Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: stopthegop on May 16, 2007, 02:49:07 AM
-
Cast your vote. (http://blogs.pcworld.com/techlog/archives/004055.html)
I nominated Vista. :)
-
Please everyone vote vista... :-)
-
Sorry. I can't vote for Windows Vista. Vista is better than XP, which, in turn, is better than 98, which was better than 95, which was better than 3.1.
That said, it's still barely useable, but still not the worst technology product ever.
I voted for "Anything with DRM".
-
Windows ME
-
I find it difficult to understand how anyone could prefer Vista to XP or even 2k lol
-
I prefer Vista because I can do cool apps that improve on what I liked about the Amiga so long ago. I think you'll find that these Vista Apps are really very cool. If you really want to see what Vista does, check out this Video on a Mac with Safari or Firefox or a PC with Internet Explorer..
http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm (http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm)
If after you see this you aren't impressed you are probably just a MS hater or you wish the Amiga could do this right now... Either way I'd question your motivations for saying such things..
-
I prefer Vista because I can do cool apps that improve on what I liked about the Amiga so long ago. I think you'll find that these Vista Apps are really very cool. If you really want to see what Vista does, check out this Video on a Mac with Safari or Firefox or a PC with Internet Explorer..
http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm
If after you see this you aren't impressed you are probably just a MS hater or you wish the Amiga could do this right now... Either way I'd question your motivations for saying such things..
I've never met anyone who waxed nostalgic about Windows. Mostly people are like.."God, its even worse than the last version..". Most people are (rightly) cynical about the technology industry in general, and Microsoft in particular. Count me among the those who don't like any of their products. I don't like the fact that they use the public to beta test their software. "Ooops, time for another 'service pack'..." I don't like their dubious (read: illegal) business practices, which are as well documented as they are notorious. I also don't like their "upgrade forever" business model, which is an inducement to create sh1t software; this is an area in which they excel (no pun). If this makes me an "ms-hater", oh well. But to simply ignore these things or pretend they are not true, one must be blind, mute and illiterate. Either that, or an "ms-hater's" opposite:"ms-lover".
-
In my opinion, Apple QuickTime easily wins here..
-
Windows ME....
Worst piece of crap i have ever seen...
-
what have we have here?
another windows-hater thread!
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
-
stopthegop wrote:
Cast your vote. (http://blogs.pcworld.com/techlog/archives/004055.html)
I nominated Vista. :)
According to PC World's "The 25 Worst Tech Products of All Time" (http://www.pcworld.com/ article/id,125772-page,2/article.html) on May 26th of last year, it was:
1. America Online (1989-2006)
Vista still has a quite dismal showing to make before it can steal that crown.
Edit: article does not show from that link, hmm, but did come up in a Google search... go figure.
Don't try instead, history is being rewritten... (Links no longer reliable.) :-)
-
The poll is actually for the most annoying tech product.
And for that I nominate the....
[color=ff0000]AMIGA[/color][/b]
-
ST!!ST!!ST!!ST!!ST!!ST!!ST!!
-
I give my vote to Windows ME. :lol:
-
orange wrote:
In my opinion, Apple QuickTime easily wins here..
What's wrong with QuickTime?
--
moto
-
Any "helper" task: Background tasks designed to speed up the booting of any particular application. All they do is waste memory. What's the point of precaching if the task itself is going to get swapped out to VM? They seem harmless until everybody starts doing it, and you've suddenly got 30+ 3rd-party background tasks running.
Anti-virus software: Responsible for probably 80% of all BSOD and lost data, not to mention unbearably slow performance. The only time I ever used anti-virus software since Windows95 was a few months, shortly before I upgraded from Win2K to XP. In that short time, Norton destroyed my entire e-mail archive (luckily I had a recent backup). I uninstalled it immediately. After almost 12 years of not using any anti-virus software, I have still never gotten a virus or mal-ware.
