How many of you are planning to upgrade to Windows XP when it is finally released?
Friday, August 10, 2001 by SpaceGhost | Discussion: WinCustomize Talk
Not me 
 |
|
Page 3 of 4 | |
|
|---|
skinner7892
Reply #42 Monday, August 13, 2001 8:13 AM
Reply #42 Monday, August 13, 2001 8:13 AM
Ooops, please forgive me! 
I inverted numbers in my previous posts (should switch amounts between US and CDN). DOH!!!
I inverted numbers in my previous posts (should switch amounts between US and CDN). DOH!!!
Mr. Sheen
Reply #43 Monday, August 13, 2001 8:22 AM
Reply #43 Monday, August 13, 2001 8:22 AM
Well, the chances are I'll upgrade to XP for the fun of it. Skinning sounds cool. BUT, I will probably revert to Win2k after a quick laugh. My system isn't exactly up to the best of modern standards, and Win2k does me fine. Barely a compatibility issue (my only problems lie with Creative SBLive! Software), and my games run fine.
And what's all this crap about 64-bit Operating Systems? IF you ask me, something that sounds like its capable of a lot requires a system which can handle it. I'm gonna earn some cash and purchase some box in the high giga range, both for processor speed and RAM. Means waiting a while, but who cares.
And what's all this crap about 64-bit Operating Systems? IF you ask me, something that sounds like its capable of a lot requires a system which can handle it. I'm gonna earn some cash and purchase some box in the high giga range, both for processor speed and RAM. Means waiting a while, but who cares.
Mr. Sheen
Reply #44 Monday, August 13, 2001 8:37 AM
Reply #44 Monday, August 13, 2001 8:37 AM
Gah. Forgot to say that with NTFS file system I can't reboot my computer. It just halts when it tries to start Win2k. Not completely fine then 
skinner7892
Reply #45 Monday, August 13, 2001 10:25 AM
Reply #45 Monday, August 13, 2001 10:25 AM
Then I would suggest a clean install of W2K, Sheen. NFTS shouldn't pose a problem when properly configured. Maybe you mess a bit too much with permissions. Hint: Never mess with System account permissions - can bring system to not reboot
For SBLive issue, I wonder what problem you have coz I own one and it works just fine with Win2K. Check on sblive.com to get the latest one.
For SBLive issue, I wonder what problem you have coz I own one and it works just fine with Win2K. Check on sblive.com to get the latest one.
hoverboy
Reply #46 Monday, August 13, 2001 11:59 AM
Reply #46 Monday, August 13, 2001 11:59 AM
Frogboy - What I was implying by saying that XP ia a gamers dream is that it plays far more games than Win2k ever will. Sure, most of the new games work in Win2k, but what about people who dig old-school apps? Like I go back every now and then and play the Ultima series, 1 - 8. When I ever have been able to get any of those old apps to run in 2k, there was no sound, video issues, etc., but in XP, they all run great... sound and all. Also, when you monkey around just to get a game to run, sometimes they take a poo on you mid-game and down they go, system and all if you're running a Win9x kernel (quite often), but not so in XP. As for incompatable games in Win2k, well there are a few issues that I have here at home, like X: Beyond the Frontier has issues with my Force Feedback joystick (not in Win9x, XP), several of the Tomb Raiders don't run in Win2k, Anachronox is officially "unsupported' in Win2k as it dosen't run on some Win2k systems at all (fine in Win9x, XP) ... And there are some multimedia apps that I have (sound card emulators) that don't run in Win2k but run great in Win9x / XP... oh yeah, I have several joysticks, 6 actually, and of them, only 3 have software that is 'officially' supported in Win2k, and the others that I can get to load in Win2k don't work right once I do force it onto the system.
AJCrowley - What version of XP are (did?) you running? Have you run RC1? To recommend Win2k to Win9x users over XP is quite silly. I'd like to hear a little more justification regarding that.
As for the WPA thing: I've mucked with WPA quite a bit (new hard drives, new video cards, new NIC's, new sound cards) and it hasn't complained once.
AJCrowley - What version of XP are (did?) you running? Have you run RC1? To recommend Win2k to Win9x users over XP is quite silly. I'd like to hear a little more justification regarding that.
