Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Bobboau on March 13, 2010, 02:25:05 pm
-
basically in any given week what OS would you be found using, this is not just your primary OS, but all OSs you are currently using on all machines. if you notice I missed something, tell me what I missed and I'll add to the list
do post what your primary OS is and anything else interesting about your OS usage.
my primary OS is Linux Mint, a derivative of Ubuntu part of the Debian Linux family. I also run windows 7 for programming assignments and games, though I'm trying to find ways around that.
-
Primary OS: Ubuntu Karmic
Since the only game I really play is FS2_Open, everything works out okay. I also have an old PowerBook G4 in the living room for convenience.
-
XP. I occasionally have to use a redhat linux station at uni.
-
One machine, running just XP. On very rare occasions I hop onto the family machine, which is running Vista Home Premium, but that's not enough to even count.
-
XP. Every computer in the house runs it, and we aren't going to upgrade until we feel 7 is worth upgrading to, probably sometime next year I guess. I'm certainly in no hurry, as XP does everything I need it to, and I'm not sure what 7 would add that I would use.
-
I run Windows 7 as a main OS. I've got XP on Virtual Box so I can install Visual Studios and SQL Servers without having to worry about them making a havok out of my system with unnecessary services among other things. I've also got Ubuntu on Virtual Box. Both of these are for university assignments and testing stuff.
If I got a dedicated partition for linux (which I find too much an hassle nowadays) I'd probably install Gentoo.
Oh, and I've got two systems set up this way. A desktop and a laptop.
-
Vista on my desktop, 7 on my laptop
-
Stuck with Vista on my computer, though since I've not been doing anything lately which has needed substantial computing power, it's not been a problem. :drevil:
I grew up with Mac, however, and would not at all mind going back if possible. :cool:
-
You left out DOS and need an other column. I run XP on all my workstations but one which I still use DOS 6.22 on. Server side I used Netware 6 and 6.5.
-
XP, for ~99% of the time.
-
I run Se7en and XP
-
What does Linux debian based mean? :confused:
My desktop uses Vista, and my netbook is a dual boot win7-ubuntu job.
So i'll tick the linux that applies to that. . . . .once you tell me what choice ubuntu falls under :)
-
Linux debian based means a distro that is based on the debian distribution. Ubuntu and its derivatives are derivatives of debian.
BTW, /me is using Win7 primarily, with Ubuntu as a backup.
-
what he said, Ubuntu is in the Debian family, which seems to account for more than half the Linux world (in terms of usage).
the results are interesting so far, I was expecting a lot more macs and a lot less linuxes.
-
This forums does contain a fair amount of computer nerds. I'm not surprised at all.
-
This forums does contain a fair amount of computer nerds. I'm not surprised at all.
I mean really, who could have guessed? :D
-
Holy ****, I completely bungled the start of that first sentence.
-
My primary OS is Mac OS X, because it connects to the Internet far better than my IBM crate, which runs Windows XP.
However, I turn to my IBM crate if I need to store stuff and/or play games.
-
Ok, who picked DOS? :wtf:
-
probly the guy who asked for it
-
WINDOWS 3.1!
-
I doubt that very much.
-
Debian Linux exclusively (on two desktops, one netbook).
-
I still use Dosbox sometimes as a nostalgia trip.
-
You use DOSBox... as an OS? :wtf:
-
No, just for playing old dos games,
It's nice to use it once in a while.
-
2 Windows 7 machines, one Windows XP machine that I'm forced to use (work).
-
dos <3
-
dos <3
See! You do love something!
Awwwwww....
-
or he thinks Dos is less than the number 3.
-
WinXP x64 when i want crap done, Win7 x64 when i feel like having crap on the pc, gentoo running xfce sometimes, when i feel very fiddly, and of course... boobies. my girls boobies.
zhat is all
-
or he thinks Dos is less than the number 3.
im so old skool im not even using a new(er) version of dos
-
No, just for playing old dos games,
It's nice to use it once in a while.
What are some of your favorite golden oldies?
im so old skool im not even using a new(er) version of dos
Then how do you get online?