HTML: A lot of people applaude the W3C -- I despise them. Who's idea was it to make a language based on SGML that couldn't be parsed as SGML because it was syntax incompatible, and then spend over a decade trying to "fix" a broken format? How the hell can something be a standard if its syntax continously changes? Isn't the point of a standard is so it doesn't change? No wonder the web is a huge mess of non-compliance! Hey, now I'm required to add blank "alt" tags to all my "img" tags just to signal that the tags are blank and not null. Oh, wait, these days I'm supposed to use "object" tags declared as image classes, not the "img" tag.
Java: Crap when it was introduced, and it's still crap. Almost every applet I've ever used will only work for a few years, and then when a new version of Java is released, everything breaks. I thought the whole point of a software platform is so you didn't have to worry about platform compatibility? Java is the new DLL hell. Software is nicer than hardware, because software can be updated at any time. That also ensures that software standards are updated and patched about 20x times as often. Funny how a Core2 Duo can run software two decades old, but Java barfs on applets written a few years ago.
Web 2.0 (and up): Not a technology, but a way of thinking. Yeah, instead of using a clean standard, I think I'll write 200K of bloated XML and JavaScript just to populate drop-down menus in realtime. Hey, who cares how complicated things are to code, so long as the technology is largely invisible to the end user? Oh yeah, and let's not forget that the reason for using XML and JS is so the application is accessible to everyone -- except those using browsers incompatible with the newest XML standards. Wouldn't it make more sense to make a new format if it takes years for browsers to start supporting the "new old" formats, and even then, they do it poorly? A clean format could be implemented in a few months, but instead we spend years trying to force HTML and XML to do things they were never designed to do? If something doesn't work in a 2-year-old web browser, what's the point in having it based on a "standard" DTS? I mean, other than for political reasons. We wouldn't want a consortium of commercial companies developing a standard to compete with those lovable martyrs at the W3C, would we?
-
Motorollin: What's wrong with QuickTime?
Where to begin?
- QuickTime installs several background tasks and helpers. See my comments about helpers above.
- The last time I downloaded QuickTime, Apple was bundling it with iTunes. Why the hell do I need iTunes forced on me when I don't have an iPod, or even a portable music player? Funny how people complained about Mandatory Web Browsers in Windows years ago, but nobody complains when Apple bundles largely unrelated products.
- QuickTime is the only application I know of that will BSOD my Windows machine. It does a lot of really nasty low-level things to the machine's graphics system. Apple is quick to blame Microsoft for this, especially given the large problems Apple has had getting QuickTime running on Vista.
- On Windows, QuickTime is not even the slightest bit compliant with Windows GUI programming guidelines. Simple things like copy/paste, hotkeys, and closing windows don't work properly.
- It's slow as dirt. Tracking response is faster than Windows Media Player, and it can play videos at different speeds, but that's it.
- QuickTime overtakes your machine. It replaces everything in your web browsers, too, so just clicking on an MP3 file will bring up the QuickTime interface. Turning everything to defaults in the system takes a long time, and the QuickTime control panel doesn't affect web browser integration at all, forcing you to do it through your web browser's extension manager. What a pain!
- Apple makes you pay for the full QuickTime app to enable file saving, even if the media is not protected. Now that's stupid.
- Many, many old QuickTime codecs don't work on newer versions of QuickTime. The solution? Buy the full version of QuickTime and recode your old .MOV files, of course! Windows Media Player will still play anything if the proper codec is installed. Oh yeah, the QuickTime updater won't recognize "obsolete" codecs, and any codecs that are recognized will usually require extra plugins to be installed, and not just the codec itself. More "bundling", in other words.
-
Voted for vista, it consume's way to many resources so it's bad for the planet :crazy:
I also would have liked to vote for windows ME, that one was really whack also :lol:
-
@waccoon:
Awesome Rant, dude. Agree w/ every word. :)
-
Waccoon wrote:
Motorollin: What's wrong with QuickTime?
- QuickTime installs several background tasks and helpers. See my comments about helpers above.
