Xbox and Sega

Myname

Established Member
I did that the other week with the intention of doing a clean reinstall of everything only to find that my OS reinstallation CD was scratched to hell. It won't load, I can't copy it
sad.gif
Been on the phone to Dell every day since, keep telling them I need a new CD but they just keep telling me to do all this crap I know is unneccessary, then after 2 hours saying: 'I think your CD might actually be scratched, sir'. Like, yeah. Thanks..
 

MasterAkumaMatata

Established Member
Originally posted by Myname@June 15 2002,16:27

I did that the other week with the intention of doing a clean reinstall of everything only to find that my OS reinstallation CD was scratched to hell. It won't load, I can't copy it
sad.gif
Been on the phone to Dell every day since, keep telling them I need a new CD but they just keep telling me to do all this crap I know is unneccessary, then after 2 hours saying: 'I think your CD might actually be scratched, sir'. Like, yeah. Thanks..

Hehe, that's just standard (a.k.a. verification) procedure they must follow before actually fulfilling your request.
 

Gallstaff

Established Member
Once i called gateway to tell them my screen was busted right out the box and they told me to make sure that it was turned on.. then i said it was and they told me it was unplugged when i'm looking right at the outlet so after like the 8th time telling them it was all as should be they said that it probably wasn't even their fault and that the delevery guy probably messed it up.
 

Myname

Established Member
Originally posted by Rumata@June 15 2002,23:33

Its a good thing its not Dell making the Xbox.
smile.gif

Hmm.. That's not the point really. Their technical support on the phones is bad (and Irish people are hard to understand when they talk fast
smile.gif
) but they're products are good. My Inspiron 8000 has served me well.

Apart from when my cat spilt milk all over it and caused £500 worth of damage anyway.
 
Actually I have ME and would say it's far more stable than 2000 and XP,

drugs baaad, mmkay?

even win98 is more stable than ME, or you never saw a good 2k install in your life.

I had a total of 3 (three) OS crashes on 2k in over 9 months, the only thing that causes a reboot or shutdown is new HW or software installs.
 
Originally posted by Arakon@June 15 2002,13:59

Actually I have ME and would say it's far more stable than 2000 and XP,

drugs baaad, mmkay?

even win98 is more stable than ME, or you never saw a good 2k install in your life.

I had a total of 3 (three) OS crashes on 2k in over 9 months, the only thing that causes a reboot or shutdown is new HW or software installs.

ME was more stable than 98 to me... depends on your hardware config between the 2, but XP and 2k do indeed kill both for stabillity
 
Best OS... ah! Most people say that because they are SO used to it, to it's flaws, to it's immensive anonyances. Plus most never touched other OS, except DOS.

Some say ME never crashed on them, for others it's crash-fest, even on notepad. Same for 2K, same for XP.

That is EXACTLY the problem. Windows is absurdely inconsistant, between different machines, and even on the same machine. Everytime I re-install Win98 on this machine, something seems different, even if the installation disk is the same.

Some installs gimme that annoying "I won't shut down!" problem, some doesn't, and so on.

On my dad's computer, I installed DirectX 8.1, and it KILLED Direct3D/DirectDraw support, because it said the video card drivers were incompatible. It was a SiS530, and there were no 8.1 drivers.

Had I stick with M$'s solutions only, I'd need to make a fresh install, since DirectX cannot be unninstalled.

Add that the the horrible RAM management in the non 32-bit windows (95/98/Me). If a big chunky app, like 3DS Max 4, crashes on my system, the Windows will never free the RAM it occupied, even if I use Rambooster. So I have to reboot.

And the goddamned IE integration with pretty much everything... that's indeed annoying.

But what annoys me even more is the fact I have no real option. If I run onto Linux, I won't be able to use some apps I need to, since they don't have a Linux version, and a couple of other things.
 

Gallstaff

Established Member
I think that the mac os is a very stable operating system, but so incompatible with personal programs. It's really a buisness computer. I had a power mac for about 2-3 years before we got a pc and it never crashed on me except for maybe once or twice when i tried to run a pc game on it. Really though, the mac os may be a bit less convienient to most, but it's a solid OS.
 
Add that the the horrible RAM management in the non 32-bit windows (95/98/Me).
Since when are Windows 95, 98 or ME not 32-bit? The last 16-bit operating systems were the Windows 3.x. I guess you meant non-NT. They do have poor memory management, but then, they were never designed to run such complex applications as 3D Max. Windows NT memory management is much superior and is adequate for 3D MAX.
And the goddamned IE integration with pretty much everything... that's indeed annoying.
Did you know that Windows Explorer is the same program as Internet Explorer? Microsoft has a vision of deep internet integration. Internet Explorer integraton is one step towards this vision, as you can open web pages, view FTP server contents and browse your hard drive folders in one application. A third party app would have a lot of trouble maching up to those goals.
Really though, the mac os may be a bit less convienient to most, but it's a solid OS.
Mac OS is fairly stable, but at the expense of very limited flexibilty in both hardware and software aspects.
 

Gallstaff

Established Member
yes i know, but hardware seems to be less of a problem for macs to ME really. I mean, i'm not a hardware man i get other people for that, but macs seem more simple in the hardware dapartment, given that they may be unflexible. it still has everything you need. Hate internal speakers though...
 
yes i know, but hardware seems to be less of a problem for macs to ME really. I mean, i'm not a hardware man i get other people for that, but macs seem more simple in the hardware dapartment, given that they may be unflexible.
With that, I agree. There has to a simple stable system, like Mac OS. Simple in use, not in implementation, mind you. Microsoft usually sacrifices stability over flexibilty - a flaw in my opinion.
 

Myname

Established Member
Originally posted by Arakon@June 16 2002,12:59

Actually I have ME and would say it's far more stable than 2000 and XP,

drugs baaad, mmkay?

even win98 is more stable than ME, or you never saw a good 2k install in your life.

I have ME on one machine and XP on another, seem to have more trouble with XP.. but maybe that's just me. Couldn't give you an estimate on crashes etc as half the time I really ask for them (melting bananas in the floppy drive, seeing if a computer has the same reaction as a cat when dropped etc).

And as you so rightly say, I can barely move for my smack-filled veins when I'm using Windows anyway. Got to get through it somehow, you know?
 

Gallstaff

Established Member
Originally posted by Rumata@June 15 2002,11:23

With that, I agree. There has to a simple stable system, like Mac OS. Simple in use, not in implementation, mind you. Microsoft usually sacrifices stability over flexibilty - a flaw in my opinion.

Yes but i don't think they actually sacrifice stability over flexibility, but they are just in general not a stable OS. The reason for such flexability goes back to the whole monopoly thing. There is not really any other choice. People use windows, hence products are made for the people... which use windows. It's the never-ending circle of Micro$oft
 
that's why I say go for 2k, winXP is crap as well. it wouldn't install on my second PC cause my videocard is not compatible with my mainboard.

it worked happily in that combination for 2+ years in win98 and 2k before.
 

Gallstaff

Established Member
Yes i agree but most people aren't going to install another OS if they have one already installed. Too much work.
 
Top