Billy Smith wrote:
>
> "Rene Brehmer" <rene@metalbunny.net> wrote in message
> news:1v0tie1m9l70g$.qlzqjiap3bc0$.dlg@40tude.net.. .
>> On Fri, 30 May 2008 06:25:56 -0700, dave wrote:
>>
>>> David wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Windows XP is fast, RELIABLE, and meets the needs of the vast majority
>>>> of PC users
>>>>
>>> Huh!? XP is klunky and wastes resources. Puppy Linux works better for
>>> most routine tasks.
>>
>> Yes, but Vista takes the cake as the worst piece of crap to come out of
>> Richmond yet. I'm surprised noone's taken them to court yet for selling a
>> clearly unfinished product as anything but a beta.
>>
>> I work with Windows all day. That's why we have a Mac at home.
>> --
>> Rene Brehmer
>> IT Technician
>>
>> North Hill Inn
>> http://www.northhillinn.com
>
> That's funny. I have three computers running on Vista utilizing them
> playing music, movies, word processing, document saving, and about every
> application you can use. No problems here just as long as you really
> know what you are doing. Maybe its not the software causing the problem
> but the user not knowing how to properly operate the computer.

I'm running a 1.5 gHz Via C7D WalMart box that cost $200. It does all
of the above and I have no idea what I'm doing.

www.ubuntu.com

clifto wrote:
> Billy Smith wrote:
>> "Rene Brehmer" <rene@metalbunny.net> wrote in message
>> news:1v0tie1m9l70g$.qlzqjiap3bc0$.dlg@40tude.net.. .
>>> On Fri, 30 May 2008 06:25:56 -0700, dave wrote:
>>>
>>>> David wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Windows XP is fast, RELIABLE, and meets the needs of the vast majority
>>>>> of PC users
>>>>>
>>>> Huh!? XP is klunky and wastes resources. Puppy Linux works better for
>>>> most routine tasks.
>>> Yes, but Vista takes the cake as the worst piece of crap to come out of
>>> Richmond yet. I'm surprised noone's taken them to court yet for selling a
>>> clearly unfinished product as anything but a beta.
>>>
>>> I work with Windows all day. That's why we have a Mac at home.
>>> --
>>> Rene Brehmer
>>> IT Technician
>>>
>>> North Hill Inn
>>> http://www.northhillinn.com
>> That's funny. I have three computers running on Vista utilizing them playing
>> music, movies, word processing, document saving, and about every application
>> you can use. No problems here just as long as you really know what you are
>> doing. Maybe its not the software causing the problem but the user not
>> knowing how to properly operate the computer.
>
> Or the owner not being able to afford a 900 terahertz 16-core processor
> with 100 terabytes of memory.
>
Amen, brother!

Billy Smith wrote:
>
> "clifto" <clifto******.com> wrote in message
> news:2oo6h5-899.ln1@remote.clifto.com...
>> Billy Smith wrote:
>>> "Rene Brehmer" <rene@metalbunny.net> wrote in message
>>> news:1v0tie1m9l70g$.qlzqjiap3bc0$.dlg@40tude.net.. .
>>>> On Fri, 30 May 2008 06:25:56 -0700, dave wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> David wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows XP is fast, RELIABLE, and meets the needs of the vast
>>>>>> majority
>>>>>> of PC users
>>>>>>
>>>>> Huh!? XP is klunky and wastes resources. Puppy Linux works better
>>>>> for
>>>>> most routine tasks.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, but Vista takes the cake as the worst piece of crap to come out of
>>>> Richmond yet. I'm surprised noone's taken them to court yet for
>>>> selling a
>>>> clearly unfinished product as anything but a beta.
>>>>
>>>> I work with Windows all day. That's why we have a Mac at home.
>>>> --
>>>> Rene Brehmer
>>>> IT Technician
>>>>
>>>> North Hill Inn
>>>> http://www.northhillinn.com
>>>
>>> That's funny. I have three computers running on Vista utilizing them
>>> playing
>>> music, movies, word processing, document saving, and about every
>>> application
>>> you can use. No problems here just as long as you really know what
>>> you are
>>> doing. Maybe its not the software causing the problem but the user not
>>> knowing how to properly operate the computer.
>>
>> Or the owner not being able to afford a 900 terahertz 16-core processor
>> with 100 terabytes of memory.
>>
>
> What makes this interesting to me is that I paid 200 dollars for the
> desktop computer brand new out of the box at Circuit City. Computer was
> originally 409 dollars and discounted to 200. Worked great right out of
> the box. I didn't have a bit of problem with that computer and its about
> a year old. Next pieces I bought were two laptops one from last August
> and the other this February. HP for both of them and spent 1500 for both
> of them in total. Both with 1 GB of ram apiece. 160 GB drive on one and
> 250 GB on the other. AMD processor on both 2.0 Ghz plus speed. So
> basically 700 bucks for one laptop and 800 for another. I've been seeing
> desktops for maybe 500-700 which is pretty reasonable.

