I used Windows XP today--Now I have a Headache!

[FinnishFlash]

192MB is really...trying. Even 256MB is the bare minimum. XP's GUI (even without the original tacky theme) takes a toll on the CPU/RAM. If you are using hardware that is more than 5 years old (predating the first Athlons), I strongly recommend you get some new hardware first.

I'm using XP on a Toshiba Satellite P2 MMX 166MHz with 64Mb of RAM. And it works fairly well. I use it for browsing the internet, email, office... And it's connected thru a D-Link WLAN PCMCIA-card. No problems here -not a single BSOD. Of course I have other computers as well ( like 1400c PowerBook with OS 8.5 and WLAN ).

 

[Mav451]

Interesting. Another example of XP being usable--proving even my own standards (I thought 192 was bad )wrong. I presume there must be a great deal of HD swapping...I have no idea if you could play mp3s/videos at the same time (codecs can take 15-20% CPU threads...the slower the CPU the higher the usage). But, regardless, it is WORKING for you. That is most important thing.

 

[Mord]

"pretty decent processor" - that could be anything. Was it a celeron? Athlon? Pentium? Barton? We have no idea what it was. For all we know, it could be a Celeron 2.0ghz, god forbid, which performs even worse than a 5-year old AMD Thunderbird that run on 100Mhz FSBs.

Scrolling sucked? This is a video driver issue. If you don't have the right driver, it will not interact with DirectX9 (or 8.1, if they didn't upgrade), and thus you have your sluggish scrolling--well sluggish anything.

I don't believe that Windows controlled your behavior. What a blatant blanket statement for your trouble. It is your BIAS, your lack of knowledge and experience that controlled you. Please, enough of the stereotypes and bigotry. It really makes me sick.

*I am really suprised you burned through "finder". I don't know anyone who uses the default Windows software to burn--when Nero or Roxio SHOULD have come with the burner, and are FAR superior alternatives.*

That decision alone serves as a metaphor for your knowledge--and it taints what little factual information you have posted as your "experience".

time and time again you prove yourself wrong in these mac Vs pc forums

you confuse people about the way they should have done something using all these different apps and fixes and patches when any idiot can do it on OS X you prove that you need an comp degree to use widows.

it may work for you but it dosent work for the rest of the world

 

[edesignuk]

time and time again you prove yourself wrong in these mac Vs pc forums

And you prove yourself an ignorant mac fanboy.

you confuse people about the way they should have done something using all these different apps and fixes and patches when any idiot can do it on OS X you prove that you need an comp degree to use widows.

There is nothing "confusing" about Mav451's post. What is it you can't understand?

it may work for you but it dosent work for the rest of the world

I think you are a bit back to front there, because on market share that comment should be the other way round