PDA

View Full Version : psuedo-poll: favorite x86 OS?


janey
May 13, 2004, 12:22 AM
i'm so unbelievably fed up with windows xp, need an OS to install (how pathetic is it if you have six viruses on a 15 day old xp install, didnt even touch any email client and only downloaded and/or installed the service pack, iTunes, vs.net, office 2003 and stuff from TheOpenCD?!).

so i was wondering what you guys used as your favorite x86 OS other than windows.
the list is so long that i'm sort of down to randomly picking them.
thanks in advance.

robbieduncan
May 13, 2004, 04:37 AM
At the moment Gentoo Linux (http://www.gentoo.org/).

Having said that it's a very involved OS. Installing (http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=1&chap=0)it requires a good internet connection and a lot of time as it downloads source for everything and recomiles locally. If you know what you are doing this can lead to better performance. You also only have the stuff you want or need installed and turned on.

Danrose1977
May 13, 2004, 05:08 AM
Red Hat, but thats only because I use it at work.....

dopefiend
May 13, 2004, 06:08 AM
Tired of Windows? Download Red Hat Fedora core 1.

Then download WINE.

Bam, stable and no viruses :D

Edit: my favorite isn't limited to one, but include SuSE 9.0+ , Red Hat 9+, Mandrake 10+, and the many, many, many other easy to use, linux flavors out there :D

blue&whiteman
May 13, 2004, 06:35 AM
redhat would be the most user friendly of all the linux os. if you don't need user friendly then go with debian or even one up that and go with free bsd.

TEG
May 13, 2004, 07:05 AM
Honest Answer...

Dos 6.22 with Windows 3.11
There are many enhancements out there to allow you to run modern softwae in 3.11 and is by far the most stable of all the Windows.

However, I have also like BeOS, it is available for x86 and would probabily do the job you are looking for.

TEG

blue&whiteman
May 13, 2004, 07:52 AM
Honest Answer...

Dos 6.22 with Windows 3.11
There are many enhancements out there to allow you to run modern softwae in 3.11 and is by far the most stable of all the Windows.

back in 96 I bought a P 120mhz with 32mb ram (screaming machine at the time) it came with 95 but for the first few weeks I ran 3.11 on it. man did it scream with that os. at that time having 3.11 on 32mb ram was like panther on 2gb now. my only good memory of a pc :)

SiliconAddict
May 13, 2004, 08:04 AM
i'm so unbelievably fed up with windows xp, need an OS to install (how pathetic is it if you have six viruses on a 15 day old xp install, didnt even touch any email client and only downloaded and/or installed the service pack, iTunes, vs.net, office 2003 and stuff from TheOpenCD?!).

so i was wondering what you guys used as your favorite x86 OS other than windows.
the list is so long that i'm sort of down to randomly picking them.
thanks in advance.


In order of pref:

XP
2000
Mandrake
Red Hat
BeOS 5
Gentoo (as someone else stated its a PITA to config/setup but once its up its a good OS.)
DOS/WIN 3.11 (Call me insane but I still like to putz around with DOS and 3.11.)
.
.
.
Windows 9x (When hell freezes over.)


As for viruses on Windows. Simple solution.
-Don't run attachments you don't know what they are about. (DUH!)
-Install a firewall. (Takes care of 100% of MS security vulnerabilities that can be exploited by worms.)
-DO NOT USE INTERNET INPLODER. FireFox is your friend.
-Install Norton AV.
-And install patches once every 4-6 months or so.

I've been using Windows since Windows 3.11 (Used Win95, 98, 98SE, WinNT, 2000, and XP.) and I have NEVER had a virus take out my system for one simple reason. I compute like I *******. I use protection.

SiliconAddict
May 13, 2004, 08:15 AM
back in 96 I bought a P 120mhz with 32mb ram (screaming machine at the time) it came with 95 but for the first few weeks I ran 3.11 on it. man did it scream with that os. at that time having 3.11 on 32mb ram was like panther on 2gb now. my only good memory of a pc :)


The introduction of the Windows registry in Windows 95 was MS's biggest mistake in their history. That PoS is caused people more problems. They've made decent strides in Windows 2000 and XP with the reg but its still a massive Achilles heel for Windows. Thank god MS was smart enough to start making backups of the reg automatically. I'd still prefer OS X and *nix's implementation of plain text files for configurations.

cubist
May 13, 2004, 08:20 AM
OS with best GUI for x86: OS/2 3.0. WPS has many features which have never been seen in any other OS.
But you won't have any software to run.

Easiest to install: Lindows (Linspire) 4.5 Linux.
But it doesn't come with many packages you'll need.

Overall, probably your best choice is Red Hat.

idkew
May 13, 2004, 08:33 AM
Most Def Windows ME



I love seeing it crash on a multiple time a day basis for my gf's family.

Horrortaxi
May 13, 2004, 08:58 AM
back in 96 I bought a P 120mhz with 32mb ram (screaming machine at the time) it came with 95 but for the first few weeks I ran 3.11 on it. man did it scream with that os. at that time having 3.11 on 32mb ram was like panther on 2gb now. my only good memory of a pc :)
Everything went to hell after Windows 95. I didn't even like it at the time, but support for the OS I wanted, OS/2, mysteriously died around the release of Win 95.

iindigo
May 13, 2004, 09:22 AM
Mandrake Linux
BeOS 5

Both are speedy and stable - ESPECIALLY BeOS. BeOS makes and 250mhz PII feel like a 650Mhz PIII. It's also very stable. It also has a very Macish feeling to it. You can download it for free at:

http://www.bebits.com/

dvdh
May 13, 2004, 10:01 AM
I remember when I got my first pentium (a IBM M system rocketing along at 75 mhz.) it was preloaded with Windows 3.11 and IBM's own OS/2 Warp. Of the two, warp was by far the nicer operating system to work with. But alas, somehow it has vanished from the scene. Lamentably so, given that it was ahead of it's time.