-
Ooh ooh! Can I have the mistaken belief that comment about the golden oldies applies to everyone who reads it and not just Dekker? If so, my favorite game that requires DOSBox to play would be Privateer 2. That game wouldn't even load up in a DOS prompt in Win' 95, you actually had to reboot into DOS to install and play it, and I don't know why. That game has held up really well for me, especially considering the graphics aren't that bad, and all the animated locations and menus are cool. I <3 ion cannons and their lack of any heat generation.
-
privateer 2 was a native dos game and it required every last shred of the 640k limit to initialize. the only way i used to be able to play it back in the day was with a boot floppy. ive never been able to play that game in windows or even freedos, i didnt even know dosbox could run it. funny thing is that many of the dos-era games were way ahead of their time and could easily out do any console games around at the time. many dos games which could be run in windows (descent2 for example) the requirements doubled when in windows mode. so when i had my 120 mhz pentium machine (with 8 megs ram, upped to 12 later on), it spent most of its time in dos mode.
-
What are some of your favorite golden oldies?
This is one of mine. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4RCDbHwx0M)
-
I'm really surprised and pleased to see Linux numbers so high and mac numbers so low :)
-
archlinux (KDE) on laptop, XP at work
-
What are some of your favorite golden oldies?
This is one of mine. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4RCDbHwx0M)
oh yes, yes :D
-
I'm really surprised and pleased to see Linux numbers so high and mac numbers so low :)
Well, you do know that Linux has a lot more going for it than Mac does. Customisability and price are probably the top two reasons, not to mention that Wine works better on it. A Mac is still an expensive extravagance, and the only reasons why I use it is because my school needed me to buy one, and because a good portion of the film industry use it.
-
XP and Ubuntu 9.04, although I'm switching to Linux Mint 8. I have Vista on my laptop unfortunately. And I have pirated Windows 7 that I don't use until I purchase it, which will probably not be until I get the pirated version working correctly with my system. (Just think; I'd be stuck if I'd not tried before I buyed. :lol: )
On that topic, does anyone know what a really good (read: pretty much as good as a PCI internal) USB NIC adapter is? I'm using a D-Link DUB-E100 but the 7 driver causes random corruption in 7 (bad news with updates, it crashes the system eventually). So far, no update on that driver, so I'll prolly end up getting another one. Once that tests out ok, I believe I can purchase 7 as the rest of the hardware seems to work good.
-
i usually wait for the first redistributable service pack to start pirating.
and windows 7 be stealin' my classic start menu :D
-
I'm really surprised and pleased to see Linux numbers so high and mac numbers so low :)
Well, you do know that Linux has a lot more going for it than Mac does. Customisability and price are probably the top two reasons, not to mention that Wine works better on it. A Mac is still an expensive extravagance, and the only reasons why I use it is because my school needed me to buy one, and because a good portion of the film industry use it.
The reason the film industry went with it early on was because it used to use RISC architectures that were better at handling 3d stuff at the time. Now that Mac has gone Intel there's really no advantage, performance wise.
-
Well, that would explain why the new computers in my school (the quad-cores I mentioned in a separate thread last month) have Windows XP Professional on them. The best part of all is that they actually work, despite being made by HP and having been downgraded from Windows Vista Business even before the first day they were used.
-
you must mean upgraded from Vista Business version?
[/sarcasm]
on a more serious note, as far as vista goes, Ultimate x64 is the most rock-solid OS i've had the luck of encountering, tbh, it rules.
-
you must mean upgraded from Vista Business version?
[/sarcasm]
Oh yeah... :nervous:
on a more serious note, as far as vista goes, Ultimate x64 is the most rock-solid OS i've had the luck of encountering, tbh, it rules.
Now here's something positive about Vista that I've never seen before.
-
I primarily use Fedora.
-
ive actually had good luck with vista x64. i just wish it would stop whoring all of my resources.
-
ive actually had good luck with vista x64. i just wish it would stop whoring all of my resources.
Try playing with the services... consult Black Viper's Vista Services page (http://www.blackviper.com/WinVista/servicecfg.htm) and use vLite (http://www.vlite.net/).
-
ive used nlite before, maybe il use vlite too at some point.
but usually the first thing i do (aside from disabling uac and installing drivers, IN THAT ORDER!), is tweak services, in fact ive been tweaking services since win2k. :D
-
you must mean upgraded from Vista Business version?
