PDA

View Full Version : Operating Systems



Shin Starlord
February 6, 2013, 11:46 AM
This is just a casual thread about Operating Systems, such and Windows and Linux.
I'm just interested in what you guys would use on a regular basis, and your preference.

Right now I'm kind of cut up between Ubuntu and Linux Mint. It used to be Arch Linux, which I feel too unexperienced to use.
I like Mint's simplicity. It performs much better than Ubuntu does. Ubuntu on the other hand is more popular and has better support for most things. Because of this deciding factor, I'm currently using Windows 7 which came preinstalled.

Windows can be a bitch, but it works. I'll give it that.

Dlinker
February 6, 2013, 12:30 PM
Another Windows 7 user here, 64-bit version. I tried Fedora Core 5 way back when I was in college and it worked really well, but I kinda ignored it after graduating, haha. I don't see how anyone can stand using any OS as 32-bit nowadays.

Shin Starlord
February 6, 2013, 7:28 PM
Another Windows 7 user here, 64-bit version. I tried Fedora Core 5 way back when I was in college and it worked really well, but I kinda ignored it after graduating, haha. I don't see how anyone can stand using any OS as 32-bit nowadays.

I'm currently using the 32-bit version, hahaha. It came with the desktop, I didn't have a choice there.

Now I must ask, what benefit does 64-bit have over 32-bit? How is it superior, are there any downsides to it, etc.
(Thinking of upgrading to 64-bit ubuntu sometime in the future.)

Deathscythe!
February 6, 2013, 7:32 PM
I'm currently using the 32-bit version, hahaha. It came with the desktop, I didn't have a choice there.

Now I must ask, what benefit does 64-bit have over 32-bit? How is it superior, are there any downsides to it, etc.
(Thinking of upgrading to 64-bit ubuntu sometime in the future.)

I guess it uses the PCs potential and resources much better than a 32-bit does.

Dlinker
February 6, 2013, 7:36 PM
Oh man, sucks that you're stuck with the 32-bit version. Still, I'm not saying it doesn't work well. After all, I used the 32-bit version of Windows 7 for a year before moving to the 64-bit one, haha.

One of the main benefits of 64-bit operating systems is that they can use memory over 4GB. For example, my personal laptop has 6GB of RAM and the OS can use all of it whereas a 32-bit OS can use only 4GB. The performance increase is pretty noticeable. Another benefit is that it can handle long filenames and other such number-related data without freezing up or otherwise encountering problems. Keep in mind that this is just for Windows systems. Linux might be a bit different.

The only downside I can think of is the application compatibility. Most applications out there today will not take full advantage of the processing capability of a 64-bit OS. The only visible benefit you'll see there is that you can open up more instances or windows of them without seeing much of a performance hit.

extend
February 12, 2013, 10:39 PM
I bought an Asus laptop last 2011 Core i3 and were already installed with Windows 7 Home Edition 64-bit. I have a separate installer of Windows 7 Ultimate edition which my older brother used with his laptop, but I am kinda feeling lazy right now of upgrading since I'm gonna be doing all the grunt work. Plus, I'm satisfied with the way my laptop is as of the moment.

Dlinker
February 13, 2013, 12:51 AM
If you're fine with the Home Edition, there isn't really a need to move to the Ultimate Edition. I run the Ultimate Edition on my laptop, but I'm not using any of the features that make it the "Ultimate" edition. It's not like a Linux OS where certain distros of the same kernel (say, Fedora and Red Hat) have noticeable differences.

extend
February 13, 2013, 8:25 AM
Yes. Even with my Android phone. I use the 3rd Nexus which was the Samsung Galaxy Nexus. Nexus devices are always the first among the Android devices to receive updates from Google. I'm still on ICS 4.0.4. I don't mind if there's a 4.2.2 already. Mine works fine, and I'm satisfied with it.

Dlinker
February 13, 2013, 11:42 AM
Same here. I'm still using my GSII that's running ICS and have no desire to get a new phone for Jelly Bean nor am I waiting anxiously for Samsung to release the update. The OS is pretty stable despite the occasional freeze-up and it does everything I need it to do well. Unlike the first Galaxy S, which was okay for a few months for me then went downhill after the Froyo update.

Makes me wonder why iPhone users are so quick to purchase the newest phone that comes out. Their OS has always been rock-solid so why fork over the cash for a marginal upgrade that you may not even notice? Baffles me.

extend
February 13, 2013, 1:34 PM
I don't know, maybe it's just about the people being materialistic and cannot feel any contentment. Status symbol; show off; what else? Most (not all) of these buyers don't even have the slightest idea how to maximize the use of their smartphones, yet they are ready to throw their devices away to get the new one.

Yahoo published an article before the release of iPhone 5 about 10 things you can do with your older iPhone. Materialistic mind conditioning.

It's not about being able to afford a device, but it's not just wise to yearly change your phone for small updates.

As for me, two or three years from now, maybe I'll get the latest iteration of Nexus. Maybe not. Let's see.

Kinda OT. I'm sorry.

@Dlinker, are you running on the official ICS update of GSII?

Dlinker
February 13, 2013, 4:03 PM
Meh, I think it's an appropriate rant, haha. It kinda applies to computers now too considering how most applications and functions nowadays rarely ever use up the maximum amount of system resources to work. Do we really need to upgrade to Windows 8? What about the latest Mac OS? The only one this doesn't really apply to is probably Linux simply because minute changes happen on their own without a need for a completely different OS. I was thinking of buying a new laptop this year, but I'm holding out for next year instead (maybe). Not because of new hardware, but because I still haven't found a reason to get a new one.

