windowsXP

i would like to know about it, from users not microsoft. Is it a good and worthy upgrade or another flop of dog shit, like win2000 and ME, loaded with almost nothing new, and lack of DOS. Also is it true that it has a poor MP3 player, so micronads can sell its formats. Another thing is what does it add to the windows OS, more bugs and useless bullshit or many bug fixes and usefull addons. and finally is it worth the heavy price tag, well i dout that, I dont want to pay 200 for minor fixes and useless features. If it is another lame toss for windows then my next system will be entire LINUX, mostlikly it will be anyway not gonna spend more for software then hardware

It definitely doesnt have DOS in. Microsoft pretty much ditched DOS support in Windows 2000, and XP is based upon Windows 2000. To be frank though, this is probably a good thing - you cant have a proper stable operating system when its based upon DOS. The impression I get from people about XP is that its ok, but if you're already running win2k theres no real reason to upgrade to XP. I've also heard stuff about it being rather dumbed down and "naggy".

more bugs and useless bullshit or many bug fixes and usefull addons.

Microsoft's typical history is to fix 2 or 3 things and break 20 more, usually with double the system requirements to get the same performance. I hear XP isn't as bad as going from 95 to 98 to ME, but it's got a load of useless crap and bloated software that will no doubt be a helluva lot slower on pre-Y2K machines.

I haven't been able to test it for myself though, the above is just what I'm getting from other users and reviews. So if I ever do get a copy for myself I'll probably write a huge thing about it.

I'm really pleased with XP pro. But take in mind I was a 98se user. There isn't a lot of new shit compared to W2k.

I'm still using 98, and will continue to do so until I need to buy a new computer. I stuck with the last version of Win95 until my last computer gave up the ghost. I'm not gonna pay money for a memory-hogging bugfix patch. And I don't use half of the features that Windows offers anyway.

I may get it if i can get a good deal on it, meaning getting it through mom or dad's office, but other than that win98se workd fine for me. DOS support is not a big deal for me, hey i got the original dos6.22 disk and a old 486 for DOS games, but i focus on what it has. Now when windows 95 came out that was worth the 150-200 because it was totaly redone and new as apposed to the win3, 3.1 and 3.11. if microsoft get inovated like they did with 95 then i would be wanting to buy, but if it is more useless bullshit and only a few bugs fixes and not much updates then i may not be as interested. Of course my next system may be LINUX, i have begun to get confortable with that OS and updates are cheap or free. one company sends u a free upgrade disk if u buy a pack( 35-60 dollars) Also i have more control over what features i want to have installed so i can save resources. however for a newbie LINUX is a no no, did an experiment by installing LINUX on a friends computer. made it easy to use and so they had to do very little in the consoule. I made it log in automaticly and shutdown like windows. however within 2 weeks it already is not working correct, setting messed up. Now they need to log in and shut down from the consoule. I wanted to see how long it would take them to mess up the settings. Anyway i hope to find a copy of XP to check it out for myself

I'm running XP right now, and I must say I've changed my song a bit from the last time anyone talked about it around me.

Performance-wise, it's a BIG upgrade to Win2k. Just for background, I have a Thunderbird 1.33 gHz on an A7A266 with 512 megs of PC 2100 DDR RAM, and 2 30 gig 7200 rpm drives. I really wouldn't expect an OS to improve my performance on much of ANYTHING. Max Payne loads at LEAST twice as fast, and don't even ASK me about Tribes 2.

The only thing I DON'T like is the interface. Mercifully, Microsoft put down the joint long enough to put the option to use old-school color schemes like "Rainy Day" instead of the "Darwin-esque" candy-corn lump of llama droppings that it starts using.

Actually, that's not true, I don't like the new Windows Media Player. Of course, that probably goes without saying. I've never been a fan of it. Unfortunately, it plays a lot of AVI files as strictly sound files, so I had to find the new DivX codec, which bites donkey balls. Hard.

So, XP gets five points for performance, but loses two for interface.

DC

ok.. hmm... wy not use winamp and real player? or does that not play AVI's?

I haven't found any Winamp plug-in that plays AVIs. And all Real products suck asses approximately the same size as the late Orson Welles.

For now, I'm stuck using Project Mayo's "The Playa". Stupid program doesn't understand aspect ratios...

DC

Those specific AVI files are DivX files. The DivX format is nothing more and nothing less than a gross hack performed on leaked betas of Microsoft's own codecs, and installing the DivX codecs over Microsoft's will only break things.