[/sarcasm]
Oh yeah... :nervous:
on a more serious note, as far as vista goes, Ultimate x64 is the most rock-solid OS i've had the luck of encountering, tbh, it rules.
Now here's something positive about Vista that I've never seen before.
its got it quirks, but when you have 4 or more gigs of ram, it actually gets good.
as much as i hated vista when it came out (32 bit version), i loved vista when i got the x64 version and a pc capable of running it nicely.
-
there are very few pure 32 bit machines aside from maybe the netbook market. so going with a pure 32 bit os is pretty pointless (unless you only use netbooks).
-
there are very few pure 32 bit machines aside from maybe the netbook market. so going with a pure 32 bit os is pretty pointless (unless you only use netbooks).
i didnt have a 64 bit machine back then, Athlon 2800+ Barton something something something :p
the first contact i had with 64 bit was with the first Phenom. 9500 or something, i completely forgot which one it was, basically, the weakest quad. oh how i regretted switching over to a Core2Duo later on... (games were okay, but i couldnt do as much crap at the same time without expecting any delays)
i'm on a AMD 7750 X2 cpu, its a quiet and cool little bugger which works nicely. saving up for a proper quad-core system somewhere around next year.
or... to put it better, waiting for AMD to put out something that can actually compete with i7's performance wise. (lets just say, i didnt get a very good impression of the Phenom II's... the quad core Athlon II got me drooling tho, since the price here is around $90 - ish and its a full blown quad...)
-
Gonna upgrade to 7 once my bull**** windows XP system finally bites the dust. I swear, with a ten minute boot up time and four minutes to load Firefox, it's the software equivalent of a drag racer held together by duct-tape and maple syrup because the registry is shot to hell with spyware and the dead shells of viruses.
-
^this is why i format my system partition every 6-8 months. if something, whether it be a poorly designed piece of software, a virus, spyware, or an automatic update, if it slows my computer down, it goes to hell.
-
Yeah, except I don't have the extra harddrives to do that. So I'm just gonna wait until my dad installs some network on our network so I can transfer my important **** over before I do a format.
-
when i was a kid and i needed some extra storage space, i didnt wayt for my parents to install a new hard drive, i simply stole one from school :D
kids these days, i swear!
-
when i was a kid and i needed some extra storage space, i didnt wayt for my parents to install a new hard drive, i simply stole one from school :D
kids these days, i swear!
I'd do that too, except not only are the computers at my school physically locked (so I can't steal the juicy RAM they have, rawr), but they all share the same massive hard drive that's either in the city somewhere or buried somewhere in the school.
-
my primary OS is Linux Mint, a derivative of Ubuntu part of the Debian Linux family. I also run windows 7 for programming assignments and games, though I'm trying to find ways around that.
Install virtualbox ose. It's in the ubuntu repos. It works fantastic. The idea of dual booting an OS is really inefficient and quite retarded once you think about it. However, running an OS inside an OS even for the simple tasks like you use windows 7 on occasion for is ideal.
I parted with windows a long time ago. I completed all of my college courses with linux. The only things i couldn't run in linux at the time with WINE was excel 2007 and photoshop. So i used a virtual machine program which was virtualbox ose and never registered my friends copy of xp and excel 2007 inside a virtual machine (re-install every 30 days, but with a virtual machine, this was a breeze). Once done with the software, i blasted the virtual machine out of existence (i really didn't feel like purchasing windows and excel 2007 which come at a premium for just one semester's use).
I use mepis pretty exclusively, but currently on linux mint while waiting for mepis 8.5 which is my holy grail. Mepis is a fantastic distribution! Great for computer diagnostics with the live cd. You can install it as the main OS too. Beginners take to it pretty fast, but is also great for intermediate and advanced users. It's base is debian stable running a newer stable kernel than what debian stable offers. Mepis also has it's own repository of backported software if you want the latest versions of several programs. The release mantra of mepis is to release when it's ready. Thank god they take their sweet ass time between releases, no rushed out the doors buggy **** from them compared to 6 month release cycle ****ers like fedora, ubuntu, and mandriva.
On the topic of mint, i keep it around for myself when i'm in a crunch and mainly for new users. Compared to ubuntu, there's a lot less to configure after install. After that, i switched my room mate over to it (it's what he gets for losing his xp cd key). He then switched his mom over to it because she had the same problem that he did eventually. I then switched my mom over to it on her two laptops which finally gets rid of that hacked version of xp that doesn't call home. New users to mint totally love the extra possibilities and the fact of no viruses and malware. People tend to be happy with linux if you have a good reason for them to switch as described above.