Since then, short of Linux, which I have little experience with, it has been a dismal progression from OS to OS. (maybe the only near success for windows - was 2000)

Edit: Looking back at the post, I see I am not the only OS/2 fan. Please, IBM give us that system back.....although it wouldn't exactly get me switch from Mac. :)

Steven1621
May 13, 2004, 10:09 AM
mandrake and suse are quality versions of linux.

wrldwzrd89
May 13, 2004, 10:13 AM
The introduction of the Windows registry in Windows 95 was MS's biggest mistake in their history. That PoS is caused people more problems. They've made decent strides in Windows 2000 and XP with the reg but its still a massive Achilles heel for Windows. Thank god MS was smart enough to start making backups of the reg automatically. I'd still prefer OS X and *nix's implementation of plain text files for configurations.
I couldn't agree more. Windows needs to toss out the whole registry concept because it is inherently flawed. The biggest flaw in the Registry is actually itself. Let me explain. Let's use an example from Mac OS X - an application's preferences become corrupted. That's OK - the application can simply create a new preferences file - no other apps are affected. Now for the Windows counter-example: a Windows app experiences corrupt preferences. This application stores its preferences in the Windows Registry, so effectively we have a corrupt Registry. Windows tries to access another part of the Registry, but can't because of the corrupt part. Bang! Instant Windows crash - you reboot, but Windows won't boot now because it can't load its settings as long as the Registry's corrupted. If it wasn't for the automatic Registry backup feature, you'd have a worthless copy of Windows. Do you see the flaw now?

MorganX
May 13, 2004, 10:33 AM
If it wasn't for the automatic Registry backup feature, you'd have a worthless copy of Windows. Do you see the flaw now?

Since the registry debutted, I've never seen the theoretical scenarios you mentioned occur, and I've deal with a LOT of pcs, software, and hardware configs. So I'd have to say, it is a theoretical flaw that has not come to pass. I'd say the X86 platform stress tests theoretical flaws more than any other platform so we can conclude the registry is not a problem. In fact, I only hear it talked about by network administrators, who know how to use it, or Mac users.

MorganX
May 13, 2004, 10:37 AM
i'm so unbelievably fed up with windows xp, need an OS to install (how pathetic is it if you have six viruses on a 15 day old xp install, didnt even touch any email client and only downloaded and/or installed the service pack, iTunes, vs.net, office 2003 and stuff from TheOpenCD?!).


6 viruses on a 15-day XP install. Well, I'm not surprised. I take it XP and Office 2003 are retail and not also downloaded.

You can get 6 viruses and countless spyware in 15 minutes downloading from the Internet. Get an AntiVirus or install SP2 and buy your software.

Rower_CPU
May 13, 2004, 10:51 AM
6 viruses on a 15-day XP install. Well, I'm not surprised. I take it XP and Office 2003 are retail and not also downloaded.

You can get 6 viruses and countless spyware in 15 minutes downloading from the Internet. Get an AntiVirus or install SP2 and buy your software.

SP2 hasn't gone gold yet.

kwajo.com
May 13, 2004, 11:30 AM
i love seeing all these mentions of BeOS cause it's my favorite of all time :P get it now if you can, it's so great in many many ways. windows would be lucky ot be like it. OS X might be better now, but BeOS came out a long time ago and still does a good job against current builds of linux or windows.

applemacdude
May 13, 2004, 12:03 PM
Suse Linux 9.1 (http://www.suse.com/us/index.html)

abhishekit
May 13, 2004, 12:24 PM
red hat

bousozoku
May 13, 2004, 12:38 PM
DR-DOS/GEM was my favourite but DR-DOS with Windows 3.11 worked too and GEOS wasn't that bad either but there were few applications.

Out of today's non-Windows choices, I'd probably go with Sun's Java Desktop System.

dopefiend
May 13, 2004, 12:52 PM
SP2 hasn't gone gold yet.

Current version 2096 works great, i'd recommend going ahead and downloading it. Seems bug free on my windows machine

http://home.comcast.net/~killershroom/sp2.JPG

wrldwzrd89
May 13, 2004, 12:56 PM
Most Def Windows ME



I love seeing it crash on a multiple time a day basis for my gf's family.
:eek: Windows ME? :eek:
Wait just a minute, I see your point now...but I've never known a Windows user that loved Windows crashes (unless they also used Macs, like you do).

idkew
May 13, 2004, 12:59 PM
:eek: Windows ME? :eek:
Wait just a minute, I see your point now...but I've never known a Windows user that loved Windows crashes (unless they also used Macs, like you do).

i just find it funny they refuse to upgrade from the worst MSFT os ever made.

hours are spent fixing crashes, but they don't want to invest the time to reformat, upgrade.... by now they would have save 20 hours of work...


but- they have a pc, what do they expect? they have no firewall. HAD a wideopen 801.11 network, before i closed it, so i could use it....

thatwendigo
May 13, 2004, 01:30 PM
I don't own any x86 machines, but I was pretty impressed with my friend's knoppix (http://www.knoppix.org/) machine. About the only things I've seen that impressed me at all on anything Windows-related have been games. If they're not a big deal, then I see no reason not to go with FreeBSD or a Linux distribution.

dopefiend
May 13, 2004, 01:33 PM
I don't own any x86 machines, but I was pretty impressed with my friend's knoppix (http://www.knoppix.org/) machine.

Knoppix is great!

About the only things I've seen that impressed me at all on anything Windows-related have been games. If they're not a big deal, then I see no reason not to go with FreeBSD or a Linux distribution.

Games shouldn't hold you back from linux! Use http://www.winehq.com/ 's program.

Stable OS + gaming = happier life. :D

Horrortaxi
May 13, 2004, 01:55 PM
Edit: Looking back at the post, I see I am not the only OS/2 fan. Please, IBM give us that system back.....although it wouldn't exactly get me switch from Mac. :)

It's still out there and it's still stable. At this point you might as well use Linux though. Microsoft did a good job at out-muscling IBM. os/2warp had a chance once, but Windows 95 (technically Microsoft's marketing department) killed it. Sad. It wasn't the first time and it certainly wasn't the last time.

csubear
May 13, 2004, 02:03 PM
freeBSD(pain to install), Debian Linux(pain to install)

wrldwzrd89
May 13, 2004, 02:05 PM
Knoppix is great!



Games shouldn't hold you back from linux! Use http://www.winehq.com/ 's program.

Stable OS + gaming = happier life. :D

I love Knoppix too! It's my favorite x86 Linux distribution. I wonder if there's any way to use it on a hard drive, instead of on a CD - if this was possible, I'd put it on a Windows box and use it instead of Windows whenever possible (but I'd still keep Windows around since I may need it for something).

Rower_CPU
May 13, 2004, 02:07 PM
Current version 2096 works great, i'd recommend going ahead and downloading it. Seems bug free on my windows machine

No thanks - I don't feel like re-imaging 30+ Dells if/when it goes bad.

Once there's an official release, I'll test it out on a machine or two to see if there are any issues like Win2K SP4 before rolling it out.

