Why Windows XP sucks.

[Timelessblur]

No I dont think Mac useser are more tech savey people. They general pop is about the same as windows pop. Most them are clueless and dont know what they are doing. Just OSX is a lot more forgiving if you dont do critcal updates (which now by defaulted is automaticly download instaled on windows). a lot more forgiving in lack of antivirus (it is a matter of time before OSX gets some big viruses). Forgiving in not having a firewall (which if you dont have a firewall I still going to say you are an idiot since the main reason to have a firewall is to keep people out and to control what data is sent out from your computer)

 

[edesignuk]

9. I re-install Windows every couple of months, using a Symantec Ghost image I took of a clean post-SP2 installation. I can get all my apps up and running in a few hours.

As you can see from my previous posts in this thread, I don't think that Windows is terrible...that said...until I read No.9 things were going well, then you completely destroyed any argument you were trying to make.

 

[Yotabyte]

Deep down inside I do, infact, love windows (and edesignuk's avatar )

Nice protection VincentVega, but I doubt you or any one would be getting many BSOD's in XP. I guess I am really too lazy to be punctual with imageing, and formatting, and updating, etc. On the other hand, I neglect this PC's security as downloading updates on a modem is like using a tap to re-fil the pacific ocean. I have norton autoupdate, and that's about it. Took me a good two hours to download an update for my firewall too. So I guess I really don't care much for this comp! Hehe...

Also with that image I posted, the entire reason I posted it was to point out how a company with so much business, and so many funds, and one that has released so many distributions of itself is so vulnerable to viruses itself, (the virus popup keeps popping up, which is I would say the definition of a program exploit!). I also know the status OK thing is not related to current virus counts on the PC, but don't you think it should? A system is not OK in from anti-virus programs perspective if your system is a petri dish filled with mutated viruses as long as the petri dish was cleaned a week before use...

 

[IJ Reilly]

My objections to Windows are less technical. IMO, the UI is an utter disaster. It's a perfect example of a product designed by an engineer without the first idea how human beings will interact with the machine. And after nearly ten years, Microsoft hasn't admitted its basic flaws and corrected them. Their idea of "improving" the UI with XP was to give the old UI a Martha Stewart color scheme and apply shadows gratuitously, but otherwise leave the basic interface flaws uncorrected. I guess they don't need to care.

 

[Timelessblur]

My objections to Windows are less technical. IMO, the UI is an utter disaster. It's a perfect example of a product designed by an engineer without the first idea how human beings will interact with the machine. And after nearly ten years, Microsoft hasn't admitted its basic flaws and corrected them. Their idea of "improving" the UI with XP was to give the old UI a Martha Stewart color scheme and apply shadows gratuitously, but otherwise leave the basic interface flaws uncorrected. I guess they don't need to care.

I dont call that a valied aregument because I could easily make a list of things that I have hate and I have always hated about the mac OS dating back to the first mac and the list as only grown since then

 

[russed]

9. I re-install Windows every couple of months, using a Symantec Ghost image I took of a clean post-SP2 installation. I can get all my apps up and running in a few hours.

what i was saying before, a good os should mean you really dont have to do this. with my windows box at home it feels in need of a reinstall every few months (and i am sensible with how i use it) with my pb i have had it nearly a year and a half and if feels just as quick as when i got it. i beleive that is a sign of a good os.

 

[VincentVega]

what i was saying before, a good os should mean you really dont have to do this. with my windows box at home it feels in need of a reinstall every few months (and i am sensible with how i use it) with my pb i have had it nearly a year and a half and if feels just as quick as when i got it. i beleive that is a sign of a good os.

I agree. With Windows, you don't really get a choice. The registry (possibly the worst idea, ever?) fills up with crap, software doesn't uninstall properly and so on. It's just easier to fire up Ghost and ten minutes later, I have a nice fresh XP installation, including Office 2K3, VS.Net and all my settings in place. If you do it as often as I do, it's not really that much of an inconvenience, though in ideal world you shouldn't have to do it (as you say). From what I've read and seen about Longhorn/Windows 20xx, I can't see basic tenets of the design - the Registry and the like - being improved to any great degree.

I'm not overly experienced with OS X (though I do want to get an Apple laptop (at least) at some point in the future to go with my iPod - I can't switch entirely because of programs like VS.Net (which is useful for work) and Chief Architect (which I love)) though I have used Linux which has some similarities to OS X. My distribution of choice was Gentoo, and keeping it up-to-date was fairly painless (though the compiling was a PITA). From what I can see from OS X, updating it is much easier and doesn't have to take as long. Which sounds great!