And these miracle babies all run Vista flawlessly?

Billy Smith wrote:
> "clifto" <clifto******.com> wrote in message
> news:2oo6h5-899.ln1@remote.clifto.com...
>> Or the owner not being able to afford a 900 terahertz 16-core processor
>> with 100 terabytes of memory.
>>
>
> What makes this interesting to me is that I paid 200 dollars for the desktop
> computer brand new out of the box at Circuit City.

The first computer I ever booted Vista on was a friend's laptop, a quad-core
Intel something near 3 GHz. It took over ten minutes to boot this almost-
brand-new-with-nothing-added computer.

--
"On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes
- and I see many of them in the audience here today - our sense of patriotism
is particularly strong." -- Barack Obama's seance

RHF wrote:
> On May 31, 3:52 am, barnegatdx <barnega...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On May 30, 7:08 pm, "Billy Smith" <chungkingchungk...******.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> "Rene Brehmer" <r...@metalbunny.net> wrote in message
>>> news:1v0tie1m9l70g$.qlzqjiap3bc0$.dlg@40tude.net.. .
>>>> On Fri, 30 May 2008 06:25:56 -0700, dave wrote:
>>>>> David wrote:
>>>>>> Windows XP is fast, RELIABLE, and meets the needs of the vast majority
>>>>>> of PC users
>>>>> Huh!? XP is klunky and wastes resources. Puppy Linux works better for
>>>>> most routine tasks.
>>>> Yes, but Vista takes the cake as the worst piece of crap to come out of
>>>> Richmond yet. I'm surprised noone's taken them to court yet for selling a
>>>> clearly unfinished product as anything but a beta.
>>>> I work with Windows all day. That's why we have a Mac at home.
>>>> --
>>>> Rene Brehmer
>>>> IT Technician
>>>> North Hill Inn
>>>> http://www.northhillinn.com
>>> That's funny. I have three computers running on Vista utilizing them playing
>>> music, movies, word processing, document saving, and about every application
>>> you can use. No problems here just as long as you really know what you are
>>> doing. Maybe its not the software causing the problem but the user not
>>> knowing how to properly operate the computer.
>> Probably get the same performance with Windows XP but with Hundreds
>> of dollars less hardware
>>
>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search
>>
>> - Or with something FREEEE ! Like Ubuntu
>>
>> they say in the future, you'll just need a computer and a browser,
>>
>> meanwhile, theres a petition you can sign,
>>
>> http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-xp/
>>
>> It'd be nice to have a reliable, standardized OS available for sale
>> June 30, 2008- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Wal*Mart is still selling some Dell Computers
> with XP installed as the OS.
So is Dell, until June 18.
Allen

