Windows is buggy and slow lets buy a Mac

[tone007]

Its a 12 month HP DV4.  It heats up if left in a bag in sleep/hibernate.

Get it fixed, it's not working right.  Maybe a BIOS update...

And i've timed waking up from hibernate: the difference is maybe a few seconds.

..and then how long does it take to start up your browser and IM software and office suite and whatever other applications you'd have running?  If you hibernate the system with everything running, everything comes back in a running state with no additional wait, saving even more time and power.

It sounds like people just need to learn how to use the capabilities of the current operating systems before getting new features.

[Nlandas]

Quite frankly Xp like most of Windoze OS's was a bit of a dog at first but over time it's developed and IMHO, one hell of a good OS these days. Sure you get the odd useless errors but everything is easy to work on and is so frugal with it's hardware.

Vista was utter s***e to put it bluntly, but thankfully has been replaced with 7 which I hear isn't a bad OS, though is still power hungry.

NT was another good bit of work from Bill if you ask me.

;^) Bill had little to do with it. Again, I'm not in love with Microsoft but the guys that wrote NT were well versed in OS design. Although they came from a more monolithic though process - IMNSHO.

"Microsoft hired a group of developers from Digital Equipment Corporation led by Dave Cutler to build Windows NT, and many elements of the design reflect earlier DEC experience with Cutler's VMS and RSX-11. The operating system was designed to run on multiple instruction set architectures and multiple hardware platforms within each architecture. The platform dependencies are largely hidden from the rest of the system by a kernel mode module called the HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer)." - Wiki

[gertsy]

Uhh... no. Windows has so many security holes it leaks like a sieve, and some of them are tied to fundamental parts of the os that would be very hard to change. These problems aren't there in other modern oses.

Yes and 98% of those security holes are between the chair and the computer.  Yet because of the Windows OS popularity MS have no choice but to baby patch.

I have a 1998 Toshi Laptop with Windows XP SP3 that I use in bed upstairs (comfee!) behind a simple wireless router firewall.  It has NO Virus protection and I have turned off all MS Updates. This of course makes it run fast for a 10+ YO Laptop.  I use it for browsing only and have carefully set by browser’s security settings to custom high. I Do not logon as Administrator.
I check it “manually” for spyware every now and then and have never had a hit in 3+ years of use.

There are a lot of companies making a lot of money propagating the AV and Security train.

Don't get me wrong the holes are real.  But rarely do nasty things come out of these holes. Mostly people with blindfolds falling into them.

Gertsy

[gertsy]

On Windows:
I have had (legal) Vista Ultimate 64bit for 2 years now. It's slow, unintuitive and nigh on unusable until 5 minutes after pushing the power button. Out of the box Video and Music management is very good. I use Dual Boot XP SP3 for games.
What I don't like is all the cr*p about Windows 7.  The number of features attributed to Windows 7 that were already in Vista is quite humorous. But then again it is in the PC support industry’s best interest to propagate the uptake of new OSes to keep and increase a job for everybody.  For all intents and purposes all that Windows 7 has over Vista is a new name and some rewritten code to make things run faster. (Just as fast as a clean XP install)

Microsoft have, and will further move to shift people onto the new OS through proprietary bonding. “No soup for you!”

I’ve run Windows 7 Beta for a while and had a play on the release. SP1 will be out in a few weeks. What it delivers will determine if I move to it or an alternative.  But XP SP3 probably looks better than Mac because of my gamehead.

Cheers

Gertsy

[fishy_fiz]

The marketting of Windows7 was interesting in my opinion. They used the exact tactics Apple used to derail Vista, but in a positive way, and it actually appears to have worked. They simply sent out the message that "it's better/good" as opposed to Apples negative Vista marketting that "it's bad". People bought into it in both cases.

[smerf]

You're dead right I don't think about anything other than turning on, using and turning off my MacBook. Why should I have to think about anything else? When I'm using my Mac for writing my dissertation, researching something for use in clinic, viewing and annotating handouts during a lecture or seminar, or any number of other taxing tasks, I don't want to have to think about what my computer is doing or why. I want my OS to leave me alone while I'm working, and OS X does that.

--
moto

Hi,

@motorollin,

Exactly, and that is just what MAC's are made for, people who just want to use them and have them do the work to just get er done. My windows machine is like my hot rod, I am constantly changing hardware, writing programs, playing the latest games, watching TV, playing music, trying different OS's, emulators, and just having fun with my computer, I very rarely use my windows machine for anything useful. For office work like databasing, spreadsheeting, and word processing I use Ubuntu. I have thought about buying an Apple product once or twice, but could never see spending that much money for an outclassed over rated computer. If I want a MAC I will just expand my PC by buying the Hackintosh, and the Leopard OS. Is Windows buggy, I don't trust it with my important stuff and I am using Windows 7. So far since I bought Windows 7 (first day) I have had no problems, my test time for an OS is about 3 years, if it doesn't crash then I will start using it for my important stuff. So far the only operating systems that have been trusted with my data are CPM, Amiga, and TRS-80. Ubuntu Linux has really impressed me, I have been using it since ver 7.04 and it has kept all my data secure.

