Turn on thread page Beta

Stripey screen of death?? wtf??! watch

Announcements
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JMonkey)
    So? They basically split microsoft up into two teams created two different OS, both of which turned out to be **** in beta testing. One of which was mildly less **** and therefore won through. Why not just make an OS that works in the first place?
    I'd say that at the time, their business model fairly reflected on the state of computing at the time. Home users didn't need the business tools of NT/2000, and so splitting it up made sense. It's still the same now, but each OS comes out with different variations of it (ie, Win XP Home / Pro).

    And Betas aren't meant to be perfect anyway! :tongue:


    (Original post by JMonkey)
    Whoop de ******* do, it took them 20 years to get an operating system that didn't crash every 5 minutes and you're impressed. Some people are so easily bought off. Linux and Apple mac operating systems have always been perfect, it's not rocket science, unless your approach to programming is to beta test on the general public with **** products.
    98SE was stable, as was XP, especially SP2. So, no, a stable OS doesn't impress me at all.

    Linux is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, certainly not out of the box. This is where Linux benefits from it's immense customisation, you can make it perfect (in your own opinion), but it doesn't start like that.

    Can't really comment for much of the Mac OS history. Only really used OSX. It's a nice O/S, but it still has it's problems, especially in a business environment.


    (Original post by JMonkey)
    Win7 is fantastic eh? Well why the **** wasn't Vista fantastic, because it was a prelim run for something that actually worked. Shocking.
    How they cocked up Vista so badly is beyond me tbh. I have no reason to defend that comment at all. Really though, Win7 is just lovely.


    (Original post by JMonkey)
    Anyone who thinks Microsoft are great is an idiot and has no idea about competition and or business sense.
    Considering the amount of different configurations MS OSes run on, the number of applications for an MS based PC there can be and considering the extremely wide user base with different PC skill levels, I'd say they've done rather well to produce anything that is A) Powerful enough to run a business on and B) Easy enough for my gran to use.

    Yes, Linux can run a business, but for an average Joe, it's far too complicated to use.

    Yes, OSX is easy to use, but it doesn't have nearly enough features to run a business on it.

    You cannot expect an OS that has to be a Jack of all trades to be a master of all of them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeyd85)
    I'd say that at the time, their business model fairly reflected on the state of computing at the time. Home users didn't need the business tools of NT/2000, and so splitting it up made sense. It's still the same now, but each OS comes out with different variations of it (ie, Win XP Home / Pro).

    And Betas aren't meant to be perfect anyway! :tongue:




    98SE was stable, as was XP, especially SP2. So, no, a stable OS doesn't impress me at all.

    Linux is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, certainly not out of the box. This is where Linux benefits from it's immense customisation, you can make it perfect (in your own opinion), but it doesn't start like that.

    Can't really comment for much of the Mac OS history. Only really used OSX. It's a nice O/S, but it still has it's problems, especially in a business environment.




    How they cocked up Vista so badly is beyond me tbh. I have no reason to defend that comment at all. Really though, Win7 is just lovely.




    Considering the amount of different configurations MS OSes run on, the number of applications for an MS based PC there can be and considering the extremely wide user base with different PC skill levels, I'd say they've done rather well to produce anything that is A) Powerful enough to run a business on and B) Easy enough for my gran to use.

    Yes, Linux can run a business, but for an average Joe, it's far too complicated to use.

    Yes, OSX is easy to use, but it doesn't have nearly enough features to run a business on it.

    You cannot expect an OS that has to be a Jack of all trades to be a master of all of them.
    Let me ask you one question corporate drone of MS. Would you expect it to take 20 years to produce a stable OS if there were 5 companies in the OS market? Why? End of story. I'm not saying MS aren't the master of business, I'm saying the customer loses and will go on losing all the time the US lets it have a monopoly.

    Basically if you are the only OS, you can produce rubbish which people will have to buy, and then bring out a better version a year later thus maximising profit. It's not hard to see exactly the way MS works, they are neither incompetent nor stupid, they have the best programmers in the world. Why then can't they make a good product, and it's not jack of all trades master of none? It's sheer bloody minded business monopolisation. Simple as that. Early on they realised that if you keep dangling carrots people will keep buying your software. Unlike with Apple where an OS is practically a once in a computers lifetime purchase.

    You'd probably admire their methodology if you hadn't had to live with windows form 3.0 to XP.

    '98SE was stable. :toofunny:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JMonkey)
    Let me ask you one question corporate drone of MS. Would you expect it to take 20 years to produce a stable OS if there were 5 companies in the OS market? Why? End of story. I'm not saying MS aren't the master of business, I'm saying the customer loses and will go on losing all the time the US lets it have a monopoly.
    It didn't take 20 years to make a stable OS, as I said earlier, 98SE and XPSP2 were very, very stable...

    Edit: Hell even Vista is stable... it just runs like a dog. Got to give it some credit I guess.

    And there have been more than 5 companies making OSes for years, so I don't see your point there either... :confused:

    Regarding the monopoly thing, well, I don't see there is one, not for OSes anyway. That's not for me to argue though, there have been plenty of law suites to determine if MS have created a monopoly or not.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeyd85)
    It didn't take 20 years to make a stable OS, as I said earlier, 98SE and XPSP2 were very, very stable...