@extend, I am indeed running the official ICS update on my GSII. I'm glad it updated without a fuss or else it would have been a trip to T-Mobile to get it replaced, haha.

extend
February 15, 2013, 11:16 PM
Meh, I think it's an appropriate rant, haha. It kinda applies to computers now too considering how most applications and functions nowadays rarely ever use up the maximum amount of system resources to work. Do we really need to upgrade to Windows 8? What about the latest Mac OS? The only one this doesn't really apply to is probably Linux simply because minute changes happen on their own without a need for a completely different OS. I was thinking of buying a new laptop this year, but I'm holding out for next year instead (maybe). Not because of new hardware, but because I still haven't found a reason to get a new one.

@extend, I am indeed running the official ICS update on my GSII. I'm glad it updated without a fuss or else it would have been a trip to T-Mobile to get it replaced, haha.

I have tried a Windows 8 on a demo machine. I hate it. I think it would lessen my efficiency at work. I hate the start menu covering up the whole screen. If I have a Unix/Linux terminal with another Excel for the documents open, then an SQL editor on the next, I'll get easily disoriented with the full screen start menu.

Windows 7 already gained praises being a stable and good OS. Why Microsoft?

Rowdain
February 15, 2013, 11:30 PM
I have tried a Windows 8 on a demo machine. I hate it. I think it would lessen my efficiency at work. I hate the start menu covering up the whole screen. If I have a Unix/Linux terminal with another Excel for the documents open, then an SQL editor on the next, I'll get easily disoriented with the full screen start menu.

Windows 7 already gained praises being a stable and good OS. Why Microsoft?
(this is the only reason I could fathom them doing this, below is what I think happened not what really happened)

Because tablet laptop's that's why, Microsoft wanted to compete with the growing tablet market by releasing there new line of tablet's that are also laptop's and for these machines they wanted to create a similar interface as there mobile phone and the tablet's of other companies and sell this as a new os entirely because why not. But the thing they should have realized is " this might be awkward if this OS is used on a real laptop or Desktop" but nooo that guy was probably shot as someone was placing the hundred dollar price tag on this OS and shipped it out.

so yeah that's my guess.

Dlinker
February 16, 2013, 1:37 AM
@Rowdain,

I think that's a fairly accurate assumption. There's no denying that the tablet market is very lucrative now and it would be a waste if Microsoft didn't capitalize on it with something daring or unique. However, Microsoft has a record of slipping on some of these attempts so I wouldn't be surprised if Windows 8 becomes their next Vista/ME fiasco. There's talk that there will be some use of Windows 8 in our firm (mostly due to clueless attorneys getting it OEM with their new laptop and blabbing about it). I'm hoping our office doesn't get swept up in that. I already feel that the migration to Windows 7 will be a huge ordeal...

extend
February 17, 2013, 8:51 AM
(this is the only reason I could fathom them doing this, below is what I think happened not what really happened)

Because tablet laptop's that's why, Microsoft wanted to compete with the growing tablet market by releasing there new line of tablet's that are also laptop's and for these machines they wanted to create a similar interface as there mobile phone and the tablet's of other companies and sell this as a new os entirely because why not. But the thing they should have realized is " this might be awkward if this OS is used on a real laptop or Desktop" but nooo that guy was probably shot as someone was placing the hundred dollar price tag on this OS and shipped it out.

so yeah that's my guess.

I see that coming. However, Apple and other open source systems took the other way around. Both still have specific operating systems for handheld tablets and smartphones. Macbooks have Mac OS. iPhone, iPod, and iPad have iOS.

Linux still have PC/Laptop operating systems, and you have Android on smartphones and tablets.

I dunno, I just think that grinding work of us developers and programmers still heavily rely on a PC/Laptop operating system compared on tablet computers.

Dlinker
February 17, 2013, 1:38 PM
@extend,

You think there will be a time when development work will be done on machines with touch interfaces such as tablets? I do web development/management work on the side and it would be very interesting to do what I do now, but using my hands directly instead of a mouse.

extend
February 17, 2013, 8:08 PM
That's a possibility. There are lots of development tools today that are graphical - I mean you "drag and drop" objects on your development pane or canvass or your work area. However, I think use of personal computers and laptops cannot be eliminated and cannot be dominated by tablet computers. Typing hundreds of lines of codes using a real keyboard is still much more convenient and efficient rather than on tablet computers. As for now, I think development and programming using tablet computers is possible, but it still cannot be the main choice of device or machine.

Take this joke for example - the comparison of the computers used by developers and the CEO.
It may not be entirely true, but somehow it reflects the difference.

4437

Dlinker
February 18, 2013, 1:02 AM
Yeah, I get what you're saying. The way things are now on the development side and how it's not really progressing towards adoption of touch interfaces, it's always going to involve the good-old keyboard/mouse interface. Your statement about use of personal computers/laptops still staying strong is very true as well. Here's a real life example: the former Managing Partner in our office uses an iPad (which he loves dearly) as his primary machine when working outside the office. He connects to the firm network via Citrix. No, he doesn't do it via touch interface only. He bought the external keyboard for the iPad so he can type better since he finds the soft keyboard lacking. The only reason he's not going for a full-blown laptop is because he's picky about weight/size. Even a tablet lover would never discard the keyboard completely, haha.

That pic is pretty funny and so absolutely right :) It applies to desktop support people too (or for anyone, really, who works a jack-of-all-trades IT/IS job).