Fair comment. However this doesn't impact performance on my Mac at all.
Waccoon wrote:
- The last time I downloaded QuickTime, Apple was bundling it with iTunes. Why the hell do I need iTunes forced on me when I don't have an iPod, or even a portable music player? Funny how people complained about Mandatory Web Browsers in Windows years ago, but nobody complains when Apple bundles largely unrelated products.
The Apple web site offers Quicktime+iTunes or Quicktime on its own.
Waccoon wrote:
- QuickTime is the only application I know of that will BSOD my Windows machine. It does a lot of really nasty low-level things to the machine's graphics system. Apple is quick to blame Microsoft for this, especially given the large problems Apple has had getting QuickTime running on Vista.
Can't comment on this as it has never happened to me in Windows, and QuickTime causes no problems on my Mac.
Waccoon wrote:
- On Windows, QuickTime is not even the slightest bit compliant with Windows GUI programming guidelines. Simple things like copy/paste, hotkeys, and closing windows don't work properly.
Fair point. But it's nicely integrated with MacOS :-)
Waccoon wrote:
- It's slow as dirt. Tracking response is faster than Windows Media Player, and it can play videos at different speeds, but that's it.
Yes this is annoying.
Waccoon wrote:
- QuickTime overtakes your machine. It replaces everything in your web browsers, too, so just clicking on an MP3 file will bring up the QuickTime interface. Turning everything to defaults in the system takes a long time, and the QuickTime control panel doesn't affect web browser integration at all, forcing you to do it through your web browser's extension manager. What a pain!
Again, this is not a problem on a Mac. Can't comment on Windows though.
Waccoon wrote:
- Apple makes you pay for the full QuickTime app to enable file saving, even if the media is not protected. Now that's stupid.
No it's not. Quicktime Pro has loads of extra features and is a great product. Most applications which allow you to convert between different file formats are shareware.
Waccoon wrote:
- Many, many old QuickTime codecs don't work on newer versions of QuickTime. The solution? Buy the full version of QuickTime and recode your old .MOV files, of course! Windows Media Player will still play anything if the proper codec is installed. Oh yeah, the QuickTime updater won't recognize "obsolete" codecs, and any codecs that are recognized will usually require extra plugins to be installed, and not just the codec itself. More "bundling", in other words.
I have never had a QuickTime movie which does not play on my Mac, and I have some very old ones.
I don't want to come across as a crackpot Applehead. I have agreed with some of your points. But they are minor annoyances. On the whole I think QuickTime is a great product, and one which I happily paid for.
--
moto
-
Vista is definitely the worst technology.
The reason:
MS has been promising a better performance, while Vista kills any machine with 1GB of memory or less.
Such a sluggish performance...maaaaaaaaaaan!
-
That'll be my vote for Norton then.
Since installing it (D'oh!) I've got a much slower system which doesn't like network gaming. Great at stopping viruses but awful at letting me do anything.
-
Norton AntiVirus is supposed to work like that. It uses so much memory and CPU time that there is nothing left for a Virus to operate in :-P
--
moto
-
I vote for the A570 CDROM addon for the A500 which was released shortly before the A500 was scrapped and the A600 was launched and A570 became obsolete... how dumb is that!!?
-
I voted norton too. It came pre-installed on a laptop I bought recently. Was wondering my my system was so un-responsive. I then remembered people moaning about norton. Unistalled it and hey presto a much more responsive system. went straight back to Free AVG which I have been using for years. But there again I have not had a virus dectected on my machine for years
-
Norton also gets my vote. Not only does it cause many headaches for people, but it can be an arse to remove from the system.
EDIT: thought better of it.
-
Waccoon wrote:
Motorollin: What's wrong with QuickTime?
Where to begin?