-
I have Windows Vista on my laptop. I'm going to get Windows 7 when I get my new desktop, though, and since I'm doing IT at uni I can download it for free (due to MSDNA)!
Also I'm thinking of fixing up my old crate desktop (which has Windows 98) to give to a relative, and I might try a distro of Linux (one from the computer magazine I get - they make their own distro of Linux and put an ISO on their disk which people can use). Have to replace the CMOS battery and CD drive first though, they're both stuffed.
-
boobies is by far, the best os.
XP and Mint here btw.
-
got back up to vista x64 again. mmm. after some fiddling with services and eliminating most of the startup crap, i'm at 990 megs of memory usage after a 3 hour gaming session and 700-800 megs of ram used after booting
and also, eliminated superfetch. screw you windows, i want my ram when i need it, not when you think i need it.
also, is a 25 gig page file really overkill?
laughably enough, not really. It starts to get usefull when doin subdiv displacement, especially on higher subdivisions of models... had C4D hit 20 gigs on a really insane render i tried once. 12 hours rendertime, of which 10 were used to make the displacement...
-
I might try a distro of Linux (one from the computer magazine I get - they make their own distro of Linux and put an ISO on their disk which people can use).
Check out remastersys. Google it, essentially you install any distro of ubuntu you want, install and configure it as you like. Then remastersys will take the system how you have it on the hard drive and turn that into an installable livecd.
Also, great for making a personal preconfigured backup of your OS when you're screwed in a crunch. I was able to use remastersys to replicate ubuntu as she sees and knows it on her eeepc and put it on her big laptop. Very handy, and of course, very easy to create you're own distro with it.
-
it's amazing we have as many people using Linux as we do ether vista or 7
-
Well, Windows 7 is still pretty new, and Windows Vista isn't all that good from what I've heard, so there's your probable justification.
-
Windows Vista isn't all that good from what I've heard, so there's your probable justification.
I was on my dad's perfectly brand new laptop one day, and because I reported very slight lag watching a flash movie on newgrounds one day, everybody instantly knew I was using Windows Vista. I guess it really is that bad.
-
And I guess you people really know how to accentuate the negative. Vista wasn't bad, it was just a) not XP, b) Victim of a horrible marketing department and c) not 7.
Taken on its own merits, it was quite good. Seriously. I used it for two years, without a single crash, and without any of the issues people keep whining about. I should note, however, that I have never used XP for any length of time...
-
And I guess you people really know how to accentuate the negative. Vista wasn't bad, it was just a) not XP, b) Victim of a horrible marketing department and c) not 7.
Taken on its own merits, it was quite good. Seriously. I used it for two years, without a single crash, and without any of the issues people keep whining about. I should note, however, that I have never used XP for any length of time...
so you went right from 98 to vista?
-
And I guess you people really know how to accentuate the negative. Vista wasn't bad, it was just a) not XP, b) Victim of a horrible marketing department and c) not 7.
Taken on its own merits, it was quite good. Seriously. I used it for two years, without a single crash, and without any of the issues people keep whining about. I should note, however, that I have never used XP for any length of time...
taken on its own merits huh? so like, not comparing to any other modern os? :)
-
Compared to Linux and MacOS (which was what I was using before).
And compared to all the bullcrap people who couldn't get over the "It's not XP!" thing were spewing. Now, there are legitimate complaints about Vista to be made (all of them fixed in 7), but others, like the reorganization of the UI, or the misbelief that Superfetch would suck resources based on people misinterpreting what they saw in the task manager? Those I do have an issue with.
-
what about people who have legitimate slowdown running vista compared too XP, and the higher hardware requirements vista requires for some applications and games compared to XP?
-
I couldn't care less. I used a system that was designed for Vista, according to the recommended system specs for Vista. If you tried to use Vista on something that does not meet those requirements, you won't get the optimal performance. Note that there is a class-action lawsuit attached to that issue in the US, where new PCs were marketed as Vista-capable when they weren't.