Going back slightly on-topic, I wonder if anyone here have used a Chromebook before.

extend
February 18, 2013, 1:45 AM
Yeah, I get what you're saying. The way things are now on the development side and how it's not really progressing towards adoption of touch interfaces, it's always going to involve the good-old keyboard/mouse interface. Your statement about use of personal computers/laptops still staying strong is very true as well. Here's a real life example: the former Managing Partner in our office uses an iPad (which he loves dearly) as his primary machine when working outside the office. He connects to the firm network via Citrix. No, he doesn't do it via touch interface only. He bought the external keyboard for the iPad so he can type better since he finds the soft keyboard lacking. The only reason he's not going for a full-blown laptop is because he's picky about weight/size. Even a tablet lover would never discard the keyboard completely, haha.

That pic is pretty funny and so absolutely right :) It applies to desktop support people too (or for anyone, really, who works a jack-of-all-trades IT/IS job).

Going back slightly on-topic, I wonder if anyone here have used a Chromebook before.

I have heard of it before, these are laptops running on Chrome OS - which is another Linux/based OS. It's like Mac OS to iOS while Chrome OS is to Android. I have read that it is designed to work exclusively with web applications. Which means you have to always be connected to the internet? This operating system seems to heavily rely on cloud computing.

Dlinker
February 18, 2013, 2:41 AM
That's right, it's entirely a cloud-based OS with everything relying on an Internet connection. I'm curious to know how it stacks up to a traditional OS. I've read the articles on it and all that, but nothing beats hearing it from someone with first-hand experience. My GF was planning on getting one for her aunt who does nothing but Facebook, but no progress on it yet.

extend
February 18, 2013, 2:59 AM
Hmmm. I think I don't want an operating system just like that. It's kinda pretty useless without internet. You cannot always be connected to the internet all of the time, especially if there's an outage in your area.

Dlinker
February 18, 2013, 12:15 PM
Not only that, you're restricted to web-based apps only. It's a very specific kind of OS for a certain kind of user and for people like us who do more than the average with our computers, it's not an ideal fit. Still, the idea is pretty unique and not really that far-fetched. It's kinda like those terminal machines that have bare bones hardware since their purpose is to connect to a terminal server or mainframe. I've only encountered it once before when I did a very quick stint at a small consulting firm. The computers were about as big as an older USB external drive, haha.

extend
February 18, 2013, 12:58 PM
In a perfect world, this is very convenient. It's like having all of the available software on the internet for you to use. However, this technology is kinda immature as of the moment. Maybe several years from now, this will be the trend of operating systems.

Shin Starlord
March 11, 2013, 4:31 PM
https://pplbpa.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p1ndAqzqWuSeKia9V-l7dJ9ibsKHqRtP1lPxWBXvxQlwCA9sTBzeXJlnc3-V3f27lE0ZgedYAObW6Bl-DcRWfXa6H1ifj16xY/unity.jpg?psid=1

Just digging up some old photos for a friend, and I came across this.
Just thought it was worth sharing.

Dlinker
March 11, 2013, 6:04 PM
I'm trying to figure out what's going on there. You're using Windows 7, but that's an XP window and yet you're not running a virtual machine of any kind.

I'm stumped, haha.

Shin Starlord
March 11, 2013, 6:30 PM
I was using VMWare to emulate XP, to play older games and run older software.

This is quite fun. I can do whatever the hell I want to, and not suffer the consequences of things like viruses. My host system is not linked to my guest, of course. That would be a risk.

The only down side to this, it uses double resources, so I can't play games that only run on XP, without my system getting unreasonably slow.
But it is fun to play with.

*edit
That version of Windows XP is a hacked version I *found* on the internet. It's only about 150 MB. It also uses low memory. It's not effective, however. Emulating another system still requires a lot of effort.

Dlinker
March 12, 2013, 12:04 AM
Ah, my hunch was correct then. Man, I haven't used VMWare in years. The interface and emulation seems to have improved a great deal; it doesn't look like you're running a VM at all.

I also find running VM's to be quite fun. When I was in college, I did it with Fedora Core 5 on my XP laptop. Took plenty of work and time to get it working correctly and linked to our home printer, but it was all worth it. Got me through my difficult Linux course with flying colors, haha. I think I have that VM still in our NAS somewhere.

You're right about it being a system hog, especially with a Windows VM. I should try it now and see how a 64-bit OS with 6GB of RAM and an SSD can perform with two or three XP VM's running.

Interesting about that hacked version of XP. Was it a pre-built VM?

Shin Starlord
March 12, 2013, 6:18 AM
It doesn't look it, does it? VMWare changed. This just happens to be the free Player version. I have no idea what the full Workstation version is capable of.
I'm waiting for VirtualBox to have such good support like this. You'll notice in my taskbar I have an icon with 3 yellow arrows pointing in different directions, that's the VMWare, minimized. It would be nice if they could shrink this to the tray. Virtualization software still has a long way to go. The day they come up with a way to emulate the OS without actually opening it through the VM, by just running the software installed in that virtual machine. Life would be easier for so many people that way.

I also happen to know Fedora, it was one of my first Linux distros I tried (it was on a PC magazine cover dvd).
I'd like to know how it manages on 6GB of RAM myself. I have 2GB, and I manage normal functions, so that should be interesting. You could possibly run most software without trouble. I can't say more than 2 VM's can be healthy though.

No, this version of XP isn't. I found it as an ISO on a website while browsing for VHD's to emulate. I didn't worry about copyright because I don't believe anyone cares for XP anymore. I wonder if we can even find a legit copy of XP that works.

extend
March 12, 2013, 7:09 AM
I have used two different images over the same VMWare: a Windows XP and a SUSE Linux. I can feel a great difference on the response time between the two. Linux is faster and does not consume much of my laptop's resources which is running on Windows 7.

Some on the XDA developers have a Linux as their primary operating system and run Windows images on their VMWs.

