on old hardware exactly to see that it won't crawl to a stop :) To this day it is the only OS I have seen that can run equally well on old hardware as well as new.
I'm using an older laptop right now and put Linux (current version) on it figuring it would run quicker than windoze and it's acceptable, at least to me, :wink:.

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #80 on: Thu, 21 October 2010, 20:01:06 »
Windows 3.1 runs great on old hardware. My Gateway 2000 keeps chugging along after 14 years and it's still pretty fast with 3.1.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline keyboardlover

  • Posts: 4022
  • Hey Paul Walker, Click It or Ticket!
    • http://www.keyboardlover.com
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #81 on: Thu, 21 October 2010, 20:04:35 »
How long does minesweeper take to load?

Offline 8_INCH_FLOPPY

  • Posts: 183
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #82 on: Sat, 23 October 2010, 15:29:15 »
Windows ME on a Gateway was my first and only computer for several years.  If anyone wants to know what HELL is like, give it a try.  

Seriously, Windows 3.1 was better.  The weirdest thing about 3.1 is getting used to having no desktop.  

The weirdest thing about windows ME is whatever it happens to be doing that day:  Making random noises, screen suddenly flashing different colors, spontaneous restarting, Error messages that don't make any sense, crashing, blue screen of death, red screen of death, violet screen of death.  Pixellated-4bit-error-message-screen-of-death...
Notable Switches I have tried:
black cherry, blue cherry, brown cherry, clear cherry, cherry M84, white alps, black alps, cream alps, Monterey blue alps, Fujitsu Peerless, Gateway2000 rubber dome, Keytronic rubber dome, Model M buckling spring, Model F buckling spring, futaba, black space invader

================================================
HAPPY HUNTING
================================================

Offline godly_music

  • Posts: 255
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #83 on: Fri, 05 November 2010, 14:43:52 »
Linux =/= Linux. If you put the latest vanilla Ubuntu on an old computer and expect it to run well, it won't. Lots of unnecessary daemons, lots of enterprise features and stuff like SELinux which, while nice in theory, won't be necessary for the average user and will slow things down substantially.

I have an old 1200 MHz laptop that I've treated to an Arch Linux install running LXDE. It beats every other distro I've tried to run on it (Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, Debian, even VectorLinux and Crunchbang). Usually 240p YouTube is a no-go, but with Arch I can watch 360p and it's smooth. XVid is also no problem. H264 needs beefier hardware.

You do not learn how a Linux works by using GUI configuration tools. That's why it's been said that "Linux is ****, stuff breaks and then you may have to get down to the command line". This is true, but you were supposed to START at the command line. Editing a .conf file is so elegant, I can't believe I didn't see it like this before. Addiction has set in.

Offline Keymonger

  • Posts: 166
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #84 on: Fri, 05 November 2010, 16:14:00 »
Quote from: godly_music;243089
I have an old 1200 MHz laptop that I've treated to an Arch Linux install running LXDE. It beats every other distro I've tried to run on it (Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, Debian, even VectorLinux and Crunchbang). Usually 240p YouTube is a no-go, but with Arch I can watch 360p and it's smooth. XVid is also no problem. H264 needs beefier hardware.

You do not learn how a Linux works by using GUI configuration tools. That's why it's been said that "Linux is ****, stuff breaks and then you may have to get down to the command line". This is true, but you were supposed to START at the command line. Editing a .conf file is so elegant, I can't believe I didn't see it like this before. Addiction has set in.
Same experience here. Arch Linux has allowed for a proper introduction to the UNIX way of doing things, and I absolutely love it. I love working on a computer more than ever before.

Offline instantkamera

  • Posts: 617
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #85 on: Fri, 05 November 2010, 22:25:31 »
you're not alone gents. This particular wallpaper is a favorite of mine (using it on my arch "netbook nomix" w/ openbox/tint2):

http://lapapunk.deviantart.com/art/Arch-Linux-113017263

it reads:

Quote
Relying on complex tools to manage and build your system is going to hurt the end users. [...] "If you try to hide the complexity of the system, you'll end up with a more complex system". Layers of abstraction that serve to hide internals are never a good thing. Instead, the internals should be designed in a way such that they NEED no hiding.


(this a very popular quote from Aaron Griffin, can be found on the arch wiki and wikipedia.)

archies unite!
Realforce 86UB - Razer Blackwidow - Dell AT101W - IBM model MCST  LtracX - Kensington Orbit - Logitech Trackman wheel opticalAMD PhenomII x6 - 16GB RAM - SSD - RAIDDell U2211H - Spyder3 - Eye One Display 2

Offline ch_123

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5860
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #86 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 08:59:50 »
I've got to a stage whereby I can install and configure Arch on a system quicker than I can try and make Ubuntu work the way I want it to.

Offline instantkamera

  • Posts: 617
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #87 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 09:33:18 »
Quote from: ch_123;243328
I've got to a stage whereby I can install and configure Arch on a system quicker than I can try and make Ubuntu work the way I want it to.


agreed. In the last while, I have grown to be at one with arch as I was with slack back in the day. It's nice to feel at home with a distro again. Although, in my not so old age (and haste to get working), I will sometimes forget a component or two in my install, only to have something fail down the road.