[words]
http://www.codecguide.com/about_qt.htm
-
so many to choose from...
norton, quicktime, real player, msnm, vista (i really don't know why so many people hate win me so much...i've never had significant problems with it [as in, nothing more than i get with anything pre-xp/2000], firefox, microsoft bluetooth stack, etc...
but i'll go with quicktime
-
DonnyEMU wrote:
check out this Video on a Mac with Safari or Firefox or a PC with Internet Explorer..
http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm (http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm)
If after you see this you aren't impressed you are probably just a MS hater or you wish the Amiga could do this right now...
So what's so impressive about that site? That you don't see anything if you don't exactly use one of those OS/browser combinations? I can do that easily... (http://www.amiga.org/uploads/smil441d61e57bccd.gif)
-
Colani1200 wrote:
[So what's so impressive about that site? That you don't see anything if you don't exactly use one of those OS/browser combinations? I can do that easily... (http://www.amiga.org/uploads/smil441d61e57bccd.gif)
@silverlight
Seamless, fast installation for users
effort...who wants to install stuff
Consistent experiences between Windows-based and Macintosh computers
that's what "STANDARDS" are for
Stunning vector-based graphics, media, text, animation, and overlays
ah, you mean like svg, flash, etc etc
lol...what poop
ed: to add insult to injury, it doesn't work with opera, and it didn't ask me where it wanted to install...
further ed: it's a resource hog...and watching that video, there's nothing but eye candy...poop that i'll never use, and i'd rather they'd have spent the years of development optimising their nt kernel, rather than mucking around with this kinda crap
-
DonnyEMU wrote:
I prefer Vista because I can do cool apps that improve on what I liked about the Amiga so long ago. I think you'll find that these Vista Apps are really very cool. If you really want to see what Vista does, check out this Video on a Mac with Safari or Firefox or a PC with Internet Explorer..
http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm (http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm)
If after you see this you aren't impressed you are probably just a MS hater or you wish the Amiga could do this right now... Either way I'd question your motivations for saying such things..
My motivation is that both times I tried Vista I found it very sluggish and awkward to use - too much gui if you know what I mean. One of the try-outs was on a nice fast computer as well. DX10 will draw me in eventually no doubt.
-
Waccoon wrote:
Motorollin: What's wrong with QuickTime?
- The last time I downloaded QuickTime, Apple was bundling it with iTunes. Why the hell do I need iTunes forced on me when I don't have an iPod, or even a portable music player?
Yes, I find that annoying too.
-
@Waccoon
I agree with both your posts entirely. Unbelieveble!
I also refuse to run anti-virus software and have never gotten a virus.
-
lou_dias wrote:
I also refuse to run anti-virus software and have never gotten a virus.
How'd you know if there's nothing that warns you when you've been infected? :lol:
-
duh , they forgot the lamest of them all... amiganywhere!
-
I also refuse to use anti-virus software. The one time I tried Norton, it brought my 3Ghz machine literally to its knees. Its a case of the cure being worse than the disease.
Speaking of inept products, I did some side work on a neighbor's PC the other day and noticed he had a printer driver installed. Guess how big it was? Try 680MB! Now, that has got to be a record..
-
mikrucio wrote:
Please everyone vote vista... :-)
Haven't tried Vista yet, so I can't vote on that.
Never used ME either.
I missed the option Windows 95. I have very bad experiences with that OS. Especially with cleaning up other's peecees. (And of course Norton Antivirus is the first thing I kick harddisks; bloody standard installations)
-
I'll vouch for AOL.
Waaaaay too much slow gfx (Much in the same way as XP/Vista), unreliable, auto-restart feature after it crashes (Shows how much faith AOL have in their browser) and ? knows how many menus.
Not to mention the spyware zapper that performs a useless 30 second scan on boot-up that does nothing execpt to slooow the PC down. And even when the "aolsoftware.exe" is supposed to be running in the background the PC is at least 50% slower than normal...
And im using AOL right now...(Killed the background task off already)
Sigh.
