Post removed.
I think it was TheRLG who said that haiku looked interesting... I have it installed, but it seems too unfinished to be usable yet... plus who uses the be api anymore? Irrlicht\IrrKlang don't...
Possibly later after google's summer of code and if a few things get ported to beos/zeta/haiku I might use Haiku OS.
www.haiku-os.org
Until that happens I'll stick with either windows xp or OSX86.
I've used a few linux distros, but I want something that doesn't need me to use the terminal unless I want to.
Possibly later after google's summer of code and if a few things get ported to beos/zeta/haiku I might use Haiku OS.
www.haiku-os.org
Until that happens I'll stick with either windows xp or OSX86.
I've used a few linux distros, but I want something that doesn't need me to use the terminal unless I want to.
-
FlyingIsFun1217
- Posts: 219
- Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:29 pm
- Location: Illinois
- Contact:
That should be a two-parter answer. The one who knows how to use the security features will make the system as secure as possible.Nodtveidt wrote:A system is only as secure as the one using it. End of story.
It's weird how you have to know how to work windows to make it secure, and by default know very little to make linux secure.
Heh...
-
rooly
- Posts: 224
- Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:32 pm
- Location: Louisiana, USA, backwater country
- Contact:
here's my two cents, seeing as i haven't posted in oh 2 months or so...
i got a free and legitimate version of vista x64 enterprise edition from my brother's school. i used it for one month before i finally got fed up with it. here are a few of my complaints.
-vista pretends that the user doesn't know what they are doing
i say this because for every program i run that somehow might possibly maybe write anything to the hard drive (aka every program ever written) i get a security warning bubble. if i want to install something, another security bubble. half my programs have to run in compatibility mode, and the other half run off the wow32 emulator. this is a problem for me, because i want to run my programs, not an memory eating emulator. simply put, running a program is apparently a security risk to vista.
-vista thinks that its gui is more important than running the rest of the computer.
seriously, since the advent of timesharing, no os has had such a hard time giving resources to the user as vista. with winxp i could run supreme commander on my 6200 nvidia card. with winxp, i could make 10-hour movies any time of day. i could do anything with winxp faster and better than trying to open the file-browser in vista. poop, fear on that 6200 has a better frame rate in high detail mode than all of vista.
-vista thinks that vista is the only operating system.
i wanted to run a very good firewall i had (which ran with 95,98,me,nt,xp, etc). vista says "this program doesn't work with vista for an unstated reason". i try to connect to my home network for the first time...i'm the only computer even with my father's laptop, my mother's laptop, my linux server box (which i only run sometimes), and the router. furthermore, it doesn't recognize my network adapter, so i have to install that. this thing is a damn LAN wire, people. so i tweak the network...i get my dad's laptop. i tweak more...i get my mom's and no dad. i tweak more...i get my mom's my dad's and lose my own. this is a network enabled operating system? my dad's screen crashes and he gets a new vista laptop. i had finally gotten all of the computers to show up ('cept the linux box) and his new one doesn't. i gave up after that...
-vista (like all other ms os's) run's slower with use...
heavy drive use of course. silly fragmentation. i'm sure most of you guys out there use your drive's at some point. your not just net browser. but more to the point, because of vista's heavy ram footprint, it uses alot of virtual memory on the drive. this fragments the drive. the computer runs slower, using more virtual memory, and so on. i defrag my 300gb's for a day. try again and wow, it runs nice and cleanly. next day, down to half speed again. vista unlike its predecessors, runs exponentially slower with given fragmentation.