MorganX
May 13, 2004, 02:09 PM
Current version 2096 works great, i'd recommend going ahead and downloading it. Seems bug free on my windows machine

http://home.comcast.net/~killershroom/sp2.JPG

Current version is 2120 and yes, it's been solid since RC1. I don't know why on earth they're talking about late summer release.

dopefiend
May 13, 2004, 02:12 PM
No thanks - I don't feel like re-imaging 30+ Dells if/when it goes bad.

:eek: I can understand that, lol.

Current version is 2120 and yes, it's been solid since RC1. I don't know why on earth they're talking about late summer release.

Me either, but I do know that people are going to love it and I bet its going to cut down on viruses being spread, as well as people installing stupid stuff in I.E.

saxman
May 13, 2004, 02:18 PM
The introduction of the Windows registry in Windows 95 was MS's biggest mistake in their history. That PoS is caused people more problems. They've made decent strides in Windows 2000 and XP with the reg but its still a massive Achilles heel for Windows. Thank god MS was smart enough to start making backups of the reg automatically.

...Windows 3.1 introduced the registry

http://www.win31.de/etips.htm#regedit


OS/2
Red Hat or Mandrake for *nix newbies
SuSE (Go Novell!)
BeOS
FreeBSD

MorganX
May 13, 2004, 02:18 PM
No thanks - I don't feel like re-imaging 30+ Dells if/when it goes bad.

Once there's an official release, I'll test it out on a machine or two to see if there are any issues like Win2K SP4 before rolling it out.


Two things:

1. VirtualPC: SP2 works great, as does Longhorn 4074 ;>

2. Ghost 8.0 (multicasting from a centralized console and great support for USB or Firewire, finally.)

These two products are fabulastic!

bousozoku
May 13, 2004, 02:43 PM
...Windows 3.1 introduced the registry

http://www.win31.de/etips.htm#regedit


OS/2
Red Hat or Mandrake for *nix newbies
SuSE (Go Novell!)
BeOS
FreeBSD

Windows for Workgroups 3.11 was quite a bit newer than Windows 3.1 and halfway toward Windows 95.

wrldwzrd89
May 13, 2004, 02:46 PM
i just find it funny they refuse to upgrade from the worst MSFT os ever made.

hours are spent fixing crashes, but they don't want to invest the time to reformat, upgrade.... by now they would have save 20 hours of work...


but- they have a pc, what do they expect? they have no firewall. HAD a wideopen 801.11 network, before i closed it, so i could use it....
Are you referring to Windows ME users in general, or a previous post that I haven't read? I agree with your point, though - I, too, find it funny.

Rower_CPU
May 13, 2004, 03:31 PM
Two things:

1. VirtualPC: SP2 works great, as does Longhorn 4074 ;>

2. Ghost 8.0 (multicasting from a centralized console and great support for USB or Firewire, finally.)

These two products are fabulastic!

I might look into VPC for some beta testing, if we ever get a decent budget again.

I use Ghost all the time for lab/staff machines. It's still a waste of my time to re-image often. That said, I am looking forward to the new WinPE features and NTFS support in Ghost 8.

Celeron
May 13, 2004, 03:36 PM
Obviously the responses I'm seeing are from people who are biased, which is to be expected considering this is a Mac forum. In any case, having been a PC user for about 10 years and just having purchased a PB about 2 months ago, I'm a little miffed about some comments.

Windows XP is by far the best Windows operating system Microsoft has released to date. All this talk about registry problems and getting six viruses on a 15 day old XP install stem from poor user management, not inherently flaws in the operating system. All of these problems can be avoided quite simply by:

1. Using a firewall. My machine has NEVER, EVER, been infected with any worms because of my firewall. If you have a broadband connection, there is no excuse for not having a firewall. You should get one for the sake of security whether you own a PC or a Mac.

2. Never has my registry become corrupted, nor has my machine refused to boot because some applications preferences have been screwed up. Its as easy as opening regedit and deleting the offending key should said "corruption" occur. This is no different from searching your Mac for the preferences file that is broken.

3. Most of the problems you have on the Windows platform is from 3rd party applications. The Mac comes with so much software built and installed by Apple, that most Mac users don't experience problems like these. I think we all know that if Microsoft started including additional applications like Mail, iPhoto, iDVD, iMovie, you would have even more companies screaming monopoly than there current are. I think its pretty clear that if Apple had the market share that Microsoft has, Apple would be in court over Safari instead of Microsoft and Internet Explorer.

In the end, the issue ultimately boils down to be an informed user capable of using your computer wisely. The Mac platform has just as many problems as the Windows platform. With such a small user base however any problems remain relatively low key. Try to tell me otherwise and I will point out the numerous security updates issued by Apple already for OSX.

Don't get me wrong, I dig my Mac, and I love OSX. I think OSX has Windows XP beaten by far in the usability department. Unfortunately, its the Mac zealot mentality that makes many Mac users look foolish when they spout off about PCs knowing little to nothing about them. The Mac platform is the way it is because Apple holds your hand the entire time you use it. Windows doesn't.

sigamy
May 13, 2004, 03:36 PM
You need an OS for x86??? OpenStep, of course!

BeOS would also be on my list. Or go really retro with DR-DOS 6 and GeoWorks/NewDeal.

Rower_CPU
May 13, 2004, 03:46 PM
...
All this talk about registry problems and getting six viruses on a 15 day old XP install stem from poor user management, not inherently flaws in the operating system.
...
In the end, the issue ultimately boils down to be an informed user capable of using your computer wisely. The Mac platform has just as many problems as the Windows platform. With such a small user base however any problems remain relatively low key. Try to tell me otherwise and I will point out the numerous security updates issued by Apple already for OSX.


I strongly disagree. OS X is much more secure out of the box and avoids enabling features such as RPC that enable remote exploitation of the system. Yes, you can make yourself a lot more secure, but why has it taken MS until SP2 to address these settings that should be on/off by default? OS X is safer to use without having to dig through system settings.

The existence of security updates for OS X is a moot point - all OSes have them; it's a question of degree. How many of Apple's security updates address flaws that could allow a 3rd party control of a system? How many of Microsoft's? Food for thought.

janey
May 13, 2004, 03:50 PM
haha thanks for the replies guys.
celeron: i am not joking about my virus dilemma and i'm not that biased when it comes to OSs, like i honestly think xp in some ways is better than os x, but now even those reasons to use xp are diminishing quickly. i'm just really frustrated with it right now.

difficult installs arent a big deal. i've installed debian, gentoo, *bsd, fedora...played with knoppix, etc.
but josh (http://forums.macrumors.com/member.php?u=5654) recommended freebsd, so i guess i'll go with that for now.

