Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Sephiroth

windowsXP

Recommended Posts

In a case of a Windows crash, What happens ?

Assuming you don't go fucking about with the partition sizes, such a catastrophic event is pretty much impossible with Win2k/XP.

Clearing Up Some Windows XP Confusion

A Closer Look at Windows XP Product Activation

Those two articles should help explain product key activation. Reinstalling frequently on the same hardware shouldn't be much of a problem, but changing hard drives on the OS would be a minor headache for NTFS partitions regardless of product key activation. In any case it takes 6 hardware changes before activation requirement is triggered once more, and even then you have a 30-day grace period to reactivate either via phone or online ... 30 days in which you can still make any changes to your system configuration you wish.

Share this post


Link to post

Thankfully, I've got a developer copy (as I am an aspiring developer) of XP, so that I can change my hardware or reinstall as many times as I want. Regular users, I suppose, aren't quite so lucky.

DC

Share this post


Link to post

Regular users! Hah! I'll warez WinXP anywhere I want! It's just that I don't want. Yet.

Share this post


Link to post

Broadcast warez? If I knew how can I "broadcast" warez, maybe I would.

I know these forums don't accept even the slightest implication of "warez". But I won't let you disparage me with your "I'm lucky and you are the lesser users" attitude.

Share this post


Link to post

Who's lording anything? In case you hadn't noticed, the word "pay" didn't occur in ANY of my XP-related posts...

DC

Share this post


Link to post

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

Free.

Damn straight. Like I said, I refuse to pay for a glorified patch.

Share this post


Link to post

Like I said, I refuse to pay for a glorified patch.

There's not a single company out there that would let you download a 400 meg patch containing their own hard work over the past 6 years for free. In fact, I'd like to see you try to write a patch from something like Win98 to something like Win2K, keeping in mind the upgrade includes a totally new core system and multitudes of new utilities, and then offer that for free. In fact, I would be surprised if you were even capable of writing something even remotely approaching Win98--and keep in mind NT is at least another couple of orders of magnitude more robust and complex.

Share this post


Link to post

There's not a single company out there that would let you download a 400 meg patch containing their own hard work over the past 6 years for free. In fact, I'd like to see you try to write a patch from something like Win98 to something like Win2K, keeping in mind the upgrade includes a totally new core system and multitudes of new utilities, and then offer that for free. In fact, I would be surprised if you were even capable of writing something even remotely approaching Win98--and keep in mind NT is at least another couple of orders of magnitude more robust and complex.

When Activision published Doom 1.0, did they wait a year and then try to sell Doom 1.9 as a separate product? No. id worked hard to fix the problems they found in 1.0 and released small patches to fix those issues. And they did so quickly. If you knew your product had multiple flaws, would you wait six years until you had all the flaws more-or-less fixed, or would you fix the smaller flaws quickly and release a series of small patches as you made progress? I acknowledge and respect that Microsoft's code-monkeys work very, very hard to get their product right. So does id. So does any self-respecting software developer.

On your second point, I'll admit I cannot yet code something on the magnitude of Win98. That's why I'm in college. Because I want to improve myself so I can do something useful with my life.

Share this post


Link to post

But I can code stuff of Win98 magnitude!

#include <stdio.h>

int main (void)
{
int i;
i = i++;
perror ("Blue Screen!\n");
free (main);
exit (1);
}

Share this post


Link to post

Assuming you don't go fucking about with the partition sizes, such a catastrophic event is pretty much impossible with Win2k/XP.

Much as I wish that was true, that's not the way it is. Mike has had quite a few lockups with games.

Amazingly there was NO way to kill the game - no response, dead as a door knob, less response then a corpse, you get the idea:)

Sigh - then that painstakingly, agonizingly slow, miserably boring boot where it checks .. very slowly .. a 60 gig partition.

There are already some XP patches on the way. FYI, the lockup was related to Ge3 drivers for XP. I think he backleveled to fix.

I am an XP fan though .. just an advocate of telling it like it is.

Share this post


Link to post

Comparing a game (amazingly spoogarific as it may be) to an operating system (as buggy, error-prone, and unoriginal as IT may be) is like comparing the F-16 jet fighter to a hippopotamus. Sure, they both have gas, but that's really the only similarity.

Doom had to deal with game AI, interface, and controls. Windows (or any operating system, for that matter) has to deal with managing memory, managing peripherals, keeping the interface useable, and providing system utilites for making the user's life easier. I may not like Windows, but I do appreciate the amount of work that went into what we have. And, like it or not, Microsoft is steadily improving their products.

DC

Share this post


Link to post

Let's continue this illogical comparison.

Would you then dispute id's right to have distributed Doom on their own, and 3 years later, having written an entirely new game (Quake) sold that also? Or would you use your same illogical argument to say that, since you play a grunt killing monsters in both games, Quake must be a measly upgrade to Doom and therefore ought to have been offered as a free upgrade?