On May 31, 7:03*am, Allen <al...@nothere.net> wrote:
> RHF wrote:
> > On May 31, 3:52 am, barnegatdx <barnega...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On May 30, 7:08 pm, "Billy Smith" <chungkingchungk...******.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> "Rene Brehmer" <r...@metalbunny.net> wrote in message
> >>>news:1v0tie1m9l70g$.qlzqjiap3bc0$.dlg@40tude.ne t...
> >>>> On Fri, 30 May 2008 06:25:56 -0700, dave wrote:
> >>>>> David wrote:
> >>>>>> Windows XP is fast, RELIABLE, and meets the needs of the vast majority
> >>>>>> of PC users
> >>>>> Huh!? *XP is klunky and wastes resources. *Puppy Linux works better for
> >>>>> most routine tasks.
> >>>> Yes, but Vista takes the cake as the worst piece of crap to come out of
> >>>> Richmond yet. I'm surprised noone's taken them to court yet for selling a
> >>>> clearly unfinished product as anything but a beta.
> >>>> I work with Windows all day. That's why we have a Mac at home.
> >>>> --
> >>>> Rene Brehmer
> >>>> IT Technician
> >>>> North Hill Inn
> >>>>http://www.northhillinn.com
> >>> That's funny. I have three computers running on Vista utilizing them playing
> >>> music, movies, word processing, document saving, and about every application
> >>> you can use. No problems here just as long as you really know what youare
> >>> doing. Maybe its not the software causing the problem but the user not
> >>> knowing how to properly operate the computer.
> >> Probably get the same performance with Windows XP *but with *Hundreds
> >> of dollars less hardware
>
> >>http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search
>
> >> - Or with something FREEEE ! Like Ubuntu
>
> >> they say in the future, you'll just need a computer and a browser,
>
> >> meanwhile, theres a petition you can sign,
>
> >>http://weblog.infoworld.com/save-xp/
>
> >> It'd be nice to have a reliable, standardized OS available for sale
> >> June 30, 2008- Hide quoted text -
>
> >> - Show quoted text -

- - Wal*Mart is still selling some Dell Computers
- - with XP installed as the OS.

- So is Dell, until June 18.
- Allen

Buy Now -otherwise-it's- Hasta la Vista Baby !

"Dave" <nospam@biteme.com> wrote in message
news:arudnf5orNZSzdzVnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
> Billy Smith wrote:
>>
>> "clifto" <clifto******.com> wrote in message
>> news:2oo6h5-899.ln1@remote.clifto.com...
>>> Billy Smith wrote:
>>>> "Rene Brehmer" <rene@metalbunny.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:1v0tie1m9l70g$.qlzqjiap3bc0$.dlg@40tude.net.. .
>>>>> On Fri, 30 May 2008 06:25:56 -0700, dave wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> David wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Windows XP is fast, RELIABLE, and meets the needs of the vast
>>>>>>> majority
>>>>>>> of PC users
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Huh!? XP is klunky and wastes resources. Puppy Linux works better
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> most routine tasks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but Vista takes the cake as the worst piece of crap to come out
>>>>> of
>>>>> Richmond yet. I'm surprised noone's taken them to court yet for
>>>>> selling a
>>>>> clearly unfinished product as anything but a beta.
>>>>>
>>>>> I work with Windows all day. That's why we have a Mac at home.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Rene Brehmer
>>>>> IT Technician
>>>>>
>>>>> North Hill Inn
>>>>> http://www.northhillinn.com
>>>>
>>>> That's funny. I have three computers running on Vista utilizing them
>>>> playing
>>>> music, movies, word processing, document saving, and about every
>>>> application
>>>> you can use. No problems here just as long as you really know what you
>>>> are
>>>> doing. Maybe its not the software causing the problem but the user not
>>>> knowing how to properly operate the computer.
>>>
>>> Or the owner not being able to afford a 900 terahertz 16-core processor
>>> with 100 terabytes of memory.
>>>
>>
>> What makes this interesting to me is that I paid 200 dollars for the
>> desktop computer brand new out of the box at Circuit City. Computer was
>> originally 409 dollars and discounted to 200. Worked great right out of
>> the box. I didn't have a bit of problem with that computer and its about
>> a year old. Next pieces I bought were two laptops one from last August
>> and the other this February. HP for both of them and spent 1500 for both
>> of them in total. Both with 1 GB of ram apiece. 160 GB drive on one and
>> 250 GB on the other. AMD processor on both 2.0 Ghz plus speed. So
>> basically 700 bucks for one laptop and 800 for another. I've been seeing
>> desktops for maybe 500-700 which is pretty reasonable.
>
> And these miracle babies all run Vista flawlessly?

