clifto wrote:
Billy Smith wrote:
"Rene Brehmer" wrote in message
.. .
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" wrote in message
...
Billy Smith wrote:
"Rene Brehmer" wrote in message
.. .
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" wrote in message
...
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

On May 31, 7:03*am, Allen wrote:
RHF wrote:
On May 31, 3:52 am, barnegatdx wrote:
On May 30, 7:08 pm, "Billy Smith"
wrote:

"Rene Brehmer" wrote in message
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 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

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

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" wrote in message
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 wrote:
"clifto" wrote in message
...
Billy Smith wrote:
"clifto" wrote in message
...
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.

Details, please. At that price point I could justify having a laptop
myself.

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.

Its never taken me ten minutes to boot any of my computers.

It's never taken me ten minutes to boot anything, including mainframes
or minicomputers, until that Vista boot. The only thing that ever took
longer was loading BASIC onto minis from paper tape in the seventies.
That took about 45 minutes at about four characters per second.

What I will
recommend is not to have a lot of stuff in your start menu

This was a brand-new laptop given to me by the owner's boyfriend for a
once-over and recommendations on virus/spyware/etc protection. The only
things that had been added to it were Kodak software and about 50 pictures.
I did describe it as "almost-brand-new-with-nothing-added".

--
Britney Spears' Guide to Semiconductor Physics
http://britneyspears.ac/lasers.htm

Pete KE9OA wrote:
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!

Sure wish I could reach them with news of my really, really great dumpster
reserved just for such contents!

--
Britney Spears' Guide to Semiconductor Physics
http://britneyspears.ac/lasers.htm

"Billy Smith" wrote in message
m...

"Dave" wrote in message
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.