Dlinker
March 12, 2013, 11:03 AM
Aha, that could be why the interface is slightly different. I've only used VMWare Player a couple of times so I'm not nearly as familiar with it. The big thing about the Workstation version is the ability to create VMs from the ground up, as well as manage your sessions for each one. It can be overkill for the user who just wants to run a VM and not worry about anything else.

VirtualBox is a good alternative and I think its only downsides are the somewhat weak support of Microsoft operating systems. Being open-source, I remember it having way better Linux/Unix support than even VMWare. The kind of virtualization you're looking for is at the server level. VMWare ESX Server is a beast and essentially allows you to cram multiple servers in one physical server, all with a seamless interface that makes it look as if the virtual servers are individual physical machines. Kinda scary in a way, haha.

Running two VM's isn't too bad. During my server OS course in college, I was running three VMs on our gaming PC that had 4GB of RAM: two XP VMs and one Server 2003 VM. They were all slow, but not slow enough to frustrate. Of course, the host OS was unusable due to all of the resource usage...

There are legit copies of XP still out there. They are likely in the closet of forgotten software in some big company's storage room, haha.

@extend, do you use virtual machines if you have to test out databases?

extend
March 14, 2013, 1:17 AM
@Dlinker
Yes, we do use virtual machines for testings, but we only use them for training purposes. It's a bit difficult to request a dedicated server for training purposes.

Dlinker
March 14, 2013, 12:11 PM
Oh, okay, that makes sense. Do you still have your production databases on dedicated physical servers? Just wondering if you're in a place that uses old equipment. Pretty common here in the States unless it's a big corporation, haha.

extend
March 15, 2013, 12:06 AM
We don't have these production servers. The client owns them. We were just given temporary access to it during the duration of the project. The client owns the maintenance of it.

Dlinker
March 15, 2013, 11:06 AM
Must be tough being a consultant. I tried it out after graduating college and it just wasn't for me. Long trips to distant clients, different equipment to deal with every time, constantly-changing work schedule...sorry, I prefer staying put in one place.

Back somewhat on-topic, do you defrag your hard drive? If so, what do you use? Built-in application or 3rd party?

extend
March 18, 2013, 8:07 AM
Must be tough being a consultant. I tried it out after graduating college and it just wasn't for me. Long trips to distant clients, different equipment to deal with every time, constantly-changing work schedule...sorry, I prefer staying put in one place.

Back somewhat on-topic, do you defrag your hard drive? If so, what do you use? Built-in application or 3rd party?

90% of us are here in Manila. Only few of us are granted L1 Visa to work directly at the client. We usually work through VPN in order to access the servers of our clients.

BTT: I just use the built-in defrag on Windows.

Dlinker
March 18, 2013, 10:56 AM
What about on Linux/Unix? Is there a defrag utility for it?

I'm trying to remember, but nothing is coming up.

extend
March 18, 2013, 9:05 PM
AFAIK, Linux doesn't have a built-in defrag tool although s we can install third party tools to do the job. I don't know if this was left out since we don't really need to defrag Unix/Linux filesystems frequently compared to Windows operating systems. It doesn't mean that defragmentation is no longer necessary in Unix/Linux. The production servers we have on my previous company have not been defragmented for more than 3 years and still are not suffering from any slowdowns.

Considering this, I haven't used a Windows phone. Is the filesystem of a Windows phone similar to Microsoft computers? I have seen Android, and it pretty much look like Unix/Linux to me.

Dlinker
March 18, 2013, 10:32 PM
Can't answer you there. I'm never touching Windows phones until my office starts supporting them, haha. Plenty enough to worry about with RIM's OS, iOS, and Android floating around all over the place as is. However, I would think it is the same as a standard Microsoft OS since it's meant to integrate as much as possible.

Interesting about the Unix/Linux file system and not really having to defrag. Then again, it makes sense; I think the whole concept of a fragmented drive came from Microsoft.

extend
March 19, 2013, 8:55 AM
I had something in my mind. Most of the operating systems except from Microsoft are related to Unix and Linux such as AIX, Ubuntu, Solaris, SUSE, MP-RAS, Mac OS, iOS, Android, etc. All of them have something in common. I'm beginning to wonder why Microsoft deviate to the established architecture of these operating systems.

Dlinker
March 19, 2013, 11:29 AM
Yeah, I do wonder that as well. Looks like something I should research on considering I use a Microsoft OS every day. Haha, funny how nobody ever bothered to explain it even during college. We just accept it as is.

thwalker13
March 21, 2013, 7:22 PM
This sorta has to do with this topic. Does anyone here know how to make a Disk Drive work on Windows 8?

extend
March 21, 2013, 11:05 PM
Are you talking about floppy disk drives? Oh my. I honestly have not used Windows 8. However, I expect it to plug and play as the operating system itself should have drivers for it.

thwalker13
March 22, 2013, 12:17 AM
Negative. I mean an actual CD Drive. My wife bought a Dell from Walmart and apparently the disc drive doesn't want to work cause windows 8 isn't letting it. Or it doesn't have the drivers to do so.

Dlinker
March 22, 2013, 12:51 AM
Yeah, normally that kind of thing is quickly detected by the OS. Do you happen to have another disc drive handy to see if that one gets noticed?

Also, do you know how to get to the BIOS? Wondering if the drive is at least being noticed by that.

thwalker13
March 22, 2013, 12:48 PM
I do not. I know the hardware part of computers. But when it comes to the program part, I'm at a loss.

Dlinker
March 22, 2013, 1:30 PM
Oh, okay. I haven't used Windows 8 at all so I don't know how the interface is like yet. The only thing I can say for now is to navigate to Device Manager once you log in and see if anything is listed under the disc drive section.