I don't have a bit of a problem with Vista. Its called keeping your computer
system clear of garbage, file clutter, and everything else that someone who
has the money to afford a computer should know. I don't have system crash
problems such as certain programs crashing. Its called keeping your file
structures clean and having good equipment to work with. I've got 85 percent
of one computer filled with audio files, documents, etc. Not a bit of a
problem keeping it running. Not to mention watching Netflix videos and
everything else on there. This computer I have had since August 2007. Maybe
had to reboot once due to a program getting all locked up and not
responding. Otherwise, learn your stuff. I've been working on computers
since well into the 1980s in fact having a Commodore and all of that sort of
thing. I've used Windows 95, 98, Millenium Edition, XP and now Vista. I've
had the least problems out of Vista than any of the older models. I think
people forget when 95 would crash quite often. 98 was quite a bit better.
Millenium was nothing to write home about.

In fact, I also have three working XP machines. All of which suit my
purposes but personally I've found that XP and its supporting programs you
run on XP tend to be slow and choppy in performance. It tends to lock up
more frequently than I have ever seen Vista do. When it doesn't lock up the
computer on XP, it tends to slow applications. One fix for that might be
adding some RAM to supercharge the computer. That always helps. Might cost
you 100 bucks these days to do that but if you're picky its well worth it.

I run this Vista computer for mostly multimedia purposes and web browsing. I
haven't rarely had a coughing fit out of it. Nothing like what older models
did. XP included.

"clifto" <clifto******.com> wrote in message
news:8328h5-otp.ln1@remote.clifto.com...
> Billy Smith wrote:
>> "clifto" <clifto******.com> wrote in message
>> news:2oo6h5-899.ln1@remote.clifto.com...
>>> Or the owner not being able to afford a 900 terahertz 16-core processor
>>> with 100 terabytes of memory.
>>>
>>
>> What makes this interesting to me is that I paid 200 dollars for the
>> desktop
>> computer brand new out of the box at Circuit City.
>
> The first computer I ever booted Vista on was a friend's laptop, a
> quad-core
> Intel something near 3 GHz. It took over ten minutes to boot this almost-
> brand-new-with-nothing-added computer.
>
> --
> "On this Memorial Day, as our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen
> heroes
> - and I see many of them in the audience here today - our sense of
> patriotism
> is particularly strong." -- Barack Obama's seance

Its never taken me ten minutes to boot any of my computers. What I will
recommend is not to have a lot of stuff in your start menu Some people go
crazy with that and thats a big problem whether you were running 95,98, XP,
or Vista. It takes mine maybe 2 to 3 minutes max which is good time to get
some coffee, use the can, or make a quick phone call. Then with Insight 10.0
and wireless router and the built in wireless card, we are ready to go.

I haven't had any experience with Vista, but XP Professional has been
running for several years, with no problems. I have some processes such as
prefetch, Messenger, and autorun disabled. The only update I have installed
is Service Pack 2. I ordered the CD from Microsoft several years ago. IE6,
with its multiple security holes runs much better than IE7. I purged that
browser. I use Firefox as my internet browser........it seems to have
tighter security.
Linux is still my favorite operating platform, but unfortunately, it is
incompatible with the electrical engineering programs that I use. When it
eventually grows up, I thing Linux will be the way to go. Microsoft has a
tendency to write quite a bit of "bloatware", but they do a better job of
coding their operating system than I would ever be able to do.
I have heard quite a few bad things about Vista, but I have heard quite a
few bad things about some radio equipment, such as the Eton E1.
When I spoke to the person over at R.L. Drake who does the repair on these
radios, he stated that very few of the E1s come in for repair. Maybe people
just throw them in the dumpster out of frustration!
The point is........sometimes sour grapes tend to exaggerate problems that
might turn up. I don't have the answer on that one.