-vista likes to decide what its going to run for you
i have a nice setup, i've downloaded and installed the apps i want, i've got all my stuff setup for startup, i shutoff my computer and go to bed (so as not to fry my video card...). next day i go to turn it on, i get a nice big popup from the now included windows defender that tells me vista didn't like a few programs, so it won't run them at startup. click here to change these settings. okay, i click here...change the settings to allow. i startup the programs myself, and go about my business. i shutoff and go to sleep and poweron again the next day. same message, same programs...which leads me to my next point
-vista likes to decide what you are allowed to use on your machine.
i'm a heavy internet user, so i need me a firewall and a good antivirus. i go to my old normal sources and BLAM, they don't work because its VISTA (read that in a derogatory tone). i don't get any other reason than vista...i have my wow32 emulator running...i have my compatibility mode running...ope, sorry, vista just doesn't like this program. okay, i search for new ones...turns out vista is so new, nobody has compiled their software to work on this crap, and they don't plan to. of course symnatec has, but we all have the same feelings about that crappy bloatware. i have to wait a week just to get a damned antivirus. i never found a working firewall.
-vista likes to decide what media you can consume
you realize that you have to pay extra just to watch an mpeg2 movie on vista? i thought that mpeg4 was the highest...apparently i'm wrong. took me another week to find a compatible codec pack just so i could watch a tv episode i downloaded. it still complained even then, and vlc couldn't solve my problems either. i gave up because of this too
vista does have a few good points, however. i'll give it that at least.
-the fastest startup times ever *
-the pretiest interface ever *
-the most advanced firewall ever *
-least cluttered interface also ever *
-the most informative and interactive os ever *
-the most new features ever *
-the smallest interface change ever
(* = microsoft os's only)
but after all this, i was fed up. i wanted a computer, not a single picture for 30 seconds, then another. i wanted to use the machine, not watch it. i said screw it to windows, and i finnally took the leap to linux. using a pretty little ubuntu edgy x64 right now. i can do everything i ever wanted, except a few games. i'm highly considering buying a 3rd sata hd to put windows on for gaming only. i'm no linux fan boy, nor do i think i'm special because i use it. remember, i've used windows happily for the first 18.5 years of my life. my family has quickly caught on to how to use this machine. linux is a cakewalk in learning the basic uses, and a terminal and google away from advanced use. i actually had to learn new crap just to run vista. the only interface change from 98 to xp (i mean the nt kernel) was a reorganized start menu, and better faster graphics in windows. plus with wine, i'm really well off for now. all i'm saying is, stick with xp or change your OS, one way or another, you'll get a much better machine out of it. my dad's vista has pleny of problems with it, and he's had it for only a month. i still haven't got it to recognize this linux box. hell, it barely recognized the network itself.
*edit*
oh and by the way, all the claims about how vista has security holes, and how vista is barely a service pack, and whatnot, they are all true. if you use vista on anything but a brand new top end machine, you're going to have a crapshoot...
i got a free and legitimate version of vista x64 enterprise edition from my brother's school. i used it for one month before i finally got fed up with it. here are a few of my complaints.
-vista pretends that the user doesn't know what they are doing
i say this because for every program i run that somehow might possibly maybe write anything to the hard drive (aka every program ever written) i get a security warning bubble. if i want to install something, another security bubble. half my programs have to run in compatibility mode, and the other half run off the wow32 emulator. this is a problem for me, because i want to run my programs, not an memory eating emulator. simply put, running a program is apparently a security risk to vista.
-vista thinks that its gui is more important than running the rest of the computer.
seriously, since the advent of timesharing, no os has had such a hard time giving resources to the user as vista. with winxp i could run supreme commander on my 6200 nvidia card. with winxp, i could make 10-hour movies any time of day. i could do anything with winxp faster and better than trying to open the file-browser in vista. poop, fear on that 6200 has a better frame rate in high detail mode than all of vista.
-vista thinks that vista is the only operating system.
i wanted to run a very good firewall i had (which ran with 95,98,me,nt,xp, etc). vista says "this program doesn't work with vista for an unstated reason". i try to connect to my home network for the first time...i'm the only computer even with my father's laptop, my mother's laptop, my linux server box (which i only run sometimes), and the router. furthermore, it doesn't recognize my network adapter, so i have to install that. this thing is a damn LAN wire, people. so i tweak the network...i get my dad's laptop. i tweak more...i get my mom's and no dad. i tweak more...i get my mom's my dad's and lose my own. this is a network enabled operating system? my dad's screen crashes and he gets a new vista laptop. i had finally gotten all of the computers to show up ('cept the linux box) and his new one doesn't. i gave up after that...