If nothing is showing there, then it's likely a hardware issue (either a bad drive, bad cable, or bad port on the motherboard). However, if the drive is listed there, but there's a red X on it or an exclamation point or something, then it's a driver issue.

Shin Starlord
March 22, 2013, 2:00 PM
The people I've learned computers from often took different methods of troubleshooting, but before we can help you, we'll need to know about what you're working with.

I take it you have a desktop computer. Is it new?

You did say it has Windows 8, but if it does come with Windows 8 and your disk drive is not working, you can get a refund for that.
Rightfully, everything should be in working order (and you should have the original disks of software included in the computer).

Have you opened your case and checked if it's connected as it should be?

What model is the disk drive? Who is the disk drive manufacturer? It will have specific drivers.

I gave this to Deathscythe! on his PC issue thread. Try it out and see if it shows your disk drive.
http://www.dr-hardware.com/

Like Dlinker, I'm not experienced at all with Windows 8. But please do keep us informed so we can help.

thwalker13
March 22, 2013, 4:15 PM
The disk drive opens and works. But it will not read the disk. My wife has done research and according to what she has read. The most basic form of 8, which is what this computer has. Does not have the drivers to make the disk drive work. We'd have to upgrade to the professional edition in order to even use the disk drive. The reason, is because of tablets. Everyone wants digital crap and not use disks anymore.

Dlinker
March 22, 2013, 5:37 PM
Huh, sounds like a legit reason. Can you still take it back to wherever you bought it from and have them put in a more appropriate version of the OS? Doesn't make sense to sell you a full computer with an OS that wasn't meant for a complete computer. Hell, if it were me, I'd tell them to downgrade it to Windows 7.

thwalker13
March 22, 2013, 10:25 PM
It's way past the 30 day return. We got it at Walmart. So that's probably why it's the basic bare bones version. Just doesn't make sense why it is this way. But then again, it's Microsoft. And Microsoft knows nothing about pleasing consumers.

Shin Starlord
March 23, 2013, 12:36 AM
It's way past the 30 day return. We got it at Walmart. So that's probably why it's the basic bare bones version. Just doesn't make sense why it is this way. But then again, it's Microsoft. And Microsoft knows nothing about pleasing consumers.

This is... if this forum could 'like' like on facebook, I'd like this.

So concerning the drive, which is definitely connected...
Well, can you tell what model/manufacturer and serial it has? That's really important.

Now if you can't tell, then you might be better off buying a new disk drive. Just a disk drive. It can be Blu-Ray or DVD, anythinng, and it should come with a disk with drivers.

Question: Did you recieve any kind of disks with your purchase of your computer?

Zeon's RedComet
March 23, 2013, 1:29 AM
I'm a Window's user.

Most Commonly XP at school, or Vista 7 or 8 elsewhere.

I had a school with MAc for awhile (they also had Windows Thank god) and they made use learn it and I just couldn't stand the Gui had to use some at my current school awhile ago, I still can't.

Never bothered with Linux really, as I know Window's well enough to feel comfortable with it. Yeah I may come off fan boyish for windows and I will admit I kind of am, but I couldn't stand mac, and am really not an apple person at all my self.

Dlinker
March 23, 2013, 2:32 AM
I'm a Window's user.

Most Commonly XP at school, or Vista 7 or 8 elsewhere.

I had a school with MAc for awhile (they also had Windows Thank god) and they made use learn it and I just couldn't stand the Gui had to use some at my current school awhile ago, I still can't.

Never bothered with Linux really, as I know Window's well enough to feel comfortable with it. Yeah I may come off fan boyish for windows and I will admit I kind of am, but I couldn't stand mac, and am really not an apple person at all my self.

You're not alone. I'm no fan of the Mac OSX interface, either now or way back when I first used it on an Apple II machine. Some people love it and swear by it, but I think it's just too obtuse.

I guess that makes me a Windows fanboy too? If so, then so be it. I prefer how easy Windows is to understand and how flexible it can be when set up properly.

@thwalker13, I agree with Shin; see if you can buy another disc drive or even an external USB disc drive. Haha, if you're feeling risky, I can remote on to it and dig around. It shouldn't take more than 30 minutes and most of that time will just be me figuring out how to get to Device Manager.

Shin Starlord
April 4, 2013, 9:40 AM
It's not like this is top secret information, but Norton is absolute shyte. Don't waste your money on it.
I'm just having loads of trouble with my aunt's pc, all of the lag troubles I'm tracing back to Norton Antivirus.
Can't even remove this, it's still subscribed for 75+ more days.

Come to think of it, don't even use McAfee. I remember using a computer with that a long time ago. It worked fine, but whenever McAfee did it's scan, the system slowed down considerably. Even John McAfee himself said "It's too annoying."

Stick to free antivirus software, I think that's the best. Avast works well, and so does AVG and Avira. I do notice that Avira has some slowdown too. AVG has maxed out the CPU usage on a few occasions, but it's okay.

Need to make a list of stress free software sometime...

Dlinker
April 4, 2013, 10:54 AM
Completely agree with you about Norton AV. It's a good deal of hassle and not worth it when there are others that work even better with less hassle. I've tried Avira and AVG before and they were fine, but somewhere down the line they just got bloated and laggy. I exclusively use Avast Free Edition which has remained quite in the background while still being incredibly effective. The relaxed licensing method is just icing on the cake. It was kind of a slog back in the early days.

Shin Starlord
April 4, 2013, 3:02 PM
Totally. I'm currently using AVG Free for my desktop, but I think my aunt's 1GB laptop will work best with Avast! Free Edition.

I on occasion get alerts about certain web pages that are 'untrusted' but other than that, nothing.
Over the years you just kind of become cautious about what you download, so that feeling helps.