Pete

"Billy Smith" <chungkingchungking******.com> wrote in message
news:66GdnQH_8cmrF9zVnZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
>
> "Dave" <nospam@biteme.com> wrote in message
> news:arudnf5orNZSzdzVnZ2dnUVZ_hudnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
>> Billy Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> "clifto" <clifto******.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2oo6h5-899.ln1@remote.clifto.com...
>>>> Billy Smith wrote:
>>>>> "Rene Brehmer" <rene@metalbunny.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:1v0tie1m9l70g$.qlzqjiap3bc0$.dlg@40tude.net.. .
>>>>>> On Fri, 30 May 2008 06:25:56 -0700, dave wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> David wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Windows XP is fast, RELIABLE, and meets the needs of the vast
>>>>>>>> majority
>>>>>>>> of PC users
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Huh!? XP is klunky and wastes resources. Puppy Linux works better
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> most routine tasks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, but Vista takes the cake as the worst piece of crap to come out
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> Richmond yet. I'm surprised noone's taken them to court yet for
>>>>>> selling a
>>>>>> clearly unfinished product as anything but a beta.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I work with Windows all day. That's why we have a Mac at home.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Rene Brehmer
>>>>>> IT Technician
>>>>>>
>>>>>> North Hill Inn
>>>>>> http://www.northhillinn.com
>>>>>
>>>>> That's funny. I have three computers running on Vista utilizing them
>>>>> playing
>>>>> music, movies, word processing, document saving, and about every
>>>>> application
>>>>> you can use. No problems here just as long as you really know what you
>>>>> are
>>>>> doing. Maybe its not the software causing the problem but the user not
>>>>> knowing how to properly operate the computer.
>>>>
>>>> Or the owner not being able to afford a 900 terahertz 16-core processor
>>>> with 100 terabytes of memory.
>>>>
>>>
>>> What makes this interesting to me is that I paid 200 dollars for the
>>> desktop computer brand new out of the box at Circuit City. Computer was
>>> originally 409 dollars and discounted to 200. Worked great right out of
>>> the box. I didn't have a bit of problem with that computer and its about
>>> a year old. Next pieces I bought were two laptops one from last August
>>> and the other this February. HP for both of them and spent 1500 for both
>>> of them in total. Both with 1 GB of ram apiece. 160 GB drive on one and
>>> 250 GB on the other. AMD processor on both 2.0 Ghz plus speed. So
>>> basically 700 bucks for one laptop and 800 for another. I've been seeing
>>> desktops for maybe 500-700 which is pretty reasonable.
>>
>> And these miracle babies all run Vista flawlessly?
>
> I don't have a bit of a problem with Vista. Its called keeping your
> computer system clear of garbage, file clutter, and everything else that
> someone who has the money to afford a computer should know. I don't have
> system crash problems such as certain programs crashing. Its called
> keeping your file structures clean and having good equipment to work with.
> I've got 85 percent of one computer filled with audio files, documents,
> etc. Not a bit of a problem keeping it running. Not to mention watching
> Netflix videos and everything else on there. This computer I have had
> since August 2007. Maybe had to reboot once due to a program getting all
> locked up and not responding. Otherwise, learn your stuff. I've been
> working on computers since well into the 1980s in fact having a Commodore
> and all of that sort of thing. I've used Windows 95, 98, Millenium
> Edition, XP and now Vista. I've had the least problems out of Vista than
> any of the older models. I think people forget when 95 would crash quite
> often. 98 was quite a bit better. Millenium was nothing to write home
> about.
>
> In fact, I also have three working XP machines. All of which suit my
> purposes but personally I've found that XP and its supporting programs you
> run on XP tend to be slow and choppy in performance. It tends to lock up
> more frequently than I have ever seen Vista do. When it doesn't lock up
> the computer on XP, it tends to slow applications. One fix for that might
> be adding some RAM to supercharge the computer. That always helps. Might
> cost you 100 bucks these days to do that but if you're picky its well
> worth it.
>
> I run this Vista computer for mostly multimedia purposes and web browsing.
> I haven't rarely had a coughing fit out of it. Nothing like what older
> models did. XP included.

Billy Smith wrote:

>> B> I run this Vista computer for mostly multimedia purposes and web
> browsing. I haven't rarely had a coughing fit out of it. Nothing like
> what older models did. XP included.

You can do that stuff way faster on a Linux box. And with a lot less
risk and hassle.

Billy Smith wrote:

>
> Its never taken me ten minutes to boot any of my computers. What I will
> recommend is not to have a lot of stuff in your start menu Some people
> go crazy with that and thats a big problem whether you were running
> 95,98, XP, or Vista. It takes mine maybe 2 to 3 minutes max which is
> good time to get some coffee, use the can, or make a quick phone call.
> Then with Insight 10.0 and wireless router and the built in wireless
> card, we are ready to go.

My eeepc (screaming 630 Megahertz Celeron) goes from cold start to
Xubuntu in ca. 50 seconds. My full-on Ubuntu desktop takes 90 seconds,
with a 1.5 gHz Via C7.

