Best Operating System

[prasad]

For gamers with upto date systems, windows vista is great! It also has faster booting than XP. For everything else, there's ubuntu linux!

 

[YamiKaitou]

For gamers with upto date systems, windows vista is great!

You're kidding, right? Vista is crap. There are somethings that Vista does good, but for the most part, it is a pile of junk.

 

[davejohns]

Sorry. missread.
Edit:

You're kidding, right? Vista is crap. There are somethings that Vista does good, but for the most part, it is a pile of junk.

Well what other OS, would you suggest to play games on? More over games that utilise Direct x 10?

Maybe you can also say what is so crap about Vista in some detail, instead of saying its just crap, otherwise you dont really have a valid point.

 

[DaveMurray-3-]

i suggest you have Bluewhite64 Linux (an superb and excellent 64bit variant of slackware) ....

I have AMD X2 64bit 3800+ and in benchmarks this os, is rock good

 

[YamiKaitou]

System requirements, memory usage, memory cap, security holes, and the fact that it is overpriced. There are more, just to lazy to list them. Personally, I have yet to find a game that I want that will only run on DX10, so I don't have any reason to upgrade.

 

[davejohns]

System requirements, memory usage, memory cap, security holes, and the fact that it is overpriced. There are more, just to lazy to list them. Personally, I have yet to find a game that I want that will only run on DX10, so I don't have any reason to upgrade.

Well like Prasad said, Vista is great for gamers with upto date systems, so the requirements are not really an issue.

I cant think of any security holes in Vista.

Vista doesnt really use a great deal of memory, if you have problems with memory you shouldnt use it in the first place. Plus the memory cap can be sorted by using a 64bit OS. It's not just Windows, it's all systems. This is not OS specific, this is a
result of the BIOS. The system can only "address" up to 32-bits of ram. When
hardware communicates, you're really just sending data to it just like you
would store data in memory.

There is no way around it in 32-bit processing, no special switches, no file
replacements, no nothing. The maximum addressable space is 4GB--period. Your
SYSTEM (not OS) has to use a certain amount of that to be able to
communicate with devices.


Being as DX10 is fairly new you wont need to, yet.

 

[prasad]

Vista is known to utilize the new dual-core and quad-core processors of today MUCH better than XP.. and is hence as I said best for gaming "for an upto date system".
Also with a geforce 7 or 8 series GPU, games are practically tested to work faster on vista than on XP.
Vista also makes better use of the 64-bit processor architechture in it's x64 version, unlike the windows xp x64 version, and is thus better suited for 64-bit PC's as well (like mine).
Therefore Vista IS better than XP for newer PC's, period.

 

[YamiKaitou]

Yes, the max for a desktop is 4GB RAM, but Vista will only recongize 3GB. Also, has SP1 for Vista come out yet? If not, there are still tons of holes. And then there is the issue with compatibility. There are still tons of stuff out there that Vista will not run. Practically anything that I need can be run on XP, so I don't see a reason for me to upgrade to Vista.


EDIT: I will agree that Vista x64 is a better option for a Windows OS for 64-bit machines

 

[davejohns]

Yes, the max for a desktop is 4GB RAM, but Vista will only recongize 3GB. Also, has SP1 for Vista come out yet? If not, there are still tons of holes. And then there is the issue with compatibility.

That isnt actually true Vista "Does" recognize all 4GB.

You cant base your argument of security holes on a SP that might or might not come out.

And if talking about compatibility i could mention linux, in terms of software.

The point im making is "You" said "Its Crap" and so far all ive seen is statements based on "Your" opinion no actual hard and fast evidence!

 

[YamiKaitou]

Vista may see all 4GB of RAM, but you doesn't have the ability to use all 4GB.

Every OS has security holes, they just haven't been discovered/displayed yet. The more an OS grows in popularity, the more hackers target it. I search both Norton and McAfee's virus/malware/vulnerbilities sites and found 50-100 results for "vista". Don't say there ain't security holes for Vista, cause clearly there is.

Linux is on a completely different base system than Windows is anyways. So, Linux doesn't count in this particular argument.

Yeah, "I" say it is crap because I truly believe that it is right now. Until someone can prove to me how much better (in all aspects) Vista is than XP Pro, I will stick with my XP.

 

[davejohns]

Vista may see all 4GB of RAM, but you doesn't have the ability to use all 4GB.