-vista (like all other ms os's) run's slower with use...
heavy drive use of course. silly fragmentation. i'm sure most of you guys out there use your drive's at some point. your not just net browser. but more to the point, because of vista's heavy ram footprint, it uses alot of virtual memory on the drive. this fragments the drive. the computer runs slower, using more virtual memory, and so on. i defrag my 300gb's for a day. try again and wow, it runs nice and cleanly. next day, down to half speed again. vista unlike its predecessors, runs exponentially slower with given fragmentation.
-vista likes to decide what its going to run for you
i have a nice setup, i've downloaded and installed the apps i want, i've got all my stuff setup for startup, i shutoff my computer and go to bed (so as not to fry my video card...). next day i go to turn it on, i get a nice big popup from the now included windows defender that tells me vista didn't like a few programs, so it won't run them at startup. click here to change these settings. okay, i click here...change the settings to allow. i startup the programs myself, and go about my business. i shutoff and go to sleep and poweron again the next day. same message, same programs...which leads me to my next point
-vista likes to decide what you are allowed to use on your machine.
i'm a heavy internet user, so i need me a firewall and a good antivirus. i go to my old normal sources and BLAM, they don't work because its VISTA (read that in a derogatory tone). i don't get any other reason than vista...i have my wow32 emulator running...i have my compatibility mode running...ope, sorry, vista just doesn't like this program. okay, i search for new ones...turns out vista is so new, nobody has compiled their software to work on this crap, and they don't plan to. of course symnatec has, but we all have the same feelings about that crappy bloatware. i have to wait a week just to get a damned antivirus. i never found a working firewall.
-vista likes to decide what media you can consume
you realize that you have to pay extra just to watch an mpeg2 movie on vista? i thought that mpeg4 was the highest...apparently i'm wrong. took me another week to find a compatible codec pack just so i could watch a tv episode i downloaded. it still complained even then, and vlc couldn't solve my problems either. i gave up because of this too
vista does have a few good points, however. i'll give it that at least.
-the fastest startup times ever *
-the pretiest interface ever *
-the most advanced firewall ever *
-least cluttered interface also ever *
-the most informative and interactive os ever *
-the most new features ever *
-the smallest interface change ever
(* = microsoft os's only)
but after all this, i was fed up. i wanted a computer, not a single picture for 30 seconds, then another. i wanted to use the machine, not watch it. i said screw it to windows, and i finnally took the leap to linux. using a pretty little ubuntu edgy x64 right now. i can do everything i ever wanted, except a few games. i'm highly considering buying a 3rd sata hd to put windows on for gaming only. i'm no linux fan boy, nor do i think i'm special because i use it. remember, i've used windows happily for the first 18.5 years of my life. my family has quickly caught on to how to use this machine. linux is a cakewalk in learning the basic uses, and a terminal and google away from advanced use. i actually had to learn new crap just to run vista. the only interface change from 98 to xp (i mean the nt kernel) was a reorganized start menu, and better faster graphics in windows. plus with wine, i'm really well off for now. all i'm saying is, stick with xp or change your OS, one way or another, you'll get a much better machine out of it. my dad's vista has pleny of problems with it, and he's had it for only a month. i still haven't got it to recognize this linux box. hell, it barely recognized the network itself.
*edit*
oh and by the way, all the claims about how vista has security holes, and how vista is barely a service pack, and whatnot, they are all true. if you use vista on anything but a brand new top end machine, you're going to have a crapshoot...
When banks compete, you win.
When ISPs compete, you win.
When electronics retailers compete, you win.
When governments compete...you get drafted.
When ISPs compete, you win.
When electronics retailers compete, you win.
When governments compete...you get drafted.