Incidentally, I don't mind the "Martha Stewart" UI in XP. The "Blue" and "Olive" themes are hideous, but the "Silver" one isn't half bad. And if you turn ClearType on, you'll get anti-aliased fonts like OS X. Windows is getting there, but slowly. Very slowly. Compared to previous versions of Windows, XP is a complete triumph.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

I agree. With Windows, you don't really get a choice. The registry (possibly the worst idea, ever?) fills up with crap, software doesn't uninstall properly and so on. It's just easier to fire up Ghost and ten minutes later, I have a nice fresh XP installation, including Office 2K3, VS.Net and all my settings in place. If you do it as often as I do, it's not really that much of an inconvenience, though in ideal world you shouldn't have to do it (as you say). From what I've read and seen about Longhorn/Windows 20xx, I can't see basic tenets of the design - the Registry and the like - being improved to any great degree.

I'm not overly experienced with OS X (though I do want to get an Apple laptop (at least) at some point in the future to go with my iPod - I can't switch entirely because of programs like VS.Net (which is useful for work) and Chief Architect (which I love)) though I have used Linux which has some similarities to OS X. My distribution of choice was Gentoo, and keeping it up-to-date was fairly painless (though the compiling was a PITA). From what I can see from OS X, updating it is much easier and doesn't have to take as long. Which sounds great!

Incidentally, I don't mind the "Martha Stewart" UI in XP. The "Blue" and "Olive" themes are hideous, but the "Silver" one isn't half bad. And if you turn ClearType on, you'll get anti-aliased fonts like OS X. Windows is getting there, but slowly. Very slowly. Compared to previous versions of Windows, XP is a complete triumph.

What I'd do in your case is become an "adder", just like me - except the other way around. I started out with just a Mac, but I bought a Windows PC because I needed one for some things I couldn't do on the Mac.

 

[Mechcozmo]

I have some adware on my Windoze machine. I can't get rid of it. Good old McAffee can't do anything to it. I can 'quarantine' it but that doesn't do anything. It really sucks. I ended up looking at those 4 files and deleting them and then replacing them with notepad files with whatever extensions and filenames they had.

I hate XP because of the secuirity threat. Yes, I can secure it (I use Mozilla, have a two routers and a hub between this computer and the internet, and do weekly virus scans) but it is a major pain! I really hate that I need to do a virus sweep before I can use it. And the defragmenting that needs to be done... every two months. Every so often I need to check up on the BIOS to make sure than Windows has not tried to change my processor (Athlon XP 2500+) to some other setting.
Also, the file name extensions... I was rather upset when they showed up in 10.1. I like those to be hidden. ~Sigh~

 

[Yotabyte]

I have some adware on my Windoze machine. I can't get rid of it. Good old McAffee can't do anything to it. I can 'quarantine' it but that doesn't do anything. It really sucks. I ended up looking at those 4 files and deleting them and then replacing them with notepad files with whatever extensions and filenames they had.

I hate XP because of the secuirity threat. Yes, I can secure it (I use Mozilla, have a two routers and a hub between this computer and the internet, and do weekly virus scans) but it is a major pain! I really hate that I need to do a virus sweep before I can use it. And the defragmenting that needs to be done... every two months. Every so often I need to check up on the BIOS to make sure than Windows has not tried to change my processor (Athlon XP 2500+) to some other setting.
Also, the file name extensions... I was rather upset when they showed up in 10.1. I like those to be hidden. ~Sigh~

Get Adaware (do a google search), use that to scan your system. Also, many of these spyware producers have ways of removing spyware as they are all paranoid about being sued and want a way of defending their hide, so also look around and see if they have removal tools.

If you're installing and erasing a lot of stuff often, that is probably why you have to defrag. A good hard drive is a fragmented one! Although, I used my grandfathers computer for the first time in 4 years and the fragmentation level was something nasty like 90% so that isn't good.

Windows making BIOS changes????????

 

[IJ Reilly]

I dont call that a valied aregument because I could easily make a list of things that I have hate and I have always hated about the mac OS dating back to the first mac and the list as only grown since then

Go for it. Some things about the Mac UI are certainly less than perfect, and I could list quite a few gripes too -- but as far as I'm concerned, the Windows UI is just plain bad to the bone. No aspect of it appears to have been completely thought out in human interaction terms. I'd also point out that Apple is actively working to refine the the Mac UI, but OTOH Microsoft hasn't made any significant changes in the Windows UI nearly ten years, which suggest they think they've gotten it about right (or don't have to care that they haven't). These facts alone should tell you volumes about how the two companies approach the user interface.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Incidentally, I don't mind the "Martha Stewart" UI in XP. The "Blue" and "Olive" themes are hideous, but the "Silver" one isn't half bad. And if you turn ClearType on, you'll get anti-aliased fonts like OS X. Windows is getting there, but slowly. Very slowly. Compared to previous versions of Windows, XP is a complete triumph.