So now you know I don't use computers, I terrorize them. I push them to there limits, any OS that passes my tests I consider great. MAC's will never get my approval because of there lack of playability. They just don't do enough.

smerf

[smerf]

You sound like a prick.

Hi,

@Hell Labs,


Only to MAC users,

I just can't see buying over priced computers, and software that regulates on how you use your equipment. The Amiga computer and OS where open, and the PC computer is really open but windows does have some regulation, but does allow you to play with the OS a lot.

One of the best computers for playing with was the C64, still have one and it is just about as amazing as the Amiga.

Sorry I want freedom with my computers.

smerf

[runequester]

Hi,

@Hell Labs,


Only to MAC users,

I just can't see buying over priced computers, and software that regulates on how you use your equipment. The Amiga computer and OS where open, and the PC computer is really open but windows does have some regulation, but does allow you to play with the OS a lot.

One of the best computers for playing with was the C64, still have one and it is just about as amazing as the Amiga.

Sorry I want freedom with my computers.

smerf

if there's one idea I wish I could go back in time and wipe out from the history of computing, its "Software as rental". Limited number of installs, registering the OS etc. Feh.

[motorollin]

@smerf
Fair enough if you're more of a tinkerer. But I don't think it's fair to assume that all Mac users "can't think", and that they need "a completely controlled environment so that they  "won't make any mistakes or crash the MAC". Personally I have worked in IT and am very experienced in using computers. I am very technical, but got fed up with mucking about with computers all day. So yes, I want a computer which I can just turn on, use, and turn off again. IMO the best solution for that is a Mac.

Oh, and I'm very interested to hear exactly what software Macs run which "regulates on how you use your equipment". I'm not restricted in any way whatsoever on how I use my Mac. I can use any software I like with absolutely no restriction at all.

--
moto

[quarkx]

Well, I love this debate, but lets look at the things  no one really wants to Address on the MAC. I know flame me all you want, for I am an Aniti-Mac fan boy, but lets look at it from another angle.
First, If I wanted to run OSX, I would run it on a custom built box. It's no big secreat that OSX can run (with a patch) on any hardware. Apple's overpriced hardware has proven really suspect lately, thats because they are using ECS and Foxcomm Motherboards and parts.
Any system builder worth their salt knows that manufacturer's like ECS and Foxcom are just about the cheapest and worst (quality wise) components and it has been showing lately with the failture rates of the Mac hardware.This is also true of companies like HP and Dell (although Dell lately has only been using intel boards, but Intel boards are "middle of the Road" for quality also).
I can build a complete low end Foxcomm based system for under $200, not including a fancy case.

Second, Lets look at the OS, FreeBSD is the same, so is OSX really worth paying for when you can get FreeBSD? BTW I am building a FreeBSD server this week, so I can comment more on that later.

So, from a "Good" system builder angle, would you want a box that has really lowend components, and a "Free" OS,- granted with a bit of work, you can have a Mac for under $200-$300.

Now, I also know that a lot of Mac software wont run just on FreeBSD, so lets (for a giggle) buy OSX and download the "patch". Now we are running a Mac Clone for under $500. Now, If I were to do this, I would want "good" hardware, so I would upgrade to an ASUS board, max out the system and still be under $800.

I am no lover of Win 7, if I am going to spend $800 on a new system, it will be with XP, now I can ditch the Intel processor and get me an AMD Phenom and really have some fun, and dual boot to FreeBSD all for under $800. Now to be fair,I can get a Mini-Mac for like $600 , so I guess it all boils down to personal preferences.

[mongo]

Apple's overpriced hardware has proven really suspect lately, thats because they are using ECS and Foxcomm Motherboards and parts.

Apple uses Foxconn motherboards, or motherboards manufactured by Foxconn at least. So does Intel. So does almost everyone.

Foxconn is the largest manufacturer of electronics and computer components worldwide, and mainly manufactures on contract to other companies. Among other things, Foxconn produces the Mac mini, the iPod and the iPhone for Apple Inc.; Intel-branded motherboards for Intel Corp.; various orders for American computer manufacturers Dell and Hewlett-Packard; motherboards for UK computer manufacturer Zoostorm; the PlayStation 2 and PlayStation 3 for Sony; the Wii for Nintendo; the Xbox 360 for Microsoft, cell phones for Motorola, the Amazon Kindle, and Cisco equipment. - From Wikipedia.

[motorollin]

@quarkx
Honestly, I can't argue with anything you have said. And if I could be bothered, I would do exactly what you suggested: find a nice laptop which is compatible with the hacked version(s) of OS X 10.5 or 10.6 and use that. The reasons I haven't done so are as follows:

1. Software updates can break the hacked OS (whether deliberately or not...)
2. I haven't yet found a notebook I like which is *fully* supported by Hackintosh
3. On some hardware, getting Hackintosh working is a real effort
4. On some systems, OS X is reported to be pretty unstable

OS X is my operating system of choice. As much as I'd love to be able to run it on anything, I enjoy the ease and stability of running it on Apple hardware. And I'm prepared to pay extra for that. If you're not, then fair enough.