As for the WPA thing: I've mucked with WPA quite a bit (new hard drives, new video cards, new NIC's, new sound cards) and it hasn't complained once.
Tarkus
Reply #48 Monday, August 13, 2001 2:27 PM
Reply #48 Monday, August 13, 2001 2:27 PM
FlipNET: I don't like WPA either, but exactly how is it an intrusion into your private life? No personal information is gathered. The only thing collected is generic IDs of some of your hardware, so that changes can be monitored.
I get the complaints about the hassles that come with WPA, especially for people who like to tinker with their hardware. I get the complaints about servers and/or phone activation possibly being unavailable at the time of install. I get the complaints about MS in theory being able to pull the plug on activation at any time (though they promise they'll release an update to turn it off when that happens).
What I don't get are the privacy concerns.
I get the complaints about the hassles that come with WPA, especially for people who like to tinker with their hardware. I get the complaints about servers and/or phone activation possibly being unavailable at the time of install. I get the complaints about MS in theory being able to pull the plug on activation at any time (though they promise they'll release an update to turn it off when that happens).
What I don't get are the privacy concerns.
DaWebMassa
Reply #49 Monday, August 13, 2001 3:37 PM
Reply #49 Monday, August 13, 2001 3:37 PM
I play games and while I may not play as many as others, there is only one game I've run across that won't run on Win2k, "BioForge." However, let it be known that this game was a problem even from plain DOS so I don't blame 2k one bit. WarZone2100, Doom, Quake and plenty of others all do just fine.
When I'm ready for a fresh install, I might (very small chance) consider XP. Perhaps by then I'll have lost the distaste I have from all the XP skin stuff that's been turning up.
When I'm ready for a fresh install, I might (very small chance) consider XP. Perhaps by then I'll have lost the distaste I have from all the XP skin stuff that's been turning up.
skinner7892
Reply #50 Monday, August 13, 2001 4:53 PM
Reply #50 Monday, August 13, 2001 4:53 PM
Tarkus, how can you be sure Microsoft won't (or isn't already) gather personal info? To date, they haven't made public the info they'll gather because, for some reason, they don't want us to know yet. And what about the registration of XP itself? Supposely, WPA and registration will be two different things. But for how long? Do you realize how easy it would be to associate the two database and have one large repositary of personal info?
Ok, you may say i'm paranoic and you're right! I am! And it's not an issue of saying I have things to hide. The issue is that Microsoft shouldn't *have* to know what I own to make their products work. That's it!
Let's face it: they do it on a purpose and I sincerely doubt it's only an anti-piracy thing. By the law, they just can't legaly gather info on you without your conscent. But what if you click that Yes button on the installation screen after having to read about 2 miles long licence agreement? Now they have all legal rights to do it because you just clicked a Yes button... Sorry but I just don't like it.
Ok, you may say i'm paranoic and you're right! I am! And it's not an issue of saying I have things to hide. The issue is that Microsoft shouldn't *have* to know what I own to make their products work. That's it!
Let's face it: they do it on a purpose and I sincerely doubt it's only an anti-piracy thing. By the law, they just can't legaly gather info on you without your conscent. But what if you click that Yes button on the installation screen after having to read about 2 miles long licence agreement? Now they have all legal rights to do it because you just clicked a Yes button... Sorry but I just don't like it.
hoverboy
Reply #51 Monday, August 13, 2001 5:13 PM
Reply #51 Monday, August 13, 2001 5:13 PM
FlipNET - If I were Microsoft, I'd do the same thing regarding not releasing specifically what hardware #'s are used during the activation process. If they did publicly say what the exact components were, they'd also be handing hackers a blue print for a WPA crack. By not saying specifically what it is that goes into WPA allows MS to keep the hackers guessing. Sure there are cracks out today, but without the specifics, those same cracks may not work tomorrow.
skinner7892
Reply #52 Monday, August 13, 2001 6:03 PM
Reply #52 Monday, August 13, 2001 6:03 PM
I understand your point hoverboy and I thank you to clear this out. My point was that having to give info on what I own and not knowing what info I give makes me reticent. But I want to make clear that i'm with any anti-piracy initiative since I believe its a real need but only as long as it doesn't infringe my own privacy. So the questions remaining are : What makes an anti-piracy initiative fair and reasonnable? What's the limit after which it makes it an infrigement to someone's privacy? That's a debate that will last for quite some times I believe...