-
stopthegop wrote:
I also refuse to use anti-virus software. The one time I tried Norton, it brought my 3Ghz machine literally to its knees. Its a case of the cure being worse than the disease.
it's a case of using the right cure...namely avg/avast
-
I also agree that Norton AntiVirus is just aweful. Have you ever tried to remove it once it is installed. Norton AntiVirus installs so deeply into the OS and registry that your lucky if it dosent crash your system when you remove it. It crashed my PC so badly several years ago that I had to do a complete reinstall of windows as the registry was totally messed up.
-
Norton.
It's like a long lost relative who comes to stay, ie it consumes most of your available resources and you can't get rid of the bugger.
-
QuickTime here as well. I can't believe people still support this player when there are tons of better alternatives (players, codecs, and encoders...).
-
McVenco wrote:
lou_dias wrote:
I also refuse to run anti-virus software and have never gotten a virus.
How'd you know if there's nothing that warns you when you've been infected? :lol:
Anyone who's built their own PC and diables all the un-necessary Windows "services" and can hear their hard drive knows whether or not they have a virus.
Add to that: Microsoft's automatic updates run the "Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool" monthly and it's updated monthly. Also, in Internet Explorer, I have everything set to "Prompt" before anything gets executed through my browser, even cookies.
It's not hard to live virus/anti-virus free, you just have to actively persue it.
ps,
My QuickTime crashes currently. It was always slow to launch to begin with. One of these days, I might care enough to uninstall it and download the latest version. I do have some .mov files that I care about - unfortunately... The one I have now installed I-Tunes along with an I-Tunes "service" which I disabled...
-
Haranguer wrote:
Sorry. I can't vote for Windows Vista. Vista is better than XP, which, in turn, is better than 98, which was better than 95, which was better than 3.1.
That said, it's still barely useable, but still not the worst technology product ever.
I voted for "Anything with DRM".
did you know by voting "anything with drm" you were in fact voting for vista and xp as both contain it. anyway i voted the same "anything with drm"
-
Real Player
-
I voted "other" - and nominated those white Ipod headphones - you know the ones which give out so much ambient tinniness. Favoured by those cheap 8astard5 who are too tight to buy a decent pair of headphones.
I would love 5 minutes alone with the designer of those (portuguese guy by the name of "Juan Kerr" I believe) - and I count myself as a pacifist.
-
DonnyEMU wrote:
I prefer Vista because I can do cool apps that improve on what I liked about the Amiga so long ago. I think you'll find that these Vista Apps are really very cool. If you really want to see what Vista does, check out this Video on a Mac with Safari or Firefox or a PC with Internet Explorer..
http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm (http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm)
If after you see this you aren't impressed you are probably just a MS hater or you wish the Amiga could do this right now... Either way I'd question your motivations for saying such things..
All I get is a button urging me to download some beta software. Hardly impressive by any measure.
Seeing as you have essentially said that everyone should agree with you, else they are some stupid illogical fan-boy, I guess that makes me a illogical fanboy.
-
I voted "Anything with DRM", however, since your all canning Norton/Symantec I thought I'd add my two cents.
A while back we migrated from Symantec Anti-virus CE 8.1 to 9.0. 9.0 will scan pretty much anything coming in or going out and I was surprised to find that on one machine, it was detecting email being sent and scanning it. First thing that sprang to mind was that there was a mass mailer running on the machine, yet Symantec failed to detect anything. It would detect and scan the emails being generated, however it wouldn't detect the mass mailer that was sending them. A quick Panda scan found the exact cause and stopped it dead in its tracks, good one Symantec.
-
I nominated Vista too! And not the Amiga version.
:)
-
hands down, Windows ME. Barely usable at all! With clean reinstalls coming at a weekly frequency!
-
lou_dias wrote:
McVenco wrote:
lou_dias wrote:
I also refuse to run anti-virus software and have never gotten a virus.
How'd you know if there's nothing that warns you when you've been infected? :lol:
Anyone who's built their own PC and diables all the un-necessary Windows "services" and can hear their hard drive knows whether or not they have a virus.