Mac is too expensive for me, Linux too complex, Windows -- this is my choice. I currently using Windows XP Pro and do not plain to move on Vista (because for now, I do not need anything that requires vista and cannot start under XP).
My experience is:
- never using Mac OSX (seen screenshot only
),
- couple of months using Linux ASP/Fedora/Suse (all are different: mechanism the same, but the names of the command different and I really hate that. I do not understand linux-users when they saying "Windows is weak because of registry... virus can destroy the registry and system will not boot" ... ok, that is right, BUT if I will kiil "etc" directory under Linux I do not think that Linux will boot properly, so what is the different: 20-40mb of registry files (organized database-like) or a bulk of files in "etc" ? Viruses not works under Linux because most clever users works under user with restricted rights... i guess if every linux-user will work under root -- he/she will be under danger-of-viruses too. And nothing blocks user under Windows to handle rights and permissions to certain part of the system and totally use low-privileged user for work ("Run As..." can help you to execute something under administrator rights without loging out)........ so i just want to say that Nodtveidt is right saying "98% of all problems with Windows are between the chair and the keyboard." )
- 10 years using Windows starting from 3.1 (used 1 year) and growing from-time-to-time up to XP.
p.s.: besides, some body here said that Windows takes too much HDD space (Vista for example) -- that is right, but when user installs Windows he/she gets working drivers for devices ... so after OS installation in most cases (99%) computer without internet connection able work on the LAN (if its present) , able to work in hi-res video modes, able to work with alot of different (by vendors) devices: scanners, printers and so on....................... about Linux I cannot say this, it installs and you got almost nothing working as it should be. An example: I had some Linux installed. While installation I had GeForce 6600GT and after downloading drivers, reading a lot of forums, listening jokes from linux-gurus on that forums on my posts I have installed those drivers and got OpenGL application work. BUT after very small time i have upgraded the system (I have got GeForce 7600GS)... and after this, my Linux returned to work in 640x480 and I couldn't to select another option in the dialog. Somehow (after speaking with my friend that it linux-fan) i get that there is a command called "kudzu" ......... tell me please, HOW can I know about that command before ??
So in conclusion I want to say that: if somebody saying "Linux is much easy than Windows" than do not believe it. I would say -- Linux requires much more knowledges and experience, also if you want to be a little bit powered-user (to work with convenient) you should know scripting languages, you should to be really stick with the console, you should know a lot of console commands (at least hundred i guess), you should totally understand how OS works (boot sequence, etc.), you should know how to compile downloaded software (if you want to have faster OS you should know how to recompile core), you should forget about top-graphics games (indeed I think there is no need to have some top video card because all you can run it is Quake3, Doom3 (thanks to idSoftware guys)), you should understand that if you think that if you will get stick with some Linux distribution -- than it is totally doesn't means that you stick with all distributions of Linux and you know Linux at all -- NO you know only Fedora (for example) or Suse
My experience is:
- never using Mac OSX (seen screenshot only
),- couple of months using Linux ASP/Fedora/Suse (all are different: mechanism the same, but the names of the command different and I really hate that. I do not understand linux-users when they saying "Windows is weak because of registry... virus can destroy the registry and system will not boot" ... ok, that is right, BUT if I will kiil "etc" directory under Linux I do not think that Linux will boot properly, so what is the different: 20-40mb of registry files (organized database-like) or a bulk of files in "etc" ? Viruses not works under Linux because most clever users works under user with restricted rights... i guess if every linux-user will work under root -- he/she will be under danger-of-viruses too. And nothing blocks user under Windows to handle rights and permissions to certain part of the system and totally use low-privileged user for work ("Run As..." can help you to execute something under administrator rights without loging out)........ so i just want to say that Nodtveidt is right saying "98% of all problems with Windows are between the chair and the keyboard." )
- 10 years using Windows starting from 3.1 (used 1 year) and growing from-time-to-time up to XP.