You've set the bar pretty low if you can call XP a triumph, complete or otherwise. Technically it's obviously better than the various iterations of 9x, but that's not saying much. My main objection to the color schemes in XP isn't so much that I hate the colors (though they are pretty bad), but that Microsoft thought they'd made the UI better simply by adding pastel shades and shadows. Microsoft's approach to product design has always been about trying to make the user feel superficially better about using the product without actually making it better to use -- "tarting up the pig," it's called.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Go for it. Some things about the Mac UI are certainly less than perfect, and I could list quite a few gripes too -- but as far as I'm concerned, the Windows UI is just plain bad to the bone. No aspect of it appears to have been completely thought out in human interaction terms. I'd also point out that Apple is actively working to refine the the Mac UI, but OTOH Microsoft hasn't made any significant changes in the Windows UI nearly ten years, which suggest they think they've gotten it about right (or don't have to care that they haven't). These facts alone should tell you volumes about how the two companies approach the user interface.

So, does that mean for every point against Mac OS X, five can be brought against Windows XP? Therefore the score is:

Mac OS X: -1
Windows XP: -5

 

[IJ Reilly]

So, does that mean for every point against Mac OS X, five can be brought against Windows XP? Therefore the score is:

Mac OS X: -1
Windows XP: -5

I dunno, never thought of it quite that way. It isn't hard to distinguish relatively good design from relatively poor design. Computers aren't so much different than any other product. We make these sorts of qualitative distinctions all the time in the products we buy.

 

[Timelessblur]

I dunno, never thought of it quite that way. It isn't hard to distinguish relatively good design from relatively poor design. Computers aren't so much different than any other product. We make these sorts of qualitative distinctions all the time in the products we buy.

Hmm a lot of the stuff I hate about OSX UI is just personal perfeince stuff. Same as people complaints about the UI of XP. (secuitry is another matter) In the UI of OSX I hate the menu bar placement. I hate the lack of a task bar. I hate the fact that you can not full screen. but it mostly things like that.

 

[Mechcozmo]

Windows making BIOS changes????????

Thanks for the suggestion. And yes, it does on compatible motherboards change stuff around. Annoying when it hangs due to bad speed settings...

 

[hulugu]

Agree with all of the above who say it is not that hard to keep your computer safe and sound, and it does not take a *complete dweeb* ... Now I will concede that building your own computer takes a certain level of dweebyness, but the chicks dig that right . I personally always use XP Pro and then just change a few things over in the registry and a few other various places to close up a few open doors...NAV Cp, SpyBot, AdAware...um I think that is all I use and I have been virus free for...evar. No crazy programs in the Task manager, etc. It doesn't take too long to figure out what is what and close what you don't want/use.

This always strikes me as hilarious, akin to buying a new car tinkering with the engine, changing the tires, repainting it all just to get common performance. Changing things in the registry may be necessary, but what a hassle.

What about me, Toe? I have both a Mac and a Windows machine...but the Windows machine is permanently disconnected from the Internet. If I want to send something to my Windows machine, I just go online with my Mac, grab the file(s), then use Windows sharing to send them over. The Mac connects with AirPort wireless, and an Ethernet cable connects the Mac and PC. Internet connection sharing on the Mac is turned off.

This is just rediculous, to protect the PC it can't be on the internet? But, we've done something similar using a Linux box as a mail server scrubbing infected emails before the users even have the choice of hitting Ok I would like to install spyware.

MS made bad choices when it started with Windows, and these poor choices just keep coming back: RPC for example, a barely used protocol that became a series of flaws. Frankly, if MS really wants to solve their security they should rewrite the code from the ground up and break some backward compatibility, but they won't and they can't.

 

[hulugu]

No I dont think Mac useser are more tech savey people. They general pop is about the same as windows pop. Most them are clueless and dont know what they are doing. Just OSX is a lot more forgiving if you dont do critcal updates (which now by defaulted is automaticly download instaled on windows). a lot more forgiving in lack of antivirus (it is a matter of time before OSX gets some big viruses). Forgiving in not having a firewall (which if you dont have a firewall I still going to say you are an idiot since the main reason to have a firewall is to keep people out and to control what data is sent out from your computer)

I disagree with this, many Macintosh users have made a specific choice regarding their machine, some have to support their own machines even in contradiction to official IT policies. Furthermore, the software firewall in OSX is on by default as is the firewall on the Airport, so Mac users automatically have some very good protection. And with .Mac Apple gives users Virex.
Now, Mac users have to cop to a general anti-Virus system because one is eventually coming down the pipe, and they have to become more security aware, but they are better off by default.
Furthemore, as bad as it is, Windows users have yet to face a real virus, something the equivalent of ebola, spreads fast and then attacks the system itself. Then, this will become a problem people really pay attention to.