"Dave" <nospam@biteme.com> wrote in message
news:H7WdndbTffhKJdzVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@earthlink.co m...
> Billy Smith wrote:
>
>>> B> I run this Vista computer for mostly multimedia purposes and web
>> browsing. I haven't rarely had a coughing fit out of it. Nothing like
>> what older models did. XP included.
>
> You can do that stuff way faster on a Linux box. And with a lot less risk
> and hassle.

Linux is generally crap. I know because I installed it on a couple of my
machines. It caused more problems using that crap and utilizing software
than anything I have ever seen. Pure garbage. Just about like that other
computer operating system called the Mac. I wouldn't have a Mac for toilet
paper. Every Mac I saw ran like crap and you couldn't do 1/3 of what you can
do on a Windows based Machine. That comes from a lot of personal experience
with Mac based stuff back in the 90s and early part of this decade.

It might be great now but back in those days they should have called it Crap
versus Mac.

"Billy Smith" <chungkingchungking******.com> wrote in message
news:zLmdnevejfyBJ9zVnZ2dnUVZ_r6rnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
>
> "Dave" <nospam@biteme.com> wrote in message
> news:H7WdndbTffhKJdzVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@earthlink.co m...
>> Billy Smith wrote:
>>
>>>> B> I run this Vista computer for mostly multimedia purposes and web
>>> browsing. I haven't rarely had a coughing fit out of it. Nothing like
>>> what older models did. XP included.
>>
>> You can do that stuff way faster on a Linux box. And with a lot less
>> risk and hassle.
>
> Linux is generally crap. I know because I installed it on a couple of my
> machines. It caused more problems using that crap and utilizing software
> than anything I have ever seen. Pure garbage. Just about like that other
> computer operating system called the Mac. I wouldn't have a Mac for toilet
> paper. Every Mac I saw ran like crap and you couldn't do 1/3 of what you
> can do on a Windows based Machine. That comes from a lot of personal
> experience with Mac based stuff back in the 90s and early part of this
> decade.
>
> It might be great now but back in those days they should have called it
> Crap versus Mac.

Linux and Apple have their place, and with your comments I doubt you have
ever owned an Apple.

The HUGE benefit of Linux over say Vista is Linux is not DRM invasive.

"Frank" <fb@tpi.olm> wrote in message
news:48408a06$0$20198$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
> Rene Brehmer wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
> Yes, but Vista takes the cake as the worst piece of crap...
>
> Sorry, but that is simply not true.
>
> to come out of Richmond yet.
>
> Richmond? You must mean Redmond right?
>
>
> I'm surprised noone's taken them to court yet for selling a
>> clearly unfinished product as anything but a beta.
>
> So you're saying you can't get your install of Vista to run properly?
> Which version of Vista do you have, and exactly what problem do you have?
> Frank

I have three different Vista based computers. All of which run quite well
and very few hiccups. See what it seems to be to me is that a lot of people
expect their computer to run perfectly and flawlessly every day, every time,
every second even though they won't defragment their hard drives, keep their
computers, clean, and have a decent level of knowledge about how to install
their programs and their computer.

They don't bother to learn the ins and outs of a computer and its hardware
much less try to do anything with software. I am not a programmer and its
really not my interest or desire to do that for a career or fun. However, I
do know what works and what doesn't and I know how to make what doesn't
work, work and keep what does work running efficiently.

I've been working with computers probably 20 plus years at this point.
Sometimes spending 8 to 10 hours a day working at one. Depends on what I
like to do. Sometimes its listening to podcasts, music, or watching DVD
video on online fare. Other times its word processing, ham software, design
software, and things of that type. Sometimes its just web browsing, online
audio and streaming audio ran through the computer all night long with no
problems.

I've had computers back in the Windows 95 and 98 DAYS that crashed. In fact,
I can't count how many times I had a 95 based system crash and then have to
reinstall everything. 98 was a much more stable system largely because it
was more developed. Millenium Edition was pretty marginal at best.

XP was probably the best version to come out versus all of the prior
systems. Least problems with crashing which meant you could keep your data
and not be constantly reinstalling the software and all your programs.

