ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Windows XP Myths

<< < (12/20) > >>

Mastertech:
If I get a BSOD something's wrong? Really? Thanks for the insight... You've completely missed my point, which was not that I was whinging about BSOD in XP being the fault of MS but rather that under ME with certified drivers my notebook was simply not stable. This suggests to me that there were serious problems with ME that cannot be explained away by incompatibilities between my OS and the device drivers that I was using. I got BSOD with my notebook out of the box. Regarding BSOD under XP, I rarely get them - I simply noted that it seems to happen more often than under Win2k. When I do get a BSOD under XP, I note the error code, research it, and fix the problem.

Anyway, I respectfully disagree with you about ME in particular, but agree with you about BSOD in general. This discussion needs to move on. -Darwin (October 13, 2006, 03:34 PM)
--- End quote ---
If you were getting a BSOD in ME "out of the box" then something was wrong with either your hardware or a device driver period. I guarantee you that all the drivers were not certified. The cause could have also been a BIOS incompatibility or defective or misconfigured hardware. What was wrong with your notebook in ME was explained away in the BSOD you were getting. That is how they work. There were no "serious issues" with ME except with people who didn't understand the nature of a problem. Time and time again I saw people loading Windows 98 and even worse 95 drivers in ME and then complaining that ME was unstable. I saw people overclocking, using Beta Drivers, having infected machines you name it the cause was never some impossible problem with ME.

And what do you mean you "rarely" get BSODs in XP? I never get BSODs in XP. And you should not unless something is wrong that needs to be fixed and no rebooting the computer is not "fixing it". Windows XP is compatible with more hardware than 2000 is. How many BSODs you get is not a sign of how stable an OS is but how good your hardware and driver situation is.

Darwin:
"Rarely" means rarely, as in not often. What exactly is your problem with my usage of the word, or are you merely being obtuse? I'm thrilled that you never get BSOD and appalled that you're so full of yourself that you assume that I fixed the problems by rebooting and your continued assumption that I loaded 95 and 98 drivers on my notebook. Like f0dder, my paticipation in this particular discussion is over. This thread has devolved into an argument highlighted by circularity and one that, despite now having posted on it three times, is of no interest to me.

jgpaiva:
I'm sorry to see so much people upset for these stupid reasons. Apparently, the discussion really isn't going anywhere productive. That's the problem with myths, they are so close to reality that sometimes it's hard to distinguish the truth from the lie. Although this has been an informative thread, i hate to see it has turned out so badly.

tslim:
Win95 is good
Win98 is better
WinMe is even better
Win2000 is close to the best
and
WinXp is the best
Because they are all from MS, they are perfect!
When MS come up with service patches for any of the above, they are all mean to correct bugs or problems in hardware drivers from the hardware manufacturers, it is their fault not MS's
If you  get BSOD, blame the hardware manufacturer like Acer, NVidia, Intel and so on or at least blame yourself for not understanding what the message on a BSOD is trying to tell you...
Technically, let's say you get N BSOD on WinXX using machine A and M BSOD from WinYY using machine B, you may take A and B as factors which contribute to N and M but please DO NOT take XX or YY into account, they are suppose to be exempted.

In brief, the whole world can be wrong except MS, especially when O/S is concerned!
If you don't agree with me for the above, the fault could only be yours not mine.

I am sorry for wasting anyone's time to read till this point... :)
IMHO, this is the perfect point to close the thread!

nudone:
Win95 is good
Win98 is better
WinMe is even better
Win2000 is close to the best
and
WinXp is the best
--- End quote ---

you missed a few out, tslim.

win v1 to v3.1 was okay because we didn't expect anything more.

win 2003 was better than everything that came before it because it says '2003' in the title - so it's got to be best, because it's the newest.

win vista is the bestest, bestest, best thing there will ever be - well, until windows 2010 comes out.  :D

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version