Celeron
May 13, 2004, 03:52 PM
I strongly disagree. OS X is much more secure out of the box and avoids enabling features such as RPC that enable remote exploitation of the system. Yes, you can make yourself a lot more secure, but why has it taken MS until SP2 to address these settings that should be on/off by default? OS X is safer to use without having to dig through system settings.

The existence of security updates for OS X is a moot point - all OSes have them; it's a question of degree. How many of Apple's security updates address flaws that could allow a 3rd party control of a system? How many of Microsoft's? Food for thought.

RPC is a required component of the Windows operating system. Turning it off renders the system completely nonfunctional.

Again, as I mentioned above, I believe that OSX has as many security problems as Windows, its just, as you say, the degree. Windows has infinately more users than OSX, as such more problems have come up. If the virus writer / hackers of the world directed their attention at OSX instead of Windows, you would see the same number of problems arise, guarenteed.

Rower_CPU
May 13, 2004, 03:59 PM
RPC is a required component of the Windows operating system. Turning it off renders the system completely nonfunctional.

Again, as I mentioned above, I believe that OSX has as many security problems as Windows, its just, as you say, the degree. Windows has infinately more users than OSX, as such more problems have come up. If the virus writer / hackers of the world directed their attention at OSX instead of Windows, you would see the same number of problems arise, guarenteed.

It's not just a numbers game it's about the severity of the flaw. "Security through obscurity" is a myth that cuts both ways - if there were flaws in OS X as bad as MS' they would be exploited, guaranteed.

janey
May 13, 2004, 04:06 PM
All this talk about registry problems and getting six viruses on a 15 day old XP install stem from poor user management, not inherently flaws in the operating system. All of these problems can be avoided quite simply by:
1. Using a firewall.
<snip>
Umm ive been using windows since 3.0, basically since i was born. dont give me **** like poor user management, because i am quit capable of using a damned computer. and yes, i have a firewall. and omfg, i dont even touch email and i have only downloaded two things: pearpc and a darwin install cd.
3. Most of the problems you have on the Windows platform is from 3rd party applications. The Mac comes with so much software built and installed by Apple, that most Mac users don't experience problems like these. I think we all know that if Microsoft started including additional applications like Mail, iPhoto, iDVD, iMovie, you would have even more companies screaming monopoly than there current are. I think its pretty clear that if Apple had the market share that Microsoft has, Apple would be in court over Safari instead of Microsoft and Internet Explorer.
Uhm okay. What did i install? office 2003. vs .net enterprise architect. iTunes. the damned security updates and service packs. miscellaneous software from theopencd (http://theopencd.sunsite.dk/), some antivirus software. Umm lets see...two apps from Microsoft, the updates from Microsoft. Those are NOT third party apps. And lets see...I don't use iCal or iSync, forget most of iLife. I actually use more third party apps on my Macs, for example Adium instead of iChat, SubEthaEdit and Office for TextEdit, CodeWarrior occasionally instead of Xcode, VLC and mplayer for QuickTime, LaunchBar instead of Finder occasionally, not to mention a whole slew of Adobe and Macromedia apps. Yes, Apple makes good software, but third party apps are just as good if not better than some of the stuff Apple does. And jeez, what do you think Outlook and Windows Movie Maker is?
In the end, the issue ultimately boils down to be an informed user capable of using your computer wisely. The Mac platform has just as many problems as the Windows platform. With such a small user base however any problems remain relatively low key. Try to tell me otherwise and I will point out the numerous security updates issued by Apple already for OSX.
Yes, thats obvious, but Apple doesnt release a security update every goddamned week. Maybe once for every minor update, if at all. Not one update for IE, then another for Outlook, then OMFG WINDOWS HAS A BIG HOLE OMFG OMFG OMFG OMFG OFMG. Okay i'm overexaggerating, but still.
Don't get me wrong, I dig my Mac, and I love OSX. I think OSX has Windows XP beaten by far in the usability department. Unfortunately, its the Mac zealot mentality that makes many Mac users look foolish when they spout off about PCs knowing little to nothing about them. The Mac platform is the way it is because Apple holds your hand the entire time you use it. Windows doesn't.
Urm and guess what i havent been pro Mac all my life, neither have i used only Macs. I know no OS is perfect, but guess what? You're acting just like a Windows zealot now. Apple doesnt hold your hand, Apple doesnt need to. Granted Apple has an easier time with their software, but Microsoft has more programmers, more money. Why can't they make quality software that is MORE inherently secure? Nobody said OS X is perfect, and nobody's complaining about it or releasing viruses for it because there arent a lot of users, but it would be nice if Microsoft spent more time fixing their problems than working on Longhorn. Meh, I'll reconsider installing any version of Windows after Longhorn is released, it looks quite sexy.

Celeron
May 13, 2004, 04:18 PM
Umm ive been using windows since 3.0, basically since i was born. dont give me **** like poor user management, because i am quit capable of using a damned computer. and yes, i have a firewall. and omfg, i dont even touch email and i have only downloaded two things: pearpc and a darwin install cd.

Uhm okay. What did i install? office 2003. vs .net enterprise architect. iTunes. the damned security updates and service packs. miscellaneous software from theopencd (http://theopencd.sunsite.dk/), some antivirus software. Umm lets see...two apps from Microsoft, the updates from Microsoft. Those are NOT third party apps. And lets see...I don't use iCal or iSync, forget most of iLife. I actually use more third party apps on my Macs, for example Adium instead of iChat, SubEthaEdit and Office for TextEdit, CodeWarrior occasionally instead of Xcode, VLC and mplayer for QuickTime, LaunchBar instead of Finder occasionally, not to mention a whole slew of Adobe and Macromedia apps. Yes, Apple makes good software, but third party apps are just as good if not better than some of the stuff Apple does. And jeez, what do you think Outlook and Windows Movie Maker is?

Yes, thats obvious, but Apple doesnt release a security update every goddamned week. Maybe once for every minor update, if at all. Not one update for IE, then another for Outlook, then OMFG WINDOWS HAS A BIG HOLE OMFG OMFG OMFG OMFG OFMG. Okay i'm overexaggerating, but still.

Urm and guess what i havent been pro Mac all my life, neither have i used only Macs. I know no OS is perfect, but guess what? You're acting just like a Windows zealot now. Apple doesnt hold your hand, Apple doesnt need to. Granted Apple has an easier time with their software, but Microsoft has more programmers, more money. Why can't they make quality software that is MORE inherently secure? Nobody said OS X is perfect, and nobody's complaining about it or releasing viruses for it because there arent a lot of users, but it would be nice if Microsoft spent more time fixing their problems than working on Longhorn. Meh, I'll reconsider installing any version of Windows after Longhorn is released, it looks quite sexy.

