Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 05-15-2008, 08:44 AM
 
Location: Tejas
7,599 posts, read 18,409,197 times
Reputation: 5251

Advertisements

Yes and yes Noahma and Steel Man hehe
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-19-2008, 04:36 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC (in my mind)
7,943 posts, read 17,254,198 times
Reputation: 4686
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotornot View Post
>Vista is bloated

>It runs slower than XP

>Windows is coming out with Service Pack 3 for XP

>Hold onto your hat: Bill Gates is going to release another OS in just two short years

Microsoft to release Windows 7, new PC operating system, in 2010; Windows 7 OS next release after Windows Vista
Windows 7 still slated for 2010 says Microsoft, Bill Gates just crazy-talking - Engadget
1. Every new MS operating system is bloated and runs slower on machines that only meet the minimum requirements or slightly above. If you only meet the minimum requirements, or even slightly above, common sense would tell you not to use Vista.

2. See #1

3. Win2k has had multiple SP releases since 2001, but that isn't any reason to still be using Win2k today

4. If you currently own a PC with XP and are content with it, don't upgrade to Vista. However, if you are buying a new computer today, unless it is a low-end budget PC, XP is actually a worse choice than going Vista because XP is incapable of taking full advantage of today's high end hardware.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2008, 06:30 PM
 
Location: Earth
67 posts, read 199,055 times
Reputation: 37
VISTA sucks, just like Windows Me.
We have 100+ XP computers and we will NOT go to VISTA.
We'll wait to see if the new OS is any better.
They really need to make it look and feel like XP, maybe even call it XP2?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2008, 07:07 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC (in my mind)
7,943 posts, read 17,254,198 times
Reputation: 4686
Quote:
Originally Posted by stomper View Post
VISTA sucks, just like Windows Me.
We have 100+ XP computers and we will NOT go to VISTA.
We'll wait to see if the new OS is any better.
They really need to make it look and feel like XP, maybe even call it XP2?
How about making it look and feel like Windows 3.1? No need for progress right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2008, 11:36 PM
 
Location: Western Bexar County
3,823 posts, read 14,669,863 times
Reputation: 1943
Quote:
Originally Posted by bchris02 View Post
How about making it look and feel like Windows 3.1? No need for progress right?
Why stop with Windows 3.1? Let's get rid of windows and go back to DOS!

C: Delete Windows 3.1
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-19-2008, 11:52 PM
 
Location: Northglenn, Colorado
3,689 posts, read 10,417,852 times
Reputation: 973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steel Man View Post
Why stop with Windows 3.1? Let's get rid of windows and go back to DOS!

C: Delete Windows 3.1
it would be c: \ deltree windows if I remember my DOS right lol.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2008, 12:11 AM
 
Location: Earth
67 posts, read 199,055 times
Reputation: 37
No lets not.
XP works fine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2008, 09:37 PM
 
Location: Western Bexar County
3,823 posts, read 14,669,863 times
Reputation: 1943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noahma View Post
it would be c: \ deltree windows if I remember my DOS right lol.
Try C:\rd windows3.1

or

Format C:
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2008, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Chicago
526 posts, read 1,058,572 times
Reputation: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by stomper View Post
No lets not.
XP works fine.
so are you going to be running xp in 2010?
i def still like XP alot but remember people XP was made in 2001
there were no dual core, quad or octicore processors XP is not optimized for that
i think they should re-release it for better 64bit architecture
XP 64 bit is not that great 64 bit computing is becoming more common as the years progress XP is not made for that
and how many complained that XP was not suitable when it came out??
Windows XP - Google News Archive Search
lets see if any remember that
so remember that when in a year im running programs made for 64bit and they are running like a beast at twice the speed on the same hardware your using with XP
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2008, 08:47 AM
 
Location: St. Augustine FL
1,641 posts, read 5,025,035 times
Reputation: 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steel Man View Post
Why stop with Windows 3.1? Let's get rid of windows and go back to DOS!

C: Delete Windows 3.1
I love DOS.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top