Having said that, my only point was that, if we go by popular internet opinion, Vista is the worst OS ever, designed with the explicit goal of not working. I would just like to point out that this is not, in fact, so.
-
for me, the bottom line is that vista's features don't warrant its resource usage.
-
The one major issue I've had with Vista in the extended periods I've used it on the family PC is, as one might expect, the over-aggressive UAC implementation. I definitely support the concept in principle, as my wall-banging stints with trying to get my mom's school laptop to do anything in a non-administrator XP account have clearly showed just how useless said accounts are, but the implementation was just all wrong. For instance, I should not have to provide an admin password to delete a goddamn shortcut off the desktop. (I'd love to meet the project manager who gave that behavior a pass.) Other than that, though, it's been relatively benign in my experience (besides a few minor quirks, but every version of Windows has those). It definitely wasn't the best Windows version out there, but I don't think it deserves flat-out vitriol.
-
Turn on the classic windows interface so it looks like win98 in vista. Doing this disables aero and reverts vista back to the standard 2d accelerated desktop (as opposed to the 3d accelerated desktop which eats ****ing memory).
Another good thing to do is to right click on computer, go to properties. You'll end up at the system properties window, you need to look to the left in the window and click "advanced system settings". Once in there, go to the advanced tab and click the performance button. You'll see a little radio button that says "optimize windows for best performance" (that gets rid of all of the vista eye candy); click that radio button.
The next thing you look for in this window, is setting up vista's virtual memory. For virtual memory set it up to static and not dynamic, and the size of the page file should be how many megabytes of ram you have. So, 4gb of ram, then a 4gb page file.
Feel free to click ok. You'll see vista become very resource friendly. This is all i ever do to vista. Idk if i had a vista friendly computer, but it was core 2 duo with 2gb of ram. It's a great OS. But, people got to complain because it's not xp. Not to mention people not realizing just how awesome UAC is (it's akin to sudo in ubuntu). I think the only areas people should complain about vista are the hardware requirements and possible incompatibility with older xp software, other than that, it was way better than xp was. Aside from that, vista has a start menu similar to xp's default, and then the taskbar is black (oh no, it's so unlike xp, i'm going to **** myself). After that all of the advanced tools you'd find in xp were upgraded in vista and worked better.
-
Like I said, I don't have a problem with the concept of UAC, but its implementation in Vista was deeply flawed. It pops up way too often, even for tasks which by rights shouldn't really require admin permission. I've even seen it pop up twice in a row to execute the same exact task. From everything I've heard, Windows 7 toned things down a great deal.
-
Like I said, I don't have a problem with the concept of UAC, but its implementation in Vista was deeply flawed. It pops up way too often, even for tasks which by rights shouldn't really require admin permission. I've even seen it pop up twice in a row to execute the same exact task. From everything I've heard, Windows 7 toned things down a great deal.
Personally, I ran Windows Vista for almost 2 years and the Vista UAC was never much of an issue for me. Any time I have had the UAC pop up way too often is because of poorly coded software (games, namely) that were written assuming that the user is going to be running as an admin. Though this is a problem on 7 as well, though Vista took the brunt of the blame for breaking everything and forced most software developers to reevaluate their why there software needed admin access.
If you are still stuck with Windows Vista and the UAC is bothering you, try the Symantec "Project 'UAC Tool'" (http://www.symantec.com/norton/theme.jsp?themeid=labs_uac&header=0&depthpath=0) it apparently reworks the Vista UAC to be more like what the UAC is like under Windows 7, though some features of the Symantec tool do not exist in the Windows 7 UAC. I say apparently because I have never actually used it myself, as it never bothered me, but I understand that it is a vast improvement and is something that the Vista UAC should have included at release.
Vista wasn't bad, it was just a) not XP, b) Victim of a horrible marketing department and c) not 7.
Spot on. Microsoft's much mocked and hated Windows "Mojave" experiment proved a and paved the way for c. I wouldn't blame it entirely on marketing, though they always make a good villain. In my experience with customers (I am a part time retail sales person) Vista is "bad" because "my smart computer friend says it is" (I guess this would qualify as a marketing failure to the geeks and techs though) or "stuff that worked on XP doesn't work on Vista". As I noted above, the fact is if it doesn't work on Vista it will probably not work on 7 (XPMode aside) but Vista catches the stink and not 7.