    Edit: Hell even Vista is stable... it just runs like a dog. Got to give

    And there have been more than 5 companies making OSes for years, so I don't see your point there either... :confused:

    Regarding the monopoly thing, well, I don't see there is one, not for OSes anyway. That's not for me to argue though, there have been plenty of law suites to determine if MS have created a monopoly or not.
    XP was the first stable platform it took nearly 20 years from V1.0 1981 to 2001: that said early OS pre V3.0 were fine it's when they gained the monopoly things went a bit pear shaped, anyone who had to use '95 or '98 will know what I'm talking about and Me was a joke. Case closed.

    What is the market share for MS OS? I'll tell you 90%.

    And I meant 5 companies with a share above 15%. not 1 company with 90% and 4 with <5% to .5%.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JMonkey)
    XP was the first stable platform it took nearly 20 years from V1.0 1981 to 2001: that said early OS pre V3.0 were fine it's when they gained the monopoly things went a bit pear shaped, anyone who had to use '95 or '98 will know what I'm talking about and Me was a joke. Case closed.

    What is the market share for MS OS? I'll tell you 90%.

    And I meant 5 companies with a share above 15%. not 1 company with 90% and 4 with <5% to .5%.
    I used 98, twas fine (eventually). 95 wasn't too shoddy either. Did everything I needed it to.

    ME was worse than Vista, I'll give you that. It was worse than a joke.

    Thing is though, you're argument is based on a hypothetical situation of developers all making great commercial OSes. If this had happened, we'd be in a right mess now. The support for 5 main rival OSes and the interoperability between them would be horrendous to say the least. Being as I do IT Tech Support for a living, I for one am glad that this isn't the case!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeyd85)
    I used 98, twas fine (eventually). 95 wasn't too shoddy either. Did everything I needed it to.

    ME was worse than Vista, I'll give you that. It was worse than a joke.

    Thing is though, you're argument is based on a hypothetical situation of developers all making great commercial OSes. If this had happened, we'd be in a right mess now. The support for 5 main rival OSes and the interoperability between them would be horrendous to say the least. Being as I do IT Tech Support for a living, I for one am glad that this isn't the case!
    Garbage. The platforms would prbably be cross compatible and two would likely have won out.

    We can both play the hypothetical game. The fact is when you've only ever known MS then everything looks good compared to MS OS ten years ago, even when it's worse it has shiny gizmos to direct the stupid and shiny impressed user away from the usual horrendous flaws. DLL hell for years, and they haven't changed and nor will they while they hold the whole market by the balls.

    Don't get me wrong MS isn't ****. It just should be better than it is.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    well idk about stripey screen of death.

    but blue screen of death (v. similar)

    put in your os disk and switch off your pc


    then when its loading up b4 you see the windows logo hit f12

    then delete windows of your drive with windows off it by pressing d then enter then l

    and then press enter on that drive to reinstall the os


    i hope this helps
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JMonkey)
    Garbage. The platforms would prbably be cross compatible and two would likely have won out.
    Maybe, maybe not. You look back 20 years ago, and nothing was cross compatible. It was horrendous. These days it's a lot better. the mentality of developers is a lot better now than it was then. You simply cannot succeed without cross compatibilty these days, which, I think in everybodys opinion, is a good thing.

    (Original post by JMonkey)
    We can both play the hypothetical game. The fact is when you've only ever known MS then everything looks good compared to MS OS ten years ago, even when it's worse it has shiny gizmos to direct the stupid and shiny impressed user away from the usual horrendous flaws. DLL hell for years, and they haven't changed and nor will they while they hold the whole market by the balls.
    Don't get me wrong MS isn't ****. It just should be better than it is.
    Shiny things and DLL hell aside, I can go home, boot my PC and do what I need. Granted, I'm not a dev, so maybe these things annoy you more, but frankly, it's a non-issue to me.

    Ultimately, I'd like to see what would happen if MS made XP source public domain - let the *nix comminity have a field day with it. That would be immense.

    MS (bless them) try to make OSes good, with all these new ideas and what not, but sometimes it doesn't work out (yes, I'm looking at you Vista). It's the user dev that makes *nix as excellent as it is.

    MS have been saying that they've listened to users and implemented changes accordingly. Thing is, MS Dev team < *nix dev community, there's no way that MS can compete with *nix as far as making an OS do what the end user wants.

    Either way, I've enjoyed this lil debate!

    Thanks!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeyd85)

    Either way, I've enjoyed this lil debate!

    Thanks!
    Hint taken. Me too!

    I'll rep you tomorrow.