Every OS has security holes, they just haven't been discovered/displayed yet. The more an OS grows in popularity, the more hackers target it. I search both Norton and McAfee's virus/malware/vulnerbilities sites and found 50-100 results for "vista". Don't say there ain't security holes for Vista, cause clearly there is.

Linux is on a completely different base system than Windows is anyways. So, Linux doesn't count in this particular argument.

Yeah, "I" say it is crap because I truly believe that it is right now. Until someone can prove to me how much better (in all aspects) Vista is than XP Pro, I will stick with my XP.

Firstly proving to you that vista isnt crap wasnt and still isnt the idea of this thread.

A 64-bit Vista OS can address much more than 4 GB so the I/O and work areas can be moved out of the 4 GB address space. A 32-bit Vista OS has just 4 GB *total* addressability so the I/O and work areas have to use some of that space. So in effect 4gb of Ram is still being used.

Im aware of popularity breading exploitation, you should have seen this in my longer post in this thread. Being as Windows is already used by around 90% of the PC using demographic i dont foresee and exculation in problems as you suggested. Im sure you probably did find Virus/maleware reports on these sites, but you cant pretend they are unique to vista or the windows OS as a whole. I dont consider a virus security hole.

Well yes Linux is a completely different system, but it "Does" count. Given that this thread is called "Whats the best OS". I run everything i need on Vista with no problems.

Like i said before just because you prefer XP over vista doesnt make it crap, it sounds like you havent actually tried it.

Again to draw a parallel with linux; it isnt, to quote you "Much better in all aspects" than Windows. Does that make it a crap OS? I think not.

 

[darkstang]

Just to add a little nail in Vista's coffin here.

I've used Vista. It was on a computer at work and was used for graphic design. I used to play a game with it. See... I'd try to do as much work as I could and as fast as I could, while it would randomly crash. Oh what fun we'd have together...

Another Vista point. One of my housemates has Vista on his laptop, which he bought about two weeks ago. Yesterday it decided that it was going to kill itself. BSOD came up, and a bunch of programs (including internet explorer, his only web browser at the time) just quit working. He scanned for issues, didn't find anything big at all. Just some minor spyware. IE still doesn't work, so I gave him firefox I had on a flash drive. Now it seems like every half hour or so the laptop will give a BSOD and just crash.

One last point...
Every windows computer I've ever known of needed to be reformatted at least every two years. Most were every year. Something would happen, and it just needed to be done. I have never heard of anybody needing to do this with linux. Ever. It just works. Period.

 

[YamiKaitou]

Like i said before just because you prefer XP over vista doesnt make it crap, it sounds like you havent actually tried it.

Actually, I did try it a little after it came out. Didn't like it then, why should I now? Their driver support is still behind. I am not going to spend $400+ just to upgrade to Vista when XP Pro works fine the way it is now.

 

[Rolyin]

Wine on Linux can run a few games for Windows pretty good. Well it used to not sure about newer games or newer wine versions, I havn't used it in a while.

 

[DaveMurray-3-]

linux is better in games or in graphics. And dont stops in 4gb limit.... Has more power, can compiled near to your hardware, windows crappies havent this possibility. What about security? what about NT Kernel crap? What about network stack (is BSD Code, but is stolen) ? More graphics effects companies and Shrek movie, have linux workstatios and servers in clusters for rendering and development... Also many formula 1 teams have servers and desktop in linux. All this peoples is idiots? Why i should trust windoze or MS when the code is closed and anyone dont know if the using code is stolen from open source projects? ....

 

[prasad]

Actually, I did try it a little after it came out. Didn't like it then, why should I now? Their driver support is still behind. I am not going to spend $400+ just to upgrade to Vista when XP Pro works fine the way it is now.

This thread is about the best operating system not about the most affordable or cheapest one If you can't purchase it, either way that's not connected to the topic.
Secondly, all those who say Vista lacks support, it maybe true but after all it's new and is being/will be updated to perform even better. Just as you are sticking onto your preference for XP today, Vista will turn out to be far better tomorrow. And as a user of windows Vista x64 Ultimate, I haven't had ANY problems with it whatsoever, except the UAC (User access control) which I disabled (cus its annoying). I got all the latest drivers for my nforce and geforce from nvidia and all works well. Doom 3 gave me a higher frame rate on Vista than on XP (on ultra high detail), period.