Vista hasn't given me a bare minimum of trouble. Its all about knowing how
to use it and how to utilize what you have in front of you. For rookies, you
might learn how the Ctrl-Alt-Delete function works that way if a program
becomes unstable due to not loading correctly or operating effectively, that
you can back out of the program and start again. Also, learn in your Task
Manager how to pull out of programs without hitting the programs and instead
find the Processes menu and learn which programs you are running and how you
can shut those programs down just in case Applications locks up. That does
happen on all versions of Microsoft software.

For the Linux supporters out there, it would be a great concept for the vast
majority of system users except that often the software is in no way
interchangeable between a Windows environment and a Linux environment. Not
to mention that Linux leaves a little bit to be desired as far as operator
functions go. There are some speed benefits to Linux especially in program
loading, booting up, and overall operation. Its a faster system. The only
problem is that you have to figure out what version can actually work well
with your system. All versions of Linux are not the same. Ive used Mandrake
before and it was useless for the most part. So I scrapped that plan and
went back to Microsoft based applications.

Its really all about what your level of comfort and experience are in using
a PC. If you don't know, then perhaps you should take a class in basic
computer operations and hardware that way you know what is needed to
actually run it. No matter how easy Microsoft makes the system, there will
always be someone there to screw things up. No matter how good the
programmer is, there is always going to be glitches in the system. Every
occupation I've ever worked in always had its share of problems either with
equipment or those running the equipment. Running a personal computer is no
different

"Canuck57" <dave-no_spam@unixhome.net> wrote in message
news:m2j0k.309335$pM4.146740@pd7urf1no...
>
> "Billy Smith" <chungkingchungking******.com> wrote in message
> news:zLmdnevejfyBJ9zVnZ2dnUVZ_r6rnZ2d@earthlink.co m...
>>
>> "Dave" <nospam@biteme.com> wrote in message
>> news:H7WdndbTffhKJdzVnZ2dnUVZ_tninZ2d@earthlink.co m...
>>> Billy Smith wrote:
>>>
>>>>> B> I run this Vista computer for mostly multimedia purposes and web
>>>> browsing. I haven't rarely had a coughing fit out of it. Nothing like
>>>> what older models did. XP included.
>>>
>>> You can do that stuff way faster on a Linux box. And with a lot less
>>> risk and hassle.
>>
>> Linux is generally crap. I know because I installed it on a couple of my
>> machines. It caused more problems using that crap and utilizing software
>> than anything I have ever seen. Pure garbage. Just about like that other
>> computer operating system called the Mac. I wouldn't have a Mac for
>> toilet paper. Every Mac I saw ran like crap and you couldn't do 1/3 of
>> what you can do on a Windows based Machine. That comes from a lot of
>> personal experience with Mac based stuff back in the 90s and early part
>> of this decade.
>>
>> It might be great now but back in those days they should have called it
>> Crap versus Mac.
>
> Linux and Apple have their place, and with your comments I doubt you have
> ever owned an Apple.
>
> The HUGE benefit of Linux over say Vista is Linux is not DRM invasive.

I never owned an apple but I used to have a lot of experience running the
Apple/Mac system. I wasn't impressed with anything that it could allegedly
do. Personally it was like an overhyped Ipod phone or Touch. A lot of glitz
but little real performance. Not user friendly, not even for the novice. I
probably spent at least a year on that sort of a system and I was none too
impressed. Thats why Mac will never catch up to Microsoft in anything. The
only people I personally knew that used Macs were kids wanting to use it for
graphics. For business operations, office work, etc, it was never worth
anything. I wouldn't even give a Mac system the time of day for even audio
listening or multimedia video and audio.

If Macs were so proficient and useful, then why in the hell doesn't everyone
in the world switch to Macs. Since there is a free market in computers and a
great deal of industriousness and ingenuity in the computer industry, then
Macs should be right up there. Not to mention the facts are that a Microsoft
based system can be had for 300 to 1000 dolllars and a good one at that.

What does a Crap cost? I was in the local Apple store recently here in
Louisville KY. It was laughable that they wanted twice as much as any
Microsoft PC and with less performance capabilities, less general respect.
You'll see who buried who in the computer systems operating business
environment. It sure wasn't Mac. Probably more people use Linux than Mac and
thats sad.