|
WTF? (me *******ing about my computer)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Bondor |
great i get a new hard drive and windows XP because i could use internet explorer on my old computer and now windows is shot to hell and i can ONLY use internet explorer ...
start menu? DOESNT WORK
folders? NO SUCH THING
traskbar? BLANK
:whip:
WTF? |
|
|
| KilldaDJ |
its ed.
get 98 or red hat or something, xp is
tons of exploits and that home users dont ing need. |
|
|
| Bondor |
| its sooo gay how i have to open up winamp through internet explore... wtf? |
|
|
| Bondor |
| i tink that something is ed up with the tast manager |
|
|
| whiskers |
| quote: | Originally posted by KilldaDJ
its ed.
get 98 or red hat or something, xp is
|
buh, all three statements are false.
98 is slow and unstable
red hat is the dj sammy of linux
xp is pretty good, but i still hate it
either get mandrake 9.1 or windows2000. i have win2k and it's so awesome and stable, i don't need anything else.
mandrake 9.1 is pretty awesome too, but it's linux, so it's not quite up to my liking. |
|
|
| Nabistai |
| quote: | Originally posted by whiskers
red hat is the dj sammy of linux
|
where can I buy it? :eyes: |
|
|
| dj_inferno |
| quote: | Originally posted by whiskers
buh, all three statements are false.
98 is slow and unstable
red hat is the dj sammy of linux
xp is pretty good, but i still hate it
either get mandrake 9.1 or windows2000. i have win2k and it's so awesome and stable, i don't need anything else.
mandrake 9.1 is pretty awesome too, but it's linux, so it's not quite up to my liking. |
98 is faster imo than xp...The NT based Os's are slower (maybe on the comps aI run them on)...2000 is the only Microsoft OS that has never given me ...
XP<2000 |
|
|
| xKaoSx |
Whiny little bitches-
god-
XP is fine- I've had my computer on for a year now and have rebooted a couple times.
2000 is fine.
if you have an older computer then get 98
what kind of idiot puts xp on a pii500 or something |
|
|
| vswede |
xp and 2000 rock thats where to go
xp = 2000 + pretty version
2000 :D good nice and simple and stable! |
|
|
| alanzo |
| it depends what your hardware is.. I have a new comp with all top of the line new hardware.. usb 2.0.. hyperthreading.. so I noticed a HUGE difference from 2000 to XP since only XP supports those two.. but if you have an old dinasour I would go with 2000 |
|
|
| whiskers |
| quote: | Originally posted by alanzo
it depends what your hardware is.. I have a new comp with all top of the line new hardware.. usb 2.0.. hyperthreading.. so I noticed a HUGE difference from 2000 to XP since only XP supports those two.. but if you have an old dinasour I would go with 2000 |
usb2.0 is supported by almost everything
hyperthreading is a CPU-based feature and it has nothing to do with os
are you, by any chance, one of those people that say "megahurtz? yeah, i've got several of those installed in my computer! it's really fast now because of them"?
i'm wondering now what kind of "top of the line" hardware you have there...
old dinosaur... win2k is pretty resource-consuming, not as much as XP, but still... an old dinosaur will not be able to run it smoothly |
|
|
|
|