Linux systems of course don't require Antivirus software. The hard part is getting used to it.

Dlinker
April 4, 2013, 3:20 PM
Regarding Linux machines, they do have a need for AV software for those rare occasions. Yeah, it's not as likely as a Windows or even an OSX machine, but the chance is still there and the threat could be a bit worse due to how well-known the Linux kernel is to anyone who is good enough to craft a virus/malware.

Of course, that's balanced by the fact that most Linux operating systems already come with some form of AV (I think Fedora or Ubuntu came with Clam AV) and most Linux users know not to be working on the machine as a root account.

One of the things that surprised me when I was using Linux often was how reliant I became on the command prompt. It got to the point where it was the first thing I opened after logging in.

thwalker13
April 4, 2013, 3:52 PM
I'll never pay money for Norton. I had to restore my laptop a few years back. And the 30 day trial for Norton kicked back in. When it expired, it unannounced to me that it was going to shut down my network card to protect my laptop from viruses. For over 2 years my laptop has set in it's case cause I thought it was broken or fried. I finally have it looked, the guy uninstalls Norton. It's as right as rain. You can imagine my frustration.

Dlinker
April 4, 2013, 5:19 PM
Wow, I've never heard of that before. Makes me glad there is software such as the PC Decrapifier that helps with removing such clutter from store-bought machines.

Shin Starlord
April 4, 2013, 5:49 PM
Wow, I've never heard of that before. Makes me glad there is software such as the PC Decrapifier that helps with removing such clutter from store-bought machines.

While the exact same thing hasn't happened to me, I had an issue with my drivers being wiped without my knowledge, thus causing my network card to become a paperweight. I still don't really know what happened, I don't think it was my AV, but I do know the network card BIOS had be switched off from windows.

Dlinker
April 4, 2013, 7:31 PM
I must be lucky then. There are only two things I experienced with my personal machines that were pretty bad: One was me deleting most of the important system files accidentally (this was back in the Win98 days) when I installed a game on the main C:\ drive under no sub folder, then tried to clean up the mess. Second was downloading something from Usenet and despite looking suspicious and not being detected as malware, I ran it, which resulted in my video card overheating every few minutes.

I've experienced hardware failures, but the HDD was still good so it was no biggie. Haven't had a single HDD die on me yet...

Shin Starlord
April 4, 2013, 7:45 PM
You also had that installing ot no sub directory problem, huh? I did that once with need for speed underground. It really freaked me out.

Computers are touchy. For some reason, mentioning that is causing my internet to switch on and off constantly...
Those of you with wireless internets, external storage devices, more than one computer, you're lucky you don't have to take the painful stress that comes with owning a desktop.

Dlinker
April 4, 2013, 8:29 PM
Haha, I was rushing through the installation and since I didn't really know what I was doing, it was a recipe for disaster. Good thing Windows just needs the OS discs to restore itself to working condition.

Got to agree about the one computer thing, though. I would never have just one computer in any place. There has to always be two at least. For the desktops, I find them to be easier to deal with than a laptop simply because you get more room to do stuff in (in the case, I mean) and parts are generally easier to get. All of the desktops I've had to get running again were quicker to handle than the same issue happening on a laptop.

Shin Starlord
April 4, 2013, 8:45 PM
That's certainly true. If something goes wrong with a laptop you're in for a sleepless night. I should know. The best problem for any kind of computer is lack of maintainence or neglect. You can't just use a computer like a toy and expect everything to be okay.

And we can't live without computers now. It's not our fault, society has become that way.
Every house needs one computer. Most kids grow up with this stuff. It would be nice to just forget computers for a while, but we know that's impossible.

Dlinker
April 5, 2013, 1:08 AM
Ugh, that reminds me of the machines we have at the office. The desktops are havens for dust colonies of various sizes. I've gotten into the habit of cleaning any desktop I bring back to stock in the server room. Those big loud fans cooling the place do a great job of making sure the dust is sucked out. However, I'd still rather deal with that than something more exotic like a water-cooled machine.

It's not just limited to desktops, of course. I've had to clean laptops that were a horridly nasty mess. Surprisingly, they still work fine regardless of how dirty. That's Lenovo for you, I guess. They make some great workhorse machines.

You know what would make us forget about computers for a while? Have something fun to do that doesn't involve the Internet or a computer. You know, maybe that's part of the reason why I prefer to build model kits as entertainment nowadays than play on my laptop.

Shin Starlord
April 5, 2013, 5:11 AM
Those fans collect a crapload of dust. Just use a desktop for 12 hours every day, for a year. Then open up the case and find amazement at how much dust has settled in there.

I suppose it would be okay if it's the solid parts. I'm damn sure if dust gets into something that moves you're going to have trouble. If a fan can't cool, the computer will overheat, desktop or laptop. There was once this case with a power supply being full of dust. The risk here is cleaning up the power supply without messing up anything that makes it work.

I was hoping to get into small form factor parts one day, I'm deciding otherwise now.

Doing something outdoor related is good too. Makes you enjoy being out there. And get rid of your cell phone for a while too, don't let that ruin your peace.

Dlinker
April 5, 2013, 11:34 AM
That's why water-cooling is becoming more important for high-performance personal machines. It takes longer to set up and riskier to maintain, but dust build-up is minimal, cooling capability is better, and noise generation is almost non-existant. My gaming desktop is water-cooled and I never have to worry about temp spikes or dusty fans.

We're starting to use small form factor machines at the office and I'm very impressed at how compact they are. Performance is amazing given the size too. How come you're not pursuing it further?