If you only installed the apps you listed, and you are behind a firewall, how do you propose you got infected by said 6 viruses? Was it behind some divine virus infector? Either your firewall isn't working properly, or you did something wrong / installed an infected file. If you firewall works properly, you can bring up a completely unpatched Windows XP box and not have to worry about any viruses seemingly "jumping" onto the computer.

You say Apple doesn't hold your hand? If thats not the case, why can I not access any BIOS or other machine settings on my Powerbook. Why can't I install driver updates from Nvidia or ATI rather than waiting for Apple to release them? For the love of god, why is there only one mouse button?

I'm not trying to be a "windows zealot" I'm just trying to point out that the problems you have are not indicative of the typically Windows users experience.

MorganX
May 13, 2004, 04:20 PM
haha thanks for the replies guys.
celeron: i am not joking about my virus dilemma and i'm not that biased when it comes to OSs, like i honestly think xp in some ways is better than os x, but now even those reasons to use xp are diminishing quickly. i'm just really frustrated with it right now.

difficult installs arent a big deal. i've installed debian, gentoo, *bsd, fedora...played with knoppix, etc.
but josh (http://forums.macrumors.com/member.php?u=5654) recommended freebsd, so i guess i'll go with that for now.

You said you installed antivirus, obviously it didn't do any good. What did you install? What virus' did you get? You said you haven't used email, so you either got them in downloaded software, I wouldn't rule out the open source cd, adware, or a rougue web site.

Virus' are sent by people, it's because of users sending them, and other users unknowingly installing them that there's a problem. The only secure OS is one that is not connected. Or one that is so obscure no one bothers with trying to damage it much. If you're tired ot the x86 platform because there are too many users who wish to do evil things, then I buy that. But WindowsXP is too insecure, etc. mmmmmrrrrgghhh... I don't think that's it.

monkeydo_jb
May 13, 2004, 04:24 PM
I'm going to have to chime in for SuSE 9.1 Pro.

I just got it in at work and it's quite streamlined and user-friendly.
I've already implemented it in my company's warehouse for running
5250 emulation as well as vt-220 emulation.

It comes with the 2.6 kernel, as well as the latest KDE (3.2) and GNOME (2.6?).

Installation was a snap except for choosing packages. That's where YAST (Yet
Another Setup Tool) is lacking still.

The other aspect that I am disappointed with is the amount of memory KDE now uses.
256MB is already overflowing by the time it gets entirely booted up. Just
make sure you have plenty of memory.


People are chiming in for Red Hat, but I lost my taste for them when they
turned the corner and became strictly enterprise.

Sure they contribute to Fedora, but only as a testing ground. Once new software is proven
running in Fedora, they implement it into their Enterprise server. Pretty smart, but still disappointing.


SuSE 9.1 is my current flavor of choice (I also enjoy Knoppix 3.4, Knoppix STD 0.1, and
Gentoo 2004.1) but I can't vouch for Mandrake 10, as I've never tried it out.

-jeff

janey
May 13, 2004, 04:25 PM
You said you installed antivirus, obviously it didn't do any good. What did you install? What virus' did you get? You said you haven't used email, so you either got them in downloaded software, I wouldn't rule out the open source cd, adware, or a rougue web site.

Most virus' aren't because of a flaw, it's because of users sending them, and other users unknowingly installing them. If you're tired ot the x86 platform because there are too many users who wish to do evil things, then I buy that. But WindowsXP is too insecure, etc. mmmmmrrrrgghhh... I don't think that's it.
i installed the antivirus apps after i noticed the speed. because i at least wanted to know what it was, and if i could remove it.

and btw, i honestly dont see the point of using Windows any longer. i swear i'm so ticked off right now i feel like sshing into the computer and installing any other OS right now. God, i'm not happy. I think the copy of MyDoom was from the disk image of my iBook's drive though, I had saved a few copies of it just for the heck of it. Still...that doesnt explain the others

csubear
May 13, 2004, 04:26 PM
Meh, I'll reconsider installing any version of Windows after Longhorn is released, it looks quite sexy.

If by sexy you mean cheap rip off of OS X? I don't think longhorn is going to catch on.

I havn't read too much, but my guess is that they are try to reinvent windows again, and i think they are going to have to break alot of leagcy win 9x programs to get a better OS. and if so they are going to need a "blue box" like classic, and that is not easy. basicly this is going to a make it or break it thing like OS X was for apple. Apple made it. Will Microsoft?

2cents

janey
May 13, 2004, 04:27 PM
If by sexy you mean cheap rip off of OS X? I don't think longhorn is going to catch on.

I havn't read too much, but my guess is that they are try to reinvent windows again, and i think they are going to have to break alot of leagcy win 9x programs to get a better OS. and if so they are going to need a "blue box" like classic, and that is not easy. basicly this is going to a make it or break it thing like OS X was for apple. Apple made it. Will Microsoft?

2cents
the black is attractive (its my favorite color), and although it just looks like XP skinned, I still would like to give it a chance, like I have done with every single version of Windows i can get my hands on. Some are not bad, some are horrid, but i'll still give it a chance.

Rower_CPU
May 13, 2004, 04:29 PM
Celeron-

Windows' firewall - why does it only block incoming traffic?

Mac BIOS - you've got Open Firmware for some low level settings, but a BIOS is overkill for a "closed" system like Apple's.

"Hand holding" - The one-button mouse is a throwback to the original Mac that Apple needs to get past; people know how to use 2+ button mice. But, in order for me to make Windows secure, I have to hold its hand. That is simply unacceptable.

"Typical" Windows user experience - you have seen the reports about how widespread virus (http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2004May/gee20040513025129.htm), worm (http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/2544212), spyware (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994745) are these days, haven't you?

monkeydo_jb
May 13, 2004, 04:32 PM
i installed the antivirus apps after i noticed the speed. because i at least wanted to know what it was, and if i could remove it.

and btw, i honestly dont see the point of using Windows any longer. i swear i'm so ticked off right now i feel like sshing into the computer and installing any other OS right now. God, i'm not happy. I think the copy of MyDoom was from the disk image of my iBook's drive though, I had saved a few copies of it just for the heck of it. Still...that doesnt explain the others



Here's (http://vil.nai.com/vil/stinger/) a slick little virus scanner.

It covers just the major iterations and is entirely free.