Tarkus
Reply #53 Monday, August 13, 2001 7:35 PM
Reply #53 Monday, August 13, 2001 7:35 PM
FlipNET: I think MS makes it pretty clear what information they're gathering. http://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWSXP/guide/activation.asp
They couldn't possibly be gathering personal information, because none is available at the time of activation (assuming a new install). Registration comes later and it's clearly stated that registration is optional.
If you don't think it's an anti-piracy thing, just what do you think it's for?
Again, I'm not pro-WPA. I just think the privacy concerns are unfounded.
They couldn't possibly be gathering personal information, because none is available at the time of activation (assuming a new install). Registration comes later and it's clearly stated that registration is optional.
If you don't think it's an anti-piracy thing, just what do you think it's for?
Again, I'm not pro-WPA. I just think the privacy concerns are unfounded.
Frogboy
Reply #54 Monday, August 13, 2001 7:49 PM
Reply #54 Monday, August 13, 2001 7:49 PM
HB, can you name a single game that runs on Windows XP but not on Windows 2000?
skinner7892
Reply #55 Monday, August 13, 2001 11:48 PM
Reply #55 Monday, August 13, 2001 11:48 PM
Tarkus, maybe during the installation no critical info is gathered but you still can't be sure what are all the possibilities later. May I remind you the GUID controversy w/Win98, Office 97 & IE4. It wasn't "suppose" to be used that way but at the end, it was. With WPA, another process is, of course, involved but basically, it's the same thing: infos are gathered from your PC to create a unique ID except that now, it's required to activate your product. What are the possibilities then, after such ID is created? Will it serve later to other means? Will there be "unknown" vulnerabilities, as it was the case with the GUID? Who knows...
Anyway, these are just arguments and personal opinion on the subject and only time will clear things out. I sincerely hope that I will be proved wrong if WPA is officialy enforced!!! As I said earlier, i'm a paranoiac when it comes to security. Maybe that's why my employer pays me to be involved in system security
Anyway, these are just arguments and personal opinion on the subject and only time will clear things out. I sincerely hope that I will be proved wrong if WPA is officialy enforced!!! As I said earlier, i'm a paranoiac when it comes to security. Maybe that's why my employer pays me to be involved in system security
Tarkus
Reply #57 Tuesday, August 14, 2001 12:13 AM
Reply #57 Tuesday, August 14, 2001 12:13 AM
FlipNET: If you don't trust MS to live by their own contractual agreement, then how do you know your current Windows isn't spying on you (for what purpose, I have no idea)? If that was really their intent, they wouldn't need WPA to do it. They could build it in so that even firewalls wouldn't see it.
If you're that paranoid, why use anything but open source?
If you're that paranoid, why use anything but open source?
juni
Reply #58 Tuesday, August 14, 2001 12:51 AM
Reply #58 Tuesday, August 14, 2001 12:51 AM
Micro$oft, Micro$oft, Micro$oft, Micro$oft, Micro$oft. Eh, well, I was wondering if M____soft will actually continue supporting and developing for win2000 after XP is released - or will their new releases be compatible with win2000. It would really be a drag to have to upgrade our 1000+ workstations to XP...when we haven't even finished our win2000 upgrade yet.
Tarkus
Reply #60 Tuesday, August 14, 2001 3:11 AM
Reply #60 Tuesday, August 14, 2001 3:11 AM
They just barely dropped support for Windows 3.1, so I don't think they'll stop supporting W2K anytime soon.
Please login to comment and/or vote for this skin.
Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
- Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums and downloading skins.
- Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
- Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
- It's simple, and FREE!
|
|
Page 3 of 4 | |
|
|---|
Reply #41 Monday, August 13, 2001 8:11 AM
Btw, I didn't meant to offense those who cares about eye candy. Just that personnaly I believe this shouldn't be a priority when talking about an enterprise OS. WinXP will try to close the gap between enterprise strenght/stability and the easy of use. And that's great! But the problem though is that I feel their strategy with WPA is not only some sort of intrusion in private life but also a bogus concept (again, take a look at the link on my previous post, you'll understand why I say that)
That was my 0,10$ CDN (0,06$ US) due to inflation since my previous post