As I recently arched up my netbook, I had chromium fail to load because IT COULDNT FIND HELVETICA on my system. oopsie, forgot some core fonts.
 You know a system is bare-bones when FONTS are not a default component.
Realforce 86UB - Razer Blackwidow - Dell AT101W - IBM model MCST  LtracX - Kensington Orbit - Logitech Trackman wheel opticalAMD PhenomII x6 - 16GB RAM - SSD - RAIDDell U2211H - Spyder3 - Eye One Display 2

Offline zefrer

  • Posts: 299
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #88 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 09:41:52 »
Quote from: godly_music;243089
Linux =/= Linux. If you put the latest vanilla Ubuntu on an old computer and expect it to run well, it won't. Lots of unnecessary daemons, lots of enterprise features and stuff like SELinux which, while nice in theory, won't be necessary for the average user and will slow things down substantially.

I have an old 1200 MHz laptop that I've treated to an Arch Linux install running LXDE. It beats every other distro I've tried to run on it (Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint, Debian, even VectorLinux and Crunchbang). Usually 240p YouTube is a no-go, but with Arch I can watch 360p and it's smooth. XVid is also no problem. H264 needs beefier hardware.

You do not learn how a Linux works by using GUI configuration tools. That's why it's been said that "Linux is ****, stuff breaks and then you may have to get down to the command line". This is true, but you were supposed to START at the command line. Editing a .conf file is so elegant, I can't believe I didn't see it like this before. Addiction has set in.


The same for me but with Gentoo :) Kinda the arch equivalent but with from source compiling instead of binary packages. Pretty neat.

It's nice that you can bootstrap a new installation within your current one and that's actually how the installer works anyway :)

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #89 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 09:43:04 »
1200 Mhz will run Windows 2000 or XP great. So will a 600Mhz CPU. And a 120Mhz can run them OK.

How well would Arch Linux run off a 160Mhz system with 80MB of RAM? That computer system ran Windows XP pretty well.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline ch_123

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5860
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #90 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 09:51:06 »
If you think Windows XP runs well on anything less than 256MB of RAM, your definition of 'runs well' is wrong.

On the other hand, you can have a usable Linux environment than fits within 64MB. Won't have all the trimmings, but still better any of the older versions of Windows.
« Last Edit: Sat, 06 November 2010, 09:54:51 by ch_123 »

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #91 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 09:53:30 »
It ran pretty well off of 80MB. You'll be surprised. What I did was I made sure the installation was as clean as possible, and it wasn't nearly as slow as I expected.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #92 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 09:55:02 »
Quote from: TexasFlood;236228
I'm with Shawn Stanford and 8_INCH_FLOPPY on this one that Windows ME was complete **** in every conceivable way.


It was complete ****, but it still beat Windows 98.

Comparing Windows 98 and ME is like comparing cat and dog poop.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline keyboardlover

  • Posts: 4022
  • Hey Paul Walker, Click It or Ticket!
    • http://www.keyboardlover.com
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #93 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 10:00:06 »
Quote from: microsoft windows

Comparing Windows 98 and ME is like comparing cat and dog poop.


So they're both poop, but one is smaller in size?

Offline ricercar

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 1697
  • Location: Silicon Valley
  • mostly abides
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #94 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 11:34:06 »
My poop doesn't stink. Neither does webwit's.
I trolled Geekhack and all I got was an eponymous SPOS.

Offline zefrer

  • Posts: 299
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #95 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 12:25:19 »
Quote from: microsoft windows;243349
It ran pretty well off of 80MB. You'll be surprised. What I did was I made sure the installation was as clean as possible, and it wasn't nearly as slow as I expected.


Dude I've installed gentoo on lesser hardware than that. Damn small linux can install on 16mb ram at it's minimum. And you can get others to go lower than that like embedded devices. Linux runs on anything.

Offline zefrer

  • Posts: 299
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #96 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 13:54:51 »
You shouldn't take me seriously you know, I don't :)

Offline godly_music

  • Posts: 255
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #97 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 14:18:53 »
1200 MHz 512 MB RAM runs XP, but it does not run it well by a long shot. Tried just a few days ago.

Offline instantkamera

  • Posts: 617
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #98 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 14:41:34 »
Quote from: ripster;243457
MW has a fascination with poop.


I read (past tense) that as "My Wife ..."


Lucky you.
Realforce 86UB - Razer Blackwidow - Dell AT101W - IBM model MCST  LtracX - Kensington Orbit - Logitech Trackman wheel opticalAMD PhenomII x6 - 16GB RAM - SSD - RAIDDell U2211H - Spyder3 - Eye One Display 2

Offline instantkamera

  • Posts: 617
Linux is a pieve of crap compared to Windows 2000.
« Reply #99 on: Sat, 06 November 2010, 14:43:17 »
oh, and MW, when you install an OS that doesnt DO ANYTHING (which is windows in general), that's not considered "running".
Realforce 86UB - Razer Blackwidow - Dell AT101W - IBM model MCST  LtracX - Kensington Orbit - Logitech Trackman wheel opticalAMD PhenomII x6 - 16GB RAM - SSD - RAIDDell U2211H - Spyder3 - Eye One Display 2