Add to that: Microsoft's automatic updates run the "Windows Malicious Software Removal Tool" monthly and it's updated monthly. Also, in Internet Explorer, I have everything set to "Prompt" before anything gets executed through my browser, even cookies.
hmm....firstly, i wouldn't trust windows to deal with spyware...spybot s&d and adaware are the only viable anti-spyware things around at the moment
secondly, there will _always_ be exploits in browsers...your prompting thing, whilst perhaps a good habit (perhaps excessive and unnecessary control) won't counteract those exploits
It's not hard to live virus/anti-virus free, you just have to actively persue it.
sure...but it helps having an efficient antivirus running in the background in addition to your good computing practice
My QuickTime crashes currently. It was always slow to launch to begin with. One of these days, I might care enough to uninstall it and download the latest version. I do have some .mov files that I care about - unfortunately... The one I have now installed I-Tunes along with an I-Tunes "service" which I disabled...
/me shouts and points to sir_inferno's above link for quicktime alternative codec...doesn't install poop (well...excluding the quicktime codecs of course)
-
If you really want to see what Vista does, check out this Video on a Mac with Safari or Firefox or a PC with Internet Explorer..
http://www.sneath.org/tim/wpf.htm
/me points my FireFox loaded up Mac to the above URL.../
Oh wow, an image link titled "Get Microsoft Silverlight" on a pink-ish background! I do have to admit, I've never seen this before on an Amiga or elsewhere. Most sites I visit tend to have actual content.
If after you see this you aren't impressed you are probably just a MS hater or you wish the Amiga could do this right now...
Sorry, count me among the "not impressed". Heck, I've seen much larger banners on a variety of colored backgrounds, some with animation even! I think you're just easily impressed.
-
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
Never used ME either.
I missed the option Windows 95. I have very bad experiences with that OS. Especially with cleaning up other's peecees. (And of course Norton Antivirus is the first thing I kick harddisks; bloody standard installations)
Having 3 PC's at the office with Win ME, 2000, and XP, ME wins hands down as the lamest of the three.
I guess I'll have to try and wipe Norton off the ME and maybe that'll speed it up a bit.
-
I'm going to toss my vote in for Microsoft BOB. What a useless and buggy piece of crap that was.
-
Heck, I've seen much larger banners on a variety of colored backgrounds, some with animation even! I think you're just easily impressed.
I actually thought that site was pretty impressive - I'd love to have animated traffic graphs on satellite maps. fantastic stuff. Admittedly the least impressive applications to me were the Microsoft ones.
Not sure if I 'wished [my] amiga could do that' however I wish something would make computing fun again, like it was with the Amiga.
The Mac doesn't cut it. It's fantastic, easy to use but I don't enjoy it. I use Debian Linux because it works, and Windows because I have to but I still fire up the A4000 when I want to remember what a fun computer felt like.
-
Realplayer realplayer OH SWEET JESUS REALPLAYER
And then once you decided to use that buggy pile of crap, real networks going after people who create "realmedia recorders" hammer and tongs.
-
Real does suck mightily, indeed.
Notice a pattern developing, too.. So many Microsoft products in the running... I think they are the undisputed champions at producing sucking software. Apple gets an honorable mention.
-
Amiduffer wrote:
Having 3 PC's at the office with Win ME, 2000, and XP, ME wins hands down as the lamest of the three.
I guess I'll have to try and wipe Norton off the ME and maybe that'll speed it up a bit.
not particularly fair comparing an 9x with an NT one...(especially with XP...i mean come on...a fair bit of time between them lol)
MAYBE?!?!!? lol...norton is the "antidote" to efficient and stable computing
-
Definately MySapce.
I couldn't vote for Vista or ME because although they look crap, I have never used them.
I was also tempted to vote for MSN/AIM but those arn't actually that annoying when you use a decent client (i.e. BitlBee). If you use the official client, then that is bad, e.g. MSN Messenger 7 is a horrible piece of software.
MySpace is definately very annoying. It can be fine when used appropriately, but not with all the horrible themes that some people use.