DVD playback, for example, will break horribly. Take it from my own personal experience.

As to the interface, I do consider it unfortunate that Microsoft decided that XP/Blue should be the default upon installation. XP/Silver is a much better choice and far more palatable, however the option remains to change the UI to something that more closely resembles Win2K. I alternate between the "Classic" and XP/Silver UIs myself, and cannot be said to hold any real preference for one over the other.

Holy shit the bugger boots fast.

talk english

talk english

I am a Dumbass. I'm incapable.

I know you're talking about nothing more then a simple color scheme. You don't need all those big words to get your point across.

I guess I'll try to read it again. I probably won't be able to walk in a straight line after that though.

oh... I give up, where's esco when you need him?

Silver's pretty good, but I'm sticking to Blue. It's hard to figure out wich applications are on focus and wich not. As for Microsoft, shaaame. There are no other skins besides that awful XP/Olive UNLESS you buy Plus! Blergh.

Yeah, XP boots incredibly fast. A P2 400 with 128 megs of ram boots in 18 seconds.

As for performance, I really like how they accelerated the UI. I'm not sure if it's drawing with DirectDraw, but I'm positively sure it's not bad old BitBLT doing it.

Can you choose to NOT install Media Player 7? Then install 6.4 later?

It's, uh, Windows Media Player 8 now.

And WMP 6.4 is still available, just run mplayer2.exe ...

Why don't you people just download some good freeware players instead of using Media Player? ^_^

I'm fairly pleased with Ultraplayer. Besides, it supports Real Media, so I don't need to embrace that awful instalation again in my life.

(Read post title 1st) The final verdict of XP (so far) is that it depends on what you need from an OS? When I first heard about it a while back it sounded like a good thing, but as more came out I was less and less impressed and beginning to think that Microsoft had done another.............well.. another Microsoft......Ie: shoddy product that looks decent but finds new ways to fuck up everytime... However, on reading reviews and having a quick play around, I might still change my mind, thankfully you can get rid of the ugly as all hell new UI and switch it right back to classic. Problem is, The new format will attract more people to it, simply becuase of: Ooh, lookitall the kolours ma! it Rock!

Sorry, no offence intended to anyone here, but the general rule is, the more shinier the product the more people buy it. On another note: Yes, Real Player SUCKS! but I like WMP7 it may not look that good, but I always minimise it to the smallest size, except when watching video's with it. Maybe if I could get a copy off (XP that is)someone...............Not anyone here that is, and Not warez. I'm not shelling out $200 bucks for something I might not want. I'll think about it, but hmm.......

The final verdict of XP (so far)

?? Where the text that's sposed to go there?
What are you trying to say here? Could You explain?

Everything you need to know is there. Just take a look at the quote.

uh huh, so are you referring to what I meant? I meant: So far, the opinion of XP is............ I said it like that because people always formulate an opinion after using it for about 5 minutes......well not everyone, but with XP everyones gonna have an opinion if they've used it or not. Including ME. Is That what you meant?

Fnord.

Here I was Hoping for a serious thread, oh well, damn whoever created that Fnord statement............../me damns Knorton

For the last 6 posts there hasn't been anything serious about this thread.

hah, only because Zaldron posted a quote with out explanation, I think I figured out what he meant but then you go and post Fnord......bah.......BTW: Kidding about Knorton I was...........(Damnit, I've been looking at Star Wars info too much damnit.)(It's Taking OVER!)

DAMNIT YOU CAN'T POST A FINAL VERDICT AND THEN SAY (SO FAR). THAT'S IT, THAT'S THE WHOLE MOTHERFUCKING BUSSINESS.

Ouch! No need to get carried away. jeez, It was a question. Okay I should of asked the verdict so far..........but I didn't....I see nothing wrong with

The final verdict so far

yes it's probably wrong, but So? I just wanted to get a summary of what people thought. which is: XP? Good, Bad or Fucking Hideous. Anyway this is gone on far enough, can we stay on topic?

I'm really pleased with XP. Fast and stable - what else would you want?

I'm pretty interested by WinXP
(The French edition is available here now)

But I've heard many things (ugly) about the "Key Registery" of WinXP...(same with Office XP)
So, what about that ?

In a case of a Windows crash, What happens ?
(Can we install it a thousand times for example)
What happens in a case of hardware changes ?
(if you change your hard disk for example or something else like your 3D card...)

I've a PIII 600 (256Mo SDRAM)
Can I use this OS properly ?

Thanx for any precisions.