Shin Starlord
April 5, 2013, 4:13 PM
It's maintainence that worries me. I also prefer to use computers built by myself than those mass manufactured.
They function better. You also know what you're working with. My current desktop is a factory build, and it's not very efficient.
Also that cleaning thing I mentioned.

If I have to choose between SFF desktop or laptop, I would naturally choose the desktop. Laptops though are easier to handle and carry around. You just need to get a new laptop every couple of years (which sucks).

I suppose I'll see where SFF goes in a couple of years. It's not exactly 'mainstream' yet. I'm wondering why it isn't.

Dlinker
April 5, 2013, 6:02 PM
Ohhh, I see what you mean now. Yeah, for self-built machines, the small form factor isn't ideal yet. Unless you're one of those eccentric hobbyists who spent most of their time figuring out how to cram hardware in as small a space as possible. I think small form factors aren't mainstream yet due to either low demand or low vendor support. Let's face it, if someone wants performance in a small compact design, they'll go for a laptop or those specially-built gaming desktops (like the FragBox).

Desktops are a bit of a money sink, although lately it's lessened somewhat. Before, you'd have to upgrade everything every couple of years (if not every year) to keep up with the latest games. Now, it's usually just the graphics card and maybe the processor and/or hard drive.

Shin Starlord
April 6, 2013, 12:30 AM
I wouldn't go as far as to say I'm one of those people that like to experiment with everything like that. I just want something reliable, based on what we need.
Efficiency, power saving(possibly), compact in any kind of room, and perhaps have better than average specs. It would need to fit almost anywhere. I'd like to be able to move this between a television and a monitor whenever I'd like. Moving it around shouldn't be a problem either, I'd just put it in a bag and take it to me when I'm going somewhere.

Processors definitely need to be changed every once in a while for gaming. The new games demand this. That's why so many people choose console gaming over computer. I've seen some guys test play Lost Planet 2 on it's highest setting. There wasn't some lag involved there too, every so often the frame rate would drop by 10 or so.

Dlinker
April 6, 2013, 1:22 AM
Yeah, that's still a ways off. The trend for now is still towards big flashy machines that stay put in one place. As I think about it more, the only things that takes up a good chunk of space in a computer case are the graphics card, motherboard, cooling system, and power supply. Hmmm, I think you can build something using a SFF as long as you can find a small enough graphics card that still gives you the performance you want.

We haven't updated our processor yet and we built the machine two years ago. My brother went with a six-core and sadly, no game needs anywhere near that much, haha.

Shin Starlord
April 6, 2013, 4:47 AM
Well, I don't mind playing my games on average quality. High Quality is just like a feel good thing, it doesn't usually interfere with the experience, usually.

I'd say it's good you guys went with a 6 core, atleast you don't have to upgrade soon, and it gives you that certain boost you'll need.
I doubt you have lag issues, eh?

Dlinker
April 6, 2013, 3:06 PM
It depends on the game and the settings quality. Keep in mind, we don't play online so everything is local.

I think Crysis 2 on max settings with full anti-aliasing didn't freeze up once. Same goes for Far Cry 3. I haven't tried a strategy game on it yet. We found that the graphics card gets most of the work. The only time the processor gets a workout is when my brother is working on ultra-high res photos in Photoshop.

Shin Starlord
April 6, 2013, 4:08 PM
I find that incredible, because I did have Far Cry 2 on DVD before I gave it back. I played it on 640x480 on lowest settings and it still lagged.

Since Cry games are so demanding, like Crysis, for example, I doubt you'll have trouble with anything produced past- 2012?
It might get intense now, with new gaming platforms, and getting new games.

I feel the same way about playing online. I might play online, but with friends, instead of strangers.

Dlinker
April 6, 2013, 9:09 PM
My brother is serious when it comes to building machines for gaming so every single part and every single setting (including overclocking) he did on it is meant for only thing. Cost both of us a pretty penny too, which is why I'm happy that games today aren't becoming more system-intensive as quickly.

I haven't had time to really enjoy that machine, though. I'm perfectly fine playing a game on moderate settings so I tend to stick with my laptop. Besides, I don't like feeling isolated when playing a game and with the way we arranged the sound system in his room, it's very easy to lose track of time.

I'm the same way when it comes to multiplayer. Either with my brother or with my friends only. I've tried playing online with strangers before and let's just say it's too much of a commitment.

You know what I do want to try out of curiosity? Playing regular PC games on a Linux machine. How would you even install the game? Haha, I'll put it on my to-do list.

Shin Starlord
April 7, 2013, 5:05 AM
Isn't overclocking really dangerous though? From what I've read, going over 10 percent could wear out your parts like nothing else.
It's the only reason I didn't, I'm afraid I'll blow something up, haha

Well, games on Linux can be installed with WINE (Windows Games), and people have good success stories. I just have no idea how to set that stuff up. I've never used Linux for anything other than browsing. I've tried to emulate GBA games, and that's it.
Thankfully, there's Steam on Linux now, though all the games don't work.

Dlinker
April 7, 2013, 2:02 PM
Oh yeah, I forgot about WINE. Glad to see it's still around and may be my first stopping point when trying out Linux gaming. I didn't know there was Steam for Linux, though. I think it's a perfect fit since much of Linux involves getting stuff through an online repository.

Overclocking is dangerous, but only if you go beyond what the hardware can handle. We're still within range considering the cooling capability and motherboard (which is friendly to overclocking). But yeah, it's always a gamble and requires plenty of research, diagnostics tools, and testing. I think it took us two weeks after it was built and running before our machine was ready to actually play with. It's a good thing Windows 7 doesn't need much tweaking to make it run more efficient. I remember there were a few steps I always did for any WinXP installation I did. Moving the page file, setting up two partitions, removing entries from start-up, disabling processes that weren't going to be used, change the HOSTS file to add more security, and a couple of others I don't remember anymore.