Share this post


Link to post

There are already some XP patches on the way. FYI, the lockup was related to Ge3 drivers for XP. I think he backleveled to fix.

Then I'd lay the blame strictly at NVidia's doorsteps, yes? Using the default drivers provided by Microsoft for the GF card, you wouldn't experience that particular lock-up, would you? (That those drivers wouldn't provide 3d acceleration would be entirely another matter...)

I would note that the drivers provided by NVidia for Linux are similarly flaky.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm abandoning and conceding this arguement. So you win, arioch. Let me just finish by saying the movement between Doom and Quake, or even between Doom and Doom II, was a tangible leap with signifigant new content. The only tangible leap between Win95 and later versions was in system requirements.

There. I'm done. You win. Good day.

Share this post


Link to post

No no, seriously. Microsoft has and will continue to provide security patches for their products FREE OF CHARGE from the WindowsUpdate site, and there have been more recent Windows 95 patches even as they were pushing Windows Me and now Windows XP. It's not like Microsoft is MAKING you upgrade to WinMe or XP by not providing security fixes...

Share this post


Link to post

Then I'd lay the blame strictly at NVidia's doorsteps, yes?

A big NO. The premise of any -GOOD- OS is that one can KILL any task at any time without it taking over the OS.

To have a driver (any driver) run amuck in the basic OS doesn't speak well for the OS design.

By comparison, IBM's mainframe systems are bullet proof! There is a world class of difference here in stability. That's why I thought it very interesting that you couldn't kill the task (as one should be able to).

You started out saying it wouldn't crash: "such a catastrophic event is pretty much impossible " - didn't you - and I showed that it indeed does. Doesn't matter the cause does it?

The point was, that like WinXXX, installing drivers fucks up the OS. And indeed this catatrophic event is pretty damn EASY to happen by anyone installing drivers. Q.E.D.

Thanks for -not- seeing the obvious point of my post.

Share this post


Link to post

Lol, comparing doom patches to OS patches is fucking stupid

XP is MUCH different from 98/me. Go fucking try it before flaming it, tks

Share this post


Link to post

IBM mainframes stable? dude what the fuck are you smoking?

And as far as drivers running amok on a system, unless you are completely clueless and don't belong behind a keyboard, there's no way you should ruin a system by installing drivers.

I have XP running perfectly on 2 systems, one was installed as an upgrade from win2k pro to winxp corporate and the other was installed stand-alone, neither has had a problem, not a bluescreen yet, and complete control over which tasks and processes I can shut down whenever.

Maybe if you used the OS before speaking, you wouldn't look like a dumbass? You do understand that 2K and XP both implemented the age old nt feature of ending both applications and processes?

Share this post


Link to post

Yet another reply:

The Ge3 drivers that supposedly caused someones system to fuck itself are the same drivers installed on mine at the moment for my visiontek geforce3. Any problems? nope. I've seen increased performance over Win2K in both Quake3 and my 3DMarks score.

The only way I can see XP really fucking up is for someone trying to upgrade a shot installation of ME on some store-bought Compaq or HP system. You're asking for trouble with a retail system and any kind of serious upgrade like that. Propietary drivers and hardware oh my!

I was even able to toss XP Home Edition on a gateway computer that was the persons First computer. The system had been abused (every time a porn link would pop up, this dumbass would un-install internet explorer. WTF?) and raped in every way imaginable, and XP went on without a hitch, even fixed some of the hardware that wasn't working (his printer).

Share this post


Link to post

The premise of any -GOOD- OS is that one can KILL any task at any time without it taking over the OS.

To have a driver (any driver) run amuck in the basic OS doesn't speak well for the OS design.

This, uh, depends on the kernel type; generally there's nothing wrong with drivers being able to crash the system - drivers are supposed to be perfect.

Not that I defend Microsoft or anything, :) but in this case it's certainly NVidia's fault.

Share this post


Link to post

honestly that is a good point to LINUX users, small upgrades over time for free. however u do have to keep on top of that if u want to stay up to date. Linux patches can come weeks after eachothers, even days sometimes. I bought LINUX for 75 and they send me free upgrades every 6 months, if there are any. I do respect the work of microsoft, but i dont like paying a ton of cash for every upgrade. second i dont think this is a major of an upgrade as win3.11 to 95 was, that was worth paying for. I might upgrade as i said before but it will be when i can get some cahs and build a new system. I wish there was a free ware version of windows, that could run most stuff windows could. Not that it would be a OS i would use over the real thing but just something to play with

Share this post


Link to post

IBM mainframes stable? dude what the fuck are you smoking?