p.s.: besides, some body here said that Windows takes too much HDD space (Vista for example
) -- that is right, but when user installs Windows he/she gets working drivers for devices ... so after OS installation in most cases (99%) computer without internet connection able work on the LAN (if its present) , able to work in hi-res video modes, able to work with alot of different (by vendors) devices: scanners, printers and so on....................... about Linux I cannot say this, it installs and you got almost nothing working as it should be. An example: I had some Linux installed. While installation I had GeForce 6600GT and after downloading drivers, reading a lot of forums, listening jokes from linux-gurus on that forums on my posts I have installed those drivers and got OpenGL application work. BUT after very small time i have upgraded the system (I have got GeForce 7600GS)... and after this, my Linux returned to work in 640x480 and I couldn't to select another option in the dialog. Somehow (after speaking with my friend that it linux-fan) i get that there is a command called "kudzu" ......... tell me please, HOW can I know about that command before ??So in conclusion I want to say that: if somebody saying "Linux is much easy than Windows" than do not believe it. I would say -- Linux requires much more knowledges and experience, also if you want to be a little bit powered-user (to work with convenient) you should know scripting languages, you should to be really stick with the console, you should know a lot of console commands (at least hundred i guess), you should totally understand how OS works (boot sequence, etc.), you should know how to compile downloaded software (if you want to have faster OS you should know how to recompile core), you should forget about top-graphics games (indeed I think there is no need to have some top video card because all you can run it is Quake3, Doom3 (thanks to idSoftware guys)), you should understand that if you think that if you will get stick with some Linux distribution -- than it is totally doesn't means that you stick with all distributions of Linux and you know Linux at all -- NO you know only Fedora (for example) or Suse
Last edited by greenya on Wed May 30, 2007 8:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
@BlindSide
I actually recall a program (for Windows) that loaded map files from video games and displayed them on your desktop in 3d and you had to run into rooms to do things. There was also another one with its own proprietary maps you would pay to download. You could decorate the rooms and whatnot. Pretty slick but not very productive.
I actually recall a program (for Windows) that loaded map files from video games and displayed them on your desktop in 3d and you had to run into rooms to do things. There was also another one with its own proprietary maps you would pay to download. You could decorate the rooms and whatnot. Pretty slick but not very productive.
Besides, I have experience (in the far past) of using some shell. You starting it like a ordinal application. It uses OpenGL (or Direct3D) do not remember. It renders beautiful home: you can walk and look around, you can set pictures on the walls -- very nice (you assigning the image to the picture from your wallpapers); you can go outside and play basketball (that was nice)BlindSide wrote:@RLG:
You want ground braking? I think Ill start work on an FPS - OS where you have to run to different rooms to run your files hahaha...
; you can manage you files on one of the boards in the room.I remember that i had an idea how to do something like that, just imagine next: you installing the shell, you have only one room (like office) where you can work with your disk files (it should be on the desk in 3D of cause) (near the desk should be a trash bin (real 3D trash bin, so user can drag-and-drop any 3D object to it)), play video (it should looks like real 3D TV set), listen to music (it is 3D music center)... and the main thing: you can install additional plugins to the shell: so what is plugin for user? -- it is a separate 3D room (while installing user can select the place where he/she want the door to be)... the room provides some functionality, for example: Basketball game plugin (you will get real 3D basketball field
), Pinball (it is a room with real pinball machine ), etc........... Lets think more: when user will have a network (LAN) it will present all computers like a separate houses on the street, so if you want to chat to some on -- you going to his house (or you can meet him on the street), you can play with him in some games (like Basketball in you room)..... ............ This should be called Matrix Shell ( and I'm going to implement this in the future )P.S.: I guess not bad idea. At least it would be really helpful for parent of children -- they can start this interaction shell and leave the child with the computer ... i guess it will be very attractive for exploring 3D shell
Real life ? No there is a difference between real life and virtal world (except graphics): you cannot save or backup you state in real world... you cannot change the nick name and become totally clean and new person for everybodyTheRLG wrote:Hmm... or, we could just live real-life.
... and other attractive features 