    I have a feeling though that I might have to start a thread about what people think of MS, it's a subject that has good legs.

    hypothetically speaking I wish Apple had 50% of the market and MS 30% and the rest 20%. Seriously.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeyd85)
    Linux is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, certainly not out of the box. This is where Linux benefits from it's immense customisation, you can make it perfect (in your own opinion), but it doesn't start like that.
    SUSE Studio
    It's only in Alpha at the moment, I got an invite yesterday (signed up a few weeks ago). OK, so you can't make the perfect OS with it, but it's a brilliant concept (I realise it is already possible for people to create their own installation CDs, but for the people that know how. SUSE Studio makes it a much simpler process).
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hobo06)
    SUSE Studio
    It's only in Alpha at the moment, I got an invite yesterday (signed up a few weeks ago). OK, so you can't make the perfect OS with it, but it's a brilliant concept (I realise it is already possible for people to create their own installation CDs, but for the people that know how. SUSE Studio makes it a much simpler process).
    Let me get this right, it essentially makes a customisable Wubi installer, but for SuSe?

    If so, winner!

    Edit: Looking at the vid, seems so. That's really nice.

    (Original post by JMonkey)

    I have a feeling though that I might have to start a thread about what people think of MS, it's a subject that has good legs.

    hypothetically speaking I wish Apple had 50% of the market and MS 30% and the rest 20%. Seriously.
    It's a good thread topic, which'll be overwhelmed with idiots very quickly. Such is the way of the idiot fanboi. :rolleyes:

    In your hypothetical world, 50% of PCs couldn't do what I'd need them too! :tongue:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    im hijacking ur thread OP, sorry:

    i have the same problem for 2 months. ive tried everything. i still have these vertical stripey lines . ive tried swapping monitors, using driver sweeper, installing latest drivers, blowing out heatsink and card and reseating it. to no avail.

    would rebooting be worth a shot? i cant seem to do it on mine since its custom built.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeyd85)
    Let me get this right, it essentially makes a customisable Wubi installer, but for SuSe?

    If so, winner!

    Edit: Looking at the vid, seems so. That's really nice.
    I can't see that there is anyway to send invitations so I'll describe it to give you an idea of how it works.
    The video appears to be a little outdated. It now uses openSUSE 11.1, with the choices shown in the video, but additionally a choice of KDE 3 or 4, and JeOS.
    You can then choose (I'm using GNOME option as an example, so the others may have slight differences) repositories to add (from a list, or import others not listed), software to install. Then the configuration - locale/time zone, network settings, users, backgrounds (for boot/login screens) from a selection, or upload your own, auto start programs and configure scripts - one to run at the end of the build, and one to run every time on startup. And then finally, additional files to add as shown in the video.
    For the build you can choose disk image, LiveCD or VMware virtual machine.

    I've never used openSUSE before so I've only been having a look through at the moment. Think I'll download a LiveCD at some point and give it a try, and if I like I'll make a custom build. Will make fresh installations a lot easier (I like to tinker with things without knowing what I'm doing, and end up screwing things up).
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hobo06)
    I can't see that there is anyway to send invitations so I'll describe it to give you an idea of how it works.
    The video appears to be a little outdated. It now uses openSUSE 11.1, with the choices shown in the video, but additionally a choice of KDE 3 or 4, and JeOS.
    You can then choose (I'm using GNOME option as an example, so the others may have slight differences) repositories to add (from a list, or import others not listed), software to install. Then the configuration - locale/time zone, network settings, users, backgrounds (for boot/login screens) from a selection, or upload your own, auto start programs and configure scripts - one to run at the end of the build, and one to run every time on startup. And then finally, additional files to add as shown in the video.
    For the build you can choose disk image, LiveCD or VMware virtual machine.

    I've never used openSUSE before so I've only been having a look through at the moment. Think I'll download a LiveCD at some point and give it a try, and if I like I'll make a custom build. Will make fresh installations a lot easier (I like to tinker with things without knowing what I'm doing, and end up screwing things up).
    That's a really, really great concept. I hope that it works as well as it seems!

    Oh, and bolded bit is the reason by Ubuntu install no longer boots! :tongue:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeyd85)
    That's a really, really great concept. I hope that it works as well as it seems!

    Oh, and bolded bit is the reason by Ubuntu install no longer boots! :tongue:
    Yeh, it'll be interesting to see where they go from here as it is only in aplha. I've noticed a few bugs, but overall it seems fairly stable. But then I've yet to actually build a system.
    It would be great to see other distros follow this concept, or to even have a Linux Studio, where you can choose the distro, although I think that would be a long way off yet.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hobo06)
    Yeh, it'll be interesting to see where they go from here as it is only in aplha. I've noticed a few bugs, but overall it seems fairly stable. But then I've yet to actually build a system.
    It would be great to see other distros follow this concept, or to even have a Linux Studio, where you can choose the distro, although I think that would be a long way off yet.
    I'd like to see a Win version of it tbh. Would make my life sooo much easier.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikeyd85)
    I'd like to see a Win version of it tbh. Would make my life sooo much easier.
    Perhaps if this takes off, a few years down the line MS might cotton on, 'Hey that's a good idea!'
    We can dream...
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hobo06)
    Perhaps if this takes off, a few years down the line MS might cotton on, 'Hey that's a good idea!'
    We can dream...
    It'll be too late by then I reckon. Everything will be thin clients and cloud computing anyway.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: March 20, 2009
Poll
Do you like exams?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.