-jeff

monkeydo_jb
May 13, 2004, 04:37 PM
the black is attractive (its my favorite color), and although it just looks like XP skinned, I still would like to give it a chance, like I have done with every single version of Windows i can get my hands on. Some are not bad, some are horrid, but i'll still give it a chance.


Good luck affording a system of at least this caliber (granted it is a few years down the pipe):

dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today.

Mav451
May 13, 2004, 04:37 PM
ubergeek: i think you should consider applying for the record book (6 viruses/15 days...a lil less than 1virus/2days) :) Joking aside, though, I am having trouble trying to rationalize 6 viruses in 15 days. I mean, I've heard 1 or 2 in 3-4 days, and this lends itself to a hasty reformat, patching or whatnot.

But 6 viruses? What AV software detected it and removed it? Or were they not removed at all? I mean 6 viruses at once would be scary...I'm not even sure if the XP would work anymore.

What has my experience been? Well I have 2 computers I can relate to:

1) My own. My baby :) Haven't gotten a virus since the day I set it up last March of 2003. I have been using Firefox/Firebird since September, which has significantly cut down on spyware.

Used to use Zone Alarm on my '98SE box (1999-2003), but haven't since I went to XP.

2) Brothers comp--built it too :)
Well, he uses IE all the time--so it took me quite a while to remove the spyware (uninstall software involved and JV16 cleaning runs), but he rarely, if ever downloads the security updates, unless I force him too o_0. No viruses on his box either.

*Many things to note:
1) We're on college campus? I'm not sure if this increase/decrease our vulnerability
2) Both are running on the A7N8X mobo, with an onboard nVidia NIC.
3) Both run XP SP1 Integrated
If you installed XP, then upgraded to SP1...there may be some slip-ups in the update process. Never really trusted M$ with this stuff, so i choose to use Integrated, which guarantees its working out of the box (SP1 fixes).

7on
May 13, 2004, 04:46 PM
My college shuts off computer internet access when you get a virus. Incidentally the largest virus outbreaks were during finals.

Anyhoo, I'm planning on checking out Windows 2003 to see what that's like. The XP install on the family computer needs a reinstall but I'm checking it out first on VPC first and check about any differences. If Longhorn begins to work right then it'll be pie, if not I dunno. For most people it'd impossible to switch from Windows. For most people if there isn't a start button in the lower left hand corner of the screen their head explodes. Trust me, I've seen it happen. It takes while a while to clean up too.

Mav451
May 13, 2004, 04:48 PM
Celeron-

Windows' firewall - why does it only block incoming traffic?



Are you sure its only incoming? While i am no network geek (I'm only H/W geek sorry, :) ), from this website, it seems, correct me if i'm wrong, that it blocks both incoming and outgoing:

http://www.wown.com/articles_tutorials/Windows_XP_SP2_New_Security_Features_Review.html

http://www.wown.com/img/upl/image0281082385685640.jpg

Rower_CPU
May 13, 2004, 04:51 PM
Are you sure its only incoming? While i am no network geek (I'm only H/W geek sorry, :) ), from this website, it seems, correct me if i'm wrong, that it blocks both incoming and outgoing:

http://www.wown.com/articles_tutorials/Windows_XP_SP2_New_Security_Features_Review.html

http://www.wown.com/img/upl/image0281082385685640.jpg

That's the new FW in SP2 - XP doesn't currently block outgoing traffic.

monkeydo_jb
May 13, 2004, 04:51 PM
Anyhoo, I'm planning on checking out Windows 2003 to see what that's like. The XP install on the family computer needs a reinstall but I'm checking it out first on VPC first and check about any differences.

When you say Windows® 2003, do you mean Server or are you planning on cracking it
to run as a desktop OS?



-jeff

Mav451
May 13, 2004, 04:55 PM
That's the new FW in SP2 - XP doesn't currently block outgoing traffic.

Yeah I think we're seeing deja vu...'98 was crappy until '98SE came out...and XP SP2 is looking like what XP should have been 3 years ago, when it was first released :(

Rower_CPU
May 13, 2004, 04:57 PM
Yeah I think we're seeing deja vu...'98 was crappy until '98SE came out...and XP SP2 is looking like what XP should have been 3 years ago, when it was first released :(

The silver lining is that if SP2 lives up to the hype, it should be pretty OK for us on the x86 side of things until Longhorn moseys in.

7on
May 13, 2004, 05:26 PM
When you say Windows® 2003, do you mean Server or are you planning on cracking it
to run as a desktop OS?



-jeff

I was was under the impression that a Server OS just has extra bells and whistles that a Desktop OS doesn't have. Still installing so we shall see.

7on
May 13, 2004, 05:57 PM
Just installed 2003. Meh, it's so so. IE's security is higher (by notification of IE's first launch). Multiple accounts are hard to manage (naturally). It's basically 2000 with server features. So if you're going Windows, it might just be safe going with XP or 2000 rather than 2003 (unless you manage servers of course :))

Celeron
May 13, 2004, 06:08 PM
Celeron-

Windows' firewall - why does it only block incoming traffic?

Mac BIOS - you've got Open Firmware for some low level settings, but a BIOS is overkill for a "closed" system like Apple's.

"Hand holding" - The one-button mouse is a throwback to the original Mac that Apple needs to get past; people know how to use 2+ button mice. But, in order for me to make Windows secure, I have to hold its hand. That is simply unacceptable.

"Typical" Windows user experience - you have seen the reports about how widespread virus (http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2004May/gee20040513025129.htm), worm (http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/business/2544212), spyware (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994745) are these days, haven't you?

Why does it only block incoming traffic? Thats the entire point of a traditional firewall. Programs like ZoneAlarm do per application blocking, but technically, all a firewall does is absure internal machines from external networks. Personally, I don't trust software firewalls and feel much more comfortable on a hardware solution.

MorganX
May 13, 2004, 06:21 PM
Good luck affording a system of at least this caliber (granted it is a few years down the pipe):

Those specs are bogus. I run Longhorn on a 2.4Ghz P4 with 512M and a Radeon 9600. No performance hiccups whatsoever. None. After I realized it was too alpha for me, I went back to XP (Ghosted image) and installed Longhorn I a VirtualPC with 256M and 16G HD. Runs almost as well as natively.

Longhorn will probably look more like this when released:

Rower_CPU
May 13, 2004, 06:22 PM
Why does it only block incoming traffic? Thats the entire point of a traditional firewall. Programs like ZoneAlarm do per application blocking, but technically, all a firewall does is absure internal machines from external networks. Personally, I don't trust software firewalls and feel much more comfortable on a hardware solution.