 

[davejohns]

Just to add a little nail in Vista's coffin here.

I've used Vista. It was on a computer at work and was used for graphic design. I used to play a game with it. See... I'd try to do as much work as I could and as fast as I could, while it would randomly crash. Oh what fun we'd have together...

Another Vista point. One of my housemates has Vista on his laptop, which he bought about two weeks ago. Yesterday it decided that it was going to kill itself. BSOD came up, and a bunch of programs (including internet explorer, his only web browser at the time) just quit working. He scanned for issues, didn't find anything big at all. Just some minor spyware. IE still doesn't work, so I gave him firefox I had on a flash drive. Now it seems like every half hour or so the laptop will give a BSOD and just crash.

One last point...
Every windows computer I've ever known of needed to be reformatted at least every two years. Most were every year. Something would happen, and it just needed to be done. I have never heard of anybody needing to do this with linux. Ever. It just works. Period.

Well perhaps to put a nail in your coffin so to speak.

Ive been running Vista without any problems since its Beta, also on top of that i have set up a network consisting of 576 Desktop PC's all using Vista, and guess what, no problems. Ive never formated my or any one elses drive.

To be honest, it looks to me like the user is at fault in you and your friends case.
Edit:

linux is better in games or in graphics

Please explain exactly why?

And dont stops in 4gb limit

Neither does Vista 64

Has more power

In terms of what?

What about security?

Yes what about security?

What about network stack (is BSD Code, but is stolen) ?

Well vista runs a new TCP/IP stack which is not based on BSD called Compound TCP, or CTCP. They found that CTCP actually uses a number of previously-tested algorithms, including TCP Reno, TCP Vegas, Fast TCP and High Speed TCP.

More graphics effects companies and Shrek movie, have linux workstatios and servers in clusters for rendering and development

Well "Weta Digital" the makers of LOTR use Microsoft graphics technology. Windows was used in conjunction with Houdini and BodyPaint 3D and CINEMA 4D exclusive 3D texturing and digital matte environment was also used on Windows for Spiderman 3.

Why i should trust windoze or MS when the code is closed and anyone dont know if the using code is stolen from open source projects?

Thats very naive, you could say that about the other million companys who make money from selling their product.

 

[DaveMurray-3-]

davejohns you can compile your windows system? you can compile the kernel exactly for your hardware needs? i dont think so.... for that has a advantage the unix operating systems.... for that has more power. in graphics why is better? million libraries available for unix operating systems, could compiled from source again, and you have anything you need in this section... Only Directx is not enough.... or the Windows OpenGL impementation... You know about libraries? .... What about security? All the planet scream about this section.... Security holes, in nt kernel, in tcp/ip stack, in file system, all hackers knows the holes in windows... has more power, In terms of what?
Look in kernel, in memory, in I/O, in all... Have you try benchmark a windows system and a Gentoo or BSD system? you maybe dont... is not very naive, i dont trust commercial companies. We have more % possibilities to think about the source. if you cant see the source, you not sure about the using code is not stolen by other open source project. you cant know if the company you are using, have worked 100% from scratch...

 

[darkstang]

davejohns
Vista has some major problems. I'm sorry you can't admit that. I'm not going to sit here and argue with you over why I don't use Vista, or why I would never recommend Vista to anybody, when you refuse to listen. It's just not worth my time.

Type 'vista problems' into google and start arguing with all those people instead. I'm not humoring you anymore.

 

[davejohns]

davejohns
Vista has some major problems. I'm sorry you can't admit that. I'm not going to sit here and argue with you over why I don't use Vista, or why I would never recommend Vista to anybody, when you refuse to listen. It's just not worth my time.

Type 'vista problems' into google and start arguing with all those people instead. I'm not humoring you anymore.

I never said Vista wasnt without its problems, i dont refuse to listen. I take note of any reply here and reply with factual evidence. Im sorry if i didnt bow down and just accept your word, after all this is a debate, is it not?

I could type "anything here problems" and probably find millions of posts, but it doesnt make them all true. You have to understand all the problems have a context and lots of times, user error is at stake. Vista and windows as a whole is not a perfct OS and i will be the first to admit that. I was simply trying to gleam further and factual evidence from people who habitually say "Its Crap".