The "fuck" i'm talking about are MAINFRAMES dude .. like AS/400, 390's and that stuff. Stable PERIOD! Guess you've never worked on one, so don't comment on that which you know nothing about. A world of their own. NT/XP is not even in the same league of stability. CDC and IBM perfected the "virtual" memory OS.

And as far as drivers running amok on a system, unless you are completely clueless and don't belong behind a keyboard, there's no way you should ruin a system by installing drivers.

"Should" or "could"? I have no idea what kind of flame you are trying for. It COULD and it DID.

I have XP running perfectly on 2 systems

Goodie for you. We've been running it for at least 3 months (courtesy subscription MSDN). And it had the problems listed - maybe in your haste to flame the details escaped your attention.

It BLUESCREENS and you CAN NOT shut down at various times. The fucking dialog won't even come up. Like I said, it's a liveless CORPSE. Has happened about TEN fucking times now. Maybe you need to READ the post more carefully before you try to flame, err .. uh .. "dumbass".

God the senseless debates these things turn into. I was merely describing what happens and you get this kind of nonsense in reply.

Share this post


Link to post

The Ge3 drivers that supposedly caused someones system to fuck itself are the same drivers installed on mine at the moment for my visiontek geforce3. Any problems? nope.

More goodie goodie. Read what I wrote CAREFULLY. It's GAMES that lock it up. AND as I recall, the game site listed it as being a problem they are working on. So much for trying to look oh so intelligent .. not. (Mike's the one with the games - I'll ask him the name of the last one with the driver problem)

Remember, the original premise was that it won't lock up or blue screen. That's just not true. It does and it will. You'll see when the patches come out (real soon now).

When you've run every possible game and driver combo out there get back to me, otherwise don't ASSUME so much.

Nevertheless, I like XP and I never said it was inferior to prior versions:)

Share this post


Link to post

This, uh, depends on the kernel type; generally there's nothing wrong with drivers being able to crash the system - drivers are supposed to be perfect.

OK smartie, what kind of "kernel type" should it be?

Reminds me of the "bloatware" type of statement, vague and nospecific so essentially meaningless. Think "protection" and the problem become obvious. I've worked on internal OS drivers a few times in my life:)

Remember the point was the claim that NT won't blue screen and that it won't lock up. So yes, there's something not quite cozy about a driver being able to muck up the system.

Admitting that the design is flawed ("able to crash") is hardly a recommendation and at best is a poor excuse.

I wasn't picking on, nor defending MS. Merely pointing out that XP can and will crash and lockup .. despite zealot's aruing otherwise.

Don't make something out of a post that is not stated.

Share this post


Link to post

Now that raises another interesting issue--driver signing.

Paying money to Microsoft to have your drivers certified aside, the WHQL process is very good at screening out some of the more egregious violations of Windows driver policies. I find myself bewildered by the ridicule the tech sites pour at the "unsigned driver installation" scenario.

The default driver-installation policy of Windows XP is to allow the installation of WHQL-certified drivers, and warnings thrice-over when you try to install unsigned drivers--without blocking a determined user from installing those drivers anyway, thus conveying a sense of the risks involved and yet allowing enough flexibility to override that safeguard. (In domains or centrally- and/or well-administered network locations this setting can be overriden so that no one is allowed to install unsigned drivers)

WHQL certification means the days of the hardware manufacturer companies quickly throwing together a set of shoddy drivers (example: a driver that requires a presence in both kernel and application layers) are essentially over. And that can only be a good thing (and better as time goes on)

Share this post


Link to post

This, uh, depends on the kernel type; generally there's nothing wrong with drivers being able to crash the system - drivers are supposed to be perfect.

OK smartie, what kind of "kernel type" should it be?

A preemtive kernel with internal protection (which is not something every kernel has to be, and not necessary a good thing). And don't call me 'smartie'. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post

OK smartie, what kind of "kernel type" should it be?

Regardless of how you think computer OSes and hardware ought to function, it is NOT up to the OS to allow for every sort of hardware interrupt and control that peripheral manufacturers can think up. Hence the need for drivers to run at the kernel level, where protection against errors are virtually nonexistent. In such an environment, the slightest mistake or unhandled exception can be fatal.

Reminds me of the "bloatware" type of statement, vague and nospecific so essentially meaningless. Think "protection" and the problem become obvious. I've worked on internal OS drivers a few times in my life:)

Ideally the OS should be protected against driver malfunctions, but that is not very realistic.

Remember the point was the claim that NT won't blue screen and that it won't lock up. So yes, there's something not quite cozy about a driver being able to muck up the system.

The design of the OS is not at fault here. It is merely following common-sense guidelines. If a particular program (games or otherwise) can tell a driver (in your case the GF3 card drivers) to do a set of actions that generate an error event that the driver does not provide a sane way to handle, then it's not up to the OS to gracefully terminate--it's already far too late for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
×