 

[puckhead193]

I don't understand why Apple doesn't have a whole marketing campaign about this.

You just need a windows user saying: "I split my computer time between three important tasks: fighting viruses, fighting spyware, and fighting spam. On the rare instances that I'm not doing one of those, I spend the rest of my time fighting the stupid Windows operating system."

--
http://www.wanderingphilosopher.com/

HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh. so true....

 

[Timelessblur]

This always strikes me as hilarious, akin to buying a new car tinkering with the engine, changing the tires, repainting it all just to get common performance. Changing things in the registry may be necessary, but what a hassle.



This is just rediculous, to protect the PC it can't be on the internet? But, we've done something similar using a Linux box as a mail server scrubbing infected emails before the users even have the choice of hitting Ok I would like to install spyware.

MS made bad choices when it started with Windows, and these poor choices just keep coming back: RPC for example, a barely used protocol that became a series of flaws. Frankly, if MS really wants to solve their security they should rewrite the code from the ground up and break some backward compatibility, but they won't and they can't.

\


Umm dune you might want to change who you quoted because i never said whaty ou quoted me saying. Please either deleted it or fix it to who ever orignal posted it

 

[Timelessblur]

I disagree with this, many Macintosh users have made a specific choice regarding their machine, some have to support their own machines even in contradiction to official IT policies. Furthermore, the software firewall in OSX is on by default as is the firewall on the Airport, so Mac users automatically have some very good protection. And with .Mac Apple gives users Virex.
Now, Mac users have to cop to a general anti-Virus system because one is eventually coming down the pipe, and they have to become more security aware, but they are better off by default.
Furthemore, as bad as it is, Windows users have yet to face a real virus, something the equivalent of ebola, spreads fast and then attacks the system itself. Then, this will become a problem people really pay attention to.

The mac firewall is basicly the same as the XP firewall which is just turned on by SP2. It protect against incoming attacks but it is worthless against infomation being sent out and you can not control it setting very easily

 

[IJ Reilly]

Hmm a lot of the stuff I hate about OSX UI is just personal perfeince stuff. Same as people complaints about the UI of XP. (secuitry is another matter) In the UI of OSX I hate the menu bar placement. I hate the lack of a task bar. I hate the fact that you can not full screen. but it mostly things like that.

IOW, a lot (most? all?) of what you hate about OSX is that it's designed differently than Windows, whereas none of my complaints about Windows are based on personal preference per se -- but on human engineering issues, or more specifically, Microsoft's utter lack of concern for them. I can easily start with the example of how Windows is (are?) shut down, which is a total cognitive bollox. Then we can move onto what happens in Windows when you connect an external drive or insert removable media into a drive (nothing). It's like pushing a button on a machine and then having to push another button to find out if the first button did anything.

 

[angelneo]

I dont call that a valied aregument because I could easily make a list of things that I have hate and I have always hated about the mac OS dating back to the first mac and the list as only grown since then

Have a read about HCI and perhaps you can appreciate Mac UI better. IJ Reilly concerns are quite valid. The main reason you did not see it is that you are too accustomed to windows UI. Software UI issues are even more critical especially in areas such as Air Craft Control Systems etc.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

This is just rediculous, to protect the PC it can't be on the internet? But, we've done something similar using a Linux box as a mail server scrubbing infected emails before the users even have the choice of hitting Ok I would like to install spyware.

MS made bad choices when it started with Windows, and these poor choices just keep coming back: RPC for example, a barely used protocol that became a series of flaws. Frankly, if MS really wants to solve their security they should rewrite the code from the ground up and break some backward compatibility, but they won't and they can't.

Hey hulugu - I posted that, not Timelessblur.

Anyway, it may not seem so ridiculous anymore if you consider these things:
1. I would only be using the Internet for two things: Windows Update and downloading program installers.
2. I frequently transfer files between my Mac and my PC, and my transfer speeds absolutely stink unless the Mac and PC are directly connected like they are now (which means that the PC has no Internet access, since it lacks a wireless card and therefore depends on Ethernet, which is used for the direct connection).

Regarding your second point, I couldn't agree more on how much a total, ground-up rewrite of Windows would help security (assuming that MS made more sensible design decisions when rewriting).

 

[Savage Henry]

I couldn't agree more on how much a total, ground-up rewrite of Windows would help security (assuming that MS made more sensible design decisions when rewriting).

Isn't that what's holding Longhorn up? The re-write can only help the computing world in the long run. The chances are that whichever job I'm in I will be sat in front of a Wintel, so the idea that it's continually developed to be safer and better is fine with me.