U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Computers
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-13-2010, 12:52 AM
 
Location: 10110001010110100
6,385 posts, read 10,841,220 times
Reputation: 5589

Advertisements

Win2K was definitely easier than NT no argument here. I used to configure NT 4.0 for various purposes and also troubleshoot issues with it, mostly remotely on dial-up, what an effing pain in the rear that was but still, Win2000 was still lame compared to XP Pro and definitely not faster. I have not used 2000 all that much but you have no idea how slow Win2K could get if the registry was bloated and fragmented and it didn't take a lot due to its limitation per sucky design. I never compare the visual aspect of an OS when commenting on its overall quality, first thing that I turn off is the visual crap. I am all about functionality and speed without o/c'ing the hardware. I could make 98SE fly, same goes for XP. I hardly ever had a BSoD on even 98se and literally none on XP except when I was screwing around in the registry a lot before wising up and started using VM extensively. Both ME and Vista were crap imho, they were sugar-coated, crappier version of their predecessors respectively. I'd not feel least bit bad if MS skipped those two altogether.

Again, I can tell you liked and had luck with Win2K and I am not saying it was a bad OS, on the contrary it was great compared to NT but not when compared to XP but that is just my opinion and I guess there really is no point arguing that so I agree to disagree!

On a side note, Linux flavors have come a long way and I am particularly found of Fedora Core and Ubuntu flavors. If it wasn't for the games I would have already made the move to one of those two.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-13-2010, 02:28 AM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 41,840,053 times
Reputation: 10962
Why does it have to be top of the line to begin with?

Just asking.

If you buy something reasonably good, it will still be serviceable 5 or 10 years down the road. I'm still working on a Windows 95 platform. Still works, good enough for me. I don't need the latest and the best.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2010, 02:40 AM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,955,968 times
Reputation: 12847
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
Why does it have to be top of the line to begin with?

Just asking.

If you buy something reasonably good, it will still be serviceable 5 or 10 years down the road. I'm still working on a Windows 95 platform. Still works, good enough for me. I don't need the latest and the best.
It depends on everyone's needs. A computer that will last you 5 years might last another person 1 year.

This is especially true if you play cutting edge video games.

Also, owning a computer capable of running a modern operating system means that you're getting the latest patches and security fixes. This is crucial in my opinion.

Regarding your Windows 95 platform... I can't imagine all the functionality you're missing out on based on the limited selection of software available to Windows 95.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2010, 02:44 AM
 
11,715 posts, read 36,330,137 times
Reputation: 7514
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
Regarding your Windows 95 platform... I can't imagine all the functionality you're missing out on based on the limited selection of software available to Windows 95.
I'd really like to know what they're using on that old thing. I doubt any of the software on my computer would run on anything older than Win2k and much of it requires at least XP. Win95 is beyond ancient at this point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2010, 02:45 AM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 41,840,053 times
Reputation: 10962
My "needs" are pretty much getting on the Internet and visiting a very limited number of sites.

I did say "serviceable".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2010, 02:49 AM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,955,968 times
Reputation: 12847
Quote:
Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia View Post
I'd really like to know what they're using on that old thing. I doubt any of the software on my computer would run on anything older than Win2k and much of it requires at least XP. Win95 is beyond ancient at this point.

I'm sure it's the usual stuff... Netscape 4.01, AOL 3.0, Word 6.0, ICQ, Dancing baby...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2010, 02:56 AM
 
24,503 posts, read 35,955,968 times
Reputation: 12847
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
My "needs" are pretty much getting on the Internet and visiting a very limited number of sites.

I did say "serviceable".
I guess what really matters is that everyone has what they want or need.

"Why bother buying a good computer?" is not synonymous with "Why by the latest and greatest computer?" Either way, I'd have to answer with the question of "Why Not?" Assuming that it is not having an impact on your financial goals, there's really no reason not to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2010, 09:13 AM
 
3,219 posts, read 5,835,813 times
Reputation: 1839
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
My "needs" are pretty much getting on the Internet and visiting a very limited number of sites.

I did say "serviceable".
Yep, people that use a computer for the same type of needs you do should learn to use Linux IMO as then if a computer goes on the fritz one can find one on the curb or to purchase one on the cheap to then just install Linux for free, okay, okay for a price of a blank CD or DVD - lol!

And Linux runs on most computers ever made, just have to use a lighter Linux distro for those older computers.

I guess in the end it depends on their financial situation as well as if applicable their gaming performance needs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2010, 12:03 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,236 posts, read 41,840,053 times
Reputation: 10962
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJBest View Post
I guess what really matters is that everyone has what they want or need.

"Why bother buying a good computer?" is not synonymous with "Why by the latest and greatest computer?" Either way, I'd have to answer with the question of "Why Not?" Assuming that it is not having an impact on your financial goals, there's really no reason not to.
The flavor of the post was basically by the time you spend the money on a "good" computer, it's already obsolete. They're already designing computers with more processing speed or higher RAM capability when you purchase the one you're getting.

In six months' time, the computer you got will drop in price by half, if it's even still available.

Still, the reason to buy a "good" computer is that it will still be serviceable for years to come, rather than buying yourself a "not good" computer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2010, 12:30 PM
 
11,715 posts, read 36,330,137 times
Reputation: 7514
Quote:
Originally Posted by TKramar View Post
Still, the reason to buy a "good" computer is that it will still be serviceable for years to come, rather than buying yourself a "not good" computer.
This. No matter what you buy, it'll be obsolete some day. But the faster your new PC starts out, the longer that will take. And its not like just because there's a faster computer 3 months after you buy, your computer is suddenly useless. Its the software that drives obsolescence. Software makers want to sell as many copies as possible so they design it to run acceptably on as wide a range of hardware as possible. If you hang on to a dinosaur PC too long, eventually new software doesn't support it or the performance level is unacceptable. People ask me how long they should keep a computer. I tell them to replace it when it can't run their software at an acceptable level of performance. This typically happens when someone upgrades to a new version of an application that runs much slower. Think Intuit products.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Computers
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:07 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top