I can't comment on the FreeBSD vs. OS X business as I've never actually used FreeBSD. However, my understanding is that Apple have made fairly significant modifications and additions to the BSD core of OS X.

--
moto

[new2amga]

@motorollin

     In response to your 2. I have heard of in the hackintosh forums that one of the Dell Mini Notebooks was fully supported to be a Hackintosh.  I cannot remember the model number but it was apparently a big deal and then Dell stopped selling the model.  On the stability of OSX on a hackintosh, I don't know.  I helped a friend of mine build a hackintosh and we followed the guides online and the thing has never had an issue so those stability issues might be hardware related.  My G4 Mac crashes OSX so I cannot be sure.  Then again I haven't encountered an OS I couldn't crash...  It's one of the reasons I like to beta test OS software.  I enjoy finding things that break so they can be fixed later.  

*edit* It was the Dell Mini 9, and it was quickly replaced with the Mini 10V that wasn't fully compatible.
http://gizmodo.com/5156903/how-to-hackintosh-a-dell-mini-9-into-the-ultimate-os-x-netbook this is an article about the mini 9.  Seems like an interesting read.

[motorollin]

@motorollin

     In response to your 2. I have heard of in the hackintosh forums that one of the Dell Mini Notebooks was fully supported to be a Hackintosh.  I cannot remember the model number but it was apparently a big deal and then Dell stopped selling the model.

*edit* It was the Dell Mini 9, and it was quickly replaced with the Mini 10V that wasn't fully compatible.
http://gizmodo.com/5156903/how-to-hackintosh-a-dell-mini-9-into-the-ultimate-os-x-netbook this is an article about the mini 9.  Seems like an interesting read.

I remember reading about that, and went in to PC World to try out a Mini 9. Unfortunately I can't get on with the keyboard on a netbook, and increasing the storage on it would also have cost a fortune. I'm looking for a full-sized notebook, not a netbook. If you have any ideas about a fully Hackintosh-supported notebook, please let me know

On the stability of OSX on a hackintosh, I don't know.  I helped a friend of mine build a hackintosh and we followed the guides online and the thing has never had an issue so those stability issues might be hardware related.

That's good to know. Perhaps things have moved on since I last looked into it.

My G4 Mac crashes OSX so I cannot be sure.  Then again I haven't encountered an OS I couldn't crash...  It's one of the reasons I like to beta test OS software.  I enjoy finding things that break so they can be fixed later.  

In all honesty I have only been able to crash OS X once, and that was my own fault for attempting to hack some system files from Tiger into Leopard. The machine hung and then wouldn't boot. I had to install the OS on a USB drive, then replace the files and it was ok. That was all entirely my own fault though - in day-to-day (heavy) use, I find OS X rock solid and it has never failed me.

--
moto

[quarkx]

Apple uses Foxconn motherboards, or motherboards manufactured by Foxconn at least. So does Intel. So does almost everyone.

Foxconn is the largest manufacturer of electronics and computer components worldwide, and mainly manufactures on contract to other companies. Among other things, Foxconn produces the Mac mini, the iPod and the iPhone for Apple Inc.; Intel-branded motherboards for Intel Corp.; various orders for American computer manufacturers Dell and Hewlett-Packard; motherboards for UK computer manufacturer Zoostorm; the PlayStation 2 and PlayStation 3 for Sony; the Wii for Nintendo; the Xbox 360 for Microsoft, cell phones for Motorola, the Amazon Kindle, and Cisco equipment. - From Wikipedia.

This may be true, I am not debating this, but anybody who is a system builder (I have worked as a system builder for over 25 years now) knows the 3 worst MoBo's to build a system on are: ECS, Foxcomm, and PC Partner (I am not sure if PC Partner is still around). Infact, the distributer we had, exchanged these boards "No questions asked" because the failure rate was so high on the boards. The only reason we used the boards is because they were so cheap. ECS sold "SOM" systems where the CPU was soldered right on the Motherboard and overclocked for less the $40- I think the boss was paying $25 in quantity. We could build a complete system and sell it for less then $250 and still make a few bucks profit. We use to find whole lots of Foxcomm boards defective- not just boxes but lot numbers.And, Yes, back in 2003, ECS was making the Apple laptops and also HP laptops. We use to get the HP ads and sell the "ECS branded" laptop for $50 less then HP, then HP got wise and started to cusom design their own cases.
We had a good running joke with PC Partner. If anyone remembers, PC Partner used the same packaging for all their motherboards and a photocopied "Manual". We used to joke that it was one guy out of his basement, and if you sent back the motherboard box and manual, you would get $5 back, so he could re-use them again.

[persia]

Complaining about Mac being high priced would be less humorous on a board that wasn't dedicated to less than iPod spec boards selling for US$1000, and US$1000+ 20 year old equipment.  Apple's prices look great compared to anything Amiga....