Good firewalls also prevent outgoing traffic so that we don't have things like Sasser propagating themselves out from infected machines or trojans opening back doors into your system. SP2 will add this functionality, hindsight being 20/20.

janey
May 13, 2004, 08:33 PM
well not including variants its iirc 4. i've removed 5, using whatever removal tools were online/on the app and stuff, and one i dont know how the hell it found it...but eh.
i tried and uninstalled kaspersky antivirus (whatever its called), and now i'm using norton antivirus pro 2004


Those specs for Longhorn are just estimates, I highly doubt they'd suggest something that insanely powerful, but then again because it will be released at the earliest probably 2007, those specs are expected.
Bah :x

monkeydo_jb
May 13, 2004, 08:53 PM
Those specs are bogus.


Not according to this (http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,1581842,00.asp)

Is your filesystem WinFS or still NTFS? WinFS is supposed to render a huge performance hit.



-jeff

windowsblowsass
May 13, 2004, 09:14 PM
[0SIZE=7]WINDOWS RG(REALLY GOOD EWDITION)[/SIZE]
its great just google for it check out word

wrldwzrd89
May 14, 2004, 05:03 AM
[0SIZE=7]WINDOWS RG(REALLY GOOD EWDITION)[/SIZE]
its great just google for it check out word
Don't bother, go here (http://www.deanliou.com/WinRG/) instead if you want to try out WinRG. A word of warning - it's funniest on a Windows machine running IE. It works just fine in Safari for Mac (but the keyboard shortcut to exit the demo doesn't work - you have to close the window instead).

MorganX
May 14, 2004, 07:50 AM
Not according to this (http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,1995,1581842,00.asp)

Is your filesystem WinFS or still NTFS? WinFS is supposed to render a huge performance hit.
-jeff

You missed the part where I said I have it and have run it stand alone and in a VirtualPC (currently) on XP.

In posts elsewhere here I mentioned the only area that could be considered slow was disk access. But not from WinFS, general disk access. Probably becasue the pre-alpha-alpha doesn't have much i/o caching or optimization at pre-alpha-alpha stage.

Those specs are ridiculous and despite what Mary J Foley reposts, I can tell you as fact, the current alpha has the same requirements and WindowsXP. It actually installs faster and the UI is faster already in some areas.

MorganX
May 14, 2004, 08:00 AM
well not including variants its iirc 4. i've removed 5, using whatever removal tools were online/on the app and stuff, and one i dont know how the hell it found it...but eh.
i tried and uninstalled kaspersky antivirus (whatever its called), and now i'm using norton antivirus pro 2004

Dang, you really got infected good. Sure no one used Kaazaa on your PC? You should be safe with Norton. Trend PCCillin is also good. Does a little better with IRC and HTML tricks. Plugs right into SP2s Security Center nicely too. I'm sure Norton will as well when SP2 goes final.

Anyway, I suppose your experience isn't that uncommon. Most people don't get their PC clean and get antivirus installed. Security has to be a major part of the OS now and XPs Security Center handles it elegantly IMO. I think other OS' including OS X will follow suit with similar security presentations. Times change and they're only going to get worse in this area.

I often wonder, what kind of dorks have no life and sit around writing adware... I still have no answer.

monkeydo_jb
May 14, 2004, 08:31 AM
You missed the part where I said I have it and have run it stand alone and in a VirtualPC (currently) on XP.

In posts elsewhere here I mentioned the only area that could be considered slow was disk access. But not from WinFS, general disk access.

Actually, I caught that part. Thanks, though.

I take those specs with a grain of salt as well, but you need to realize that M$ has about
two more years to add more features and bloat.

You never clearly responded to my question about the filesystem. As I understood it,
WinFS wasn't implemented yet. I haven't downloaded any of the Alphas, so I'm interested to know.



-jeff

monkeydo_jb
May 14, 2004, 08:46 AM
Sorry for the double post, but I just ran across this.

Looks like (http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-5212077.html?tag=cnetfd.buzz) WinFS' full implementation will be delayed a bit.




Advanced search features that Gates has termed the "Holy Grail" of Longhorn, the next major version of Windows, won't be fully in place until 2009, Bob Muglia, the senior vice president in charge of Windows server development, told CNET News.com.

wrldwzrd89
May 14, 2004, 08:55 AM
Sorry for the double post, but I just ran across this.

Looks like (http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-5212077.html?tag=cnetfd.buzz) WinFS' full implementation will be delayed a bit.
I don't know if you've checked out the Virtual PC 7 Preview thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=71627&page=5), but there's a post about this on Page 5 by Beck446.

monkeydo_jb
May 14, 2004, 09:09 AM
I don't know if you've checked out the Virtual PC 7 Preview thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=71627&page=5), but there's a post about this on Page 5 by Beck446.


No, I hadn't seen that. Scooped again.

MorganX
May 14, 2004, 10:22 AM
You never clearly responded to my question about the filesystem. As I understood it,
WinFS wasn't implemented yet. I haven't downloaded any of the Alphas, so I'm interested to know.
-jeff

Yes it is implemented in 4074. To what extent, I couldn't tell you. For a non-developer all it translates to is extra meta data. IMO, there's way too much info at a high level. I think most of that should be, and will be hidden better. 4074 is probably 5 or so builds behind what MS was showing at WinHEC in their demonstrations.

The full scope of WinFS (Server-side, domain-wide) may not be implemented for several more years according to reports. I don't expect even the full WinFS to cause that much of a problem. x86 has always had great integer performance as well as disk i/o performance (on Windows anyway).

janey
May 14, 2004, 12:20 PM
Dang, you really got infected good. Sure no one used Kaazaa on your PC?
i'm not crazy enough to install kazaa :)

Mav451
May 14, 2004, 12:47 PM
AHHH i just thought of something.

Did you have your ethernet cable already connected throughout your installation process? When you installed your security updates?

If it is at all possible, i think that when you are installing XP, you should have the security updates on a CD so you can install of them BEFORE connecting to the network (be it cable/dsl/etc.)

If it wasn't connected, then ignore me :)

MorganX
May 14, 2004, 01:24 PM
i'm not crazy enough to install kazaa :)

Good! I have to admit, I clicked on one adware install in IE before. It took maybe 2 seconds to install and I had over 5 pesky adware progs that took a week to get rid of. I finally got Pest Control.

I was downloading a zip file and the IE dialog said something.zip. I clicked before I realized if it said .zip, that meant it had another extension, .exe. The dialog didn't say run it said save/open. Of course I opened it which ran the install.

In a weak moment, I was getting a keygen. I ended up buying what I was getting the keygen for. The best thing about SP2 is it stops all executables and gives you and inquiry. However, I did get my search page hijacked yesterday with SP2 and Trend Antivirus. Unfortunately, Opera doesn't work with ISA Server. I did download it but couldn't do much with it.

dopefiend
May 14, 2004, 01:26 PM
i'm not crazy enough to install kazaa :)


Kazaa lite ;)

Mav451
May 14, 2004, 01:27 PM
Hmm some people mentioned AvantBrowser, b/c it runs off the IE engine...I wonder if Avantbrowser can be an "IE alternative", while we still use Firefox/Opera for the rest?

janey
May 14, 2004, 03:13 PM
Did you have your ethernet cable already connected throughout your installation process? When you installed your security updates?
Hmm i'm not sure. I know I haven't used the ethernet cable yet, but I might have been using wifi.

SiliconAddict
May 14, 2004, 04:58 PM
Good luck affording a system of at least this caliber (granted it is a few years down the pipe):

That's NOT the specs for Longhorn. This HAS been discussed ad nauseum. It was what was expected to be standard in 3-4 years. Not the blasted system requirments.

I've run Longhorn Alpha. Yes ALPHA with its buggy code and debug features all turned on on my 800Mhz 384MB laptop and it runs. Slow but it does run.

SiliconAddict
May 14, 2004, 05:04 PM
Current version is 2120 and yes, it's been solid since RC1. I don't know why on earth they're talking about late summer release.

Because it breaks some apps....badly. I've had a number of apps error out on startup and that's with their current RC1 package. I'm not all that surprised that MS is pushing it back what with the tweaks they are doing to security under the hood. You don't fix god knows how many years of bad code with one SP and one painful upgrade.
Also they NEED to give developers more time to test their software with this patch. Off the top of my head I had at least 7 applications die on me after installing SP2.

SiliconAddict
May 14, 2004, 05:09 PM
...Windows 3.1 introduced the registry

http://www.win31.de/etips.htm#regedit



:eek:
Why is it I've never heard of this before. Every class seminar book has always referenced Windows 95 as the introduction of the registry.


Heh. Learn something new everyday. Thanks.

SiliconAddict
May 14, 2004, 05:18 PM
Yeah I think we're seeing deja vu...'98 was crappy until '98SE came out...and XP SP2 is looking like what XP should have been 3 years ago, when it was first released :(


*Coughs*OS 10.0*coughs*

Mav451
May 14, 2004, 06:10 PM
Hehe Silicon Addict; but the problem is, I only started using/playing around with OSX a few months ago (10.3.2), so I have no idea what 10.0 was like at all.

Would my first impressions with Macs been different if I had tried 10.0 instead of 10.3.2 (with its Expose haha)?

SiliconAddict
May 15, 2004, 12:59 PM
Hehe Silicon Addict; but the problem is, I only started using/playing around with OSX a few months ago (10.3.2), so I have no idea what 10.0 was like at all.

Would my first impressions with Macs been different if I had tried 10.0 instead of 10.3.2 (with its Expose haha)?


I've never played with 10.0 myself but lets put it this way. Apple gave 10.1 away for free. SP's like 10.3.x are typically free. Major, or minor depending on your point of view, 3.X releases never are. The reason was that 10.0 was craptastic and rather crash prone that Apple made good by giving .1 away to those brave few that dared take the OS X challenge. Check out this rather extensive review at ARSTechnica:
OS 10.0 (http://arstechnica.com/reviews/01q2/macos-x-final/macos-x-1.html)

OS 10.1 (http://arstechnica.com/reviews/01q4/macosx-10.1/macosx-10.1.html)

OS 10.2 (http://arstechnica.com/reviews/02q3/macosx-10.2/macosx-10.2-1.html)

OS 10.3 (http://arstechnica.com/reviews/003/panther/macosx-10.3-1.html)

The praise in each review has steadily increased and with good reason. 10.3 is what 10.0 should have been. I'm not going to argue that OS X isn't one hell of a sweat OS. It is. I think its progression has been no different then any other OS. It starts off somewhat buggy and gradually gets better.
I expect this from Longhorn as well. Its a total rewrite from the ground up. I think we are going to see a ton of non critical patches for Longhorn soon after release. Prob nto for security but compatibility, and functionality.

*shrugs* At this point I’m more excited about OS X: Tiger. I want to see what apple has up their Steve…oops sorry sleeve. ;)

Gherkin
May 15, 2004, 01:11 PM
This is ridiculous. 6 viruses after 15 days? You obviously have no idea how to run a Windows based PC. I've used Windows since 3.11 and I've never had a virus... EVER.

janey
May 15, 2004, 07:36 PM
This is ridiculous. 6 viruses after 15 days? You obviously have no idea how to run a Windows based PC. I've used Windows since 3.11 and I've never had a virus... EVER.
now now, be gentle.
i've been using windows a few minor versions before you, and i'm not stupid. i do know enough to know how to remove it, and trash the copies of viruses i have. i have some clue. what, do you want me to bitch about some problem you have? i was just asking what other OSs people recommended, by the way i'm goign to install gentoo tonight. oh hooray for you, you havent gotten a single virus yet. Wow. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: what an achievement. :rolleyes:
and by the way, even with 6 viruses in 15 days, that still averages out to be less than one virus every year i've been using computers.

applemacdude
May 19, 2004, 07:05 PM
I'm going to have to chime in for SuSE 9.1 Pro.

I just got it in at work and it's quite streamlined and user-friendly.
I've already implemented it in my company's warehouse for running
5250 emulation as well as vt-220 emulation.

It comes with the 2.6 kernel, as well as the latest KDE (3.2) and GNOME (2.6?).

Installation was a snap except for choosing packages. That's where YAST (Yet
Another Setup Tool) is lacking still.

The other aspect that I am disappointed with is the amount of memory KDE now uses.
256MB is already overflowing by the time it gets entirely booted up. Just
make sure you have plenty of memory.


People are chiming in for Red Hat, but I lost my taste for them when they
turned the corner and became strictly enterprise.

Sure they contribute to Fedora, but only as a testing ground. Once new software is proven
running in Fedora, they implement it into their Enterprise server. Pretty smart, but still disappointing.


SuSE 9.1 is my current flavor of choice (I also enjoy Knoppix 3.4, Knoppix STD 0.1, and
Gentoo 2004.1) but I can't vouch for Mandrake 10, as I've never tried it out.

-jeff

Yeah its great anyways since i live in oakland and they r located here i can get anyone a copy of 9.1 for free if they pay shipping