Shin Starlord
April 7, 2013, 4:30 PM
WINE by itself isn't simple to use, there are plenty of factors that can cause you to throw a rage fit. Some files don't work through the loader, or it doesn't even detect it. Thankfully, WINE has a database that's updated frequently. From personal experience, using Windows Apps through WINE are better than running Linux versions. It'd be nice if they could set a Windows Vista/7 theme for Window bars though...

It's nice that they ported Steam over too. You just won't find Linux support on consoles like Playstation because they see it as a threat. Not many people use the consoles to work with Linux anyway, but still man...

My belief is that overclocking should be done if the user is willing to lose parts. Even with research, it's stil ldangerous and experimental, because different parts together can give variable results.

Dlinker
April 7, 2013, 6:05 PM
I guess that home-brewed Linux OS for PS3 didn't take off as originally hoped then. It's a shame since it looked promising.

I actually don't mind if there wasn't much of a GUI to Linux even if many Windows applications are ported over successfully. I know I'm in the minority, but I just can't shake my use of the command console.

Hmm, have you had a bad experience with overclocking? We've been overclocking our gaming desktops for years and not once have we damaged any parts. Usually, you can tell rather easily if the overclocking isn't working correctly, such as random shutdowns or noticeably slower performance.

Shin Starlord
April 7, 2013, 6:38 PM
That's Sony for you. The Playstation branch went from a pioneering console computer giant to money making crooks. They might also happen to be thinking financially. People that can install an OS on a console are more liable to hacking it, thus being able to play pirated games.

You're not the only one in the minority there, I also made use of Mint's terminal. I wouldn't call myself an expert though, I just used memorized commands since Linux's base is much complex than Windows. Still, having a UI you're used to is easy on the eyes. The WINE UI for Windows apps are like Pre-Windows 2000, which I've long since evolved from.

I've never really looked into overclocking for anything other than curiosity.
My computer was merely purchased for me for study related reasons, I'd just like to increase processing speed, as that might be the only reason I'd attempt to overclock. I'm also kind of fearful should anything go wrong and my *cough* dual-core CPU melts.

Dlinker
April 7, 2013, 11:58 PM
That was actually one of the things I was looking forward to with a custom OS on a PS3. We have many games we transferred to a hard drive on our PS2 and supposedly that custom OS would allow someone to play them on the PS3. Oh well, I haven't been much of a console gamer recently so it's not too much of a loss.

Have you done any shell scripting with Linux? I had a blast with it during college. Took less time to understand than MS shell scripting and really took advantage of what Linux can do. I remember doing a shell script for my final project (which involved the raw version of the Linux/Unix-based Asterisk VoIP server so no GUI and all config files are text files) that would be used for adding new extensions for the VoIP phones connecting to it. Took me a week to finish, but it cut down the process from 15 minutes to 2 minutes. It's too easy to get carried away, though. The FTP back-up shell script I did, though it worked, was just a mess of commands and comments.

Overclocking is best done on parts that could do it simply because the gains are better. For your everyday dual-core CPU, you might not see enough of a benefit to justify the action. Still, if you want to try it, I don't see why you shouldn't :)

Shin Starlord
April 8, 2013, 5:41 AM
Not to mention translated PS2/PSX games. Games that would never officially see a translation, and homebrew, you name it. I can never call myself a console gamer. I spend only a few hours on a sunday playing a ps2 game, and that's been rare of late. However, thinking back, most of my classic favourite games ARE Playstation 1 or 2. Killing backward compatibility was cruel, and they're now making it impossible to play those PS2 classics. I wouldn't get upset though, somebody is bound to hack it sooner or later. I think OtherOS was hacked to play on slim PS3s too, but I'm unsure about that.

No, I have never tried shell scripting. I might have crossed it before, but the 'scripting' part probably scared me off. I tried learning C++ once, didn't go too far with that... Shell Scripting can't be too complicated, right? It's the same commands just compiled into something that can be exected, correct?

I'm going to hold off on that overclocking until I manage to get a new computer, preferably a laptop. I'll need to open up my case and do some cleaning first. I hadn't done so in a while. I'll just do this to improve the fan's cooling, so overclocking by 5 percent or so won't fry anything. I don't trust my computer.

Dlinker
April 8, 2013, 11:20 AM
Yeah, wait until you get something newer before overclocking. You need the time for some research anyway so you have less chance of frying anything.

I feel the same way with today's games. There are some gems, but most just don't have the same appeal to me whereas back in the PS1 and PS2 days, there were too many games I wanted to play. I do hope someone out there is finding a way to play older games on newer systems or at the very least have some kind of emulator. You'd think with today's computing power available, we would be playing PS2 games on the PC, but nope, not happening.

C++ is a beast to learn with tons of syntax to be familiar with. I tried to learn it too during my later high school months and it never clicked with me. Maybe it was because my brain wasn't thinking logically enough back then; I did rather well when learning Java during college and personally, I think it's a great programming language to start out with if you want to get into programming. Shell scripting is a cakewalk compared to that stuff. It really is just a series of commands and variable definitions saved into a .sh file. Very similar to a Windows batch file, but with friendlier commands.

Shin Starlord
April 8, 2013, 11:39 AM
Actually, it is possible with PCSX2. I am able to emulate PS2 games with 30-40 frames per second. I'm sure you'll be able to do better with a more powerful processor.
Most games I've tried work fine, there are some exceptions but it's okay. Dynasty Warriors Gundam works close to 50, depending on enemies on screen, things like that. I also have God of War, but it's quite a big disk to make an image of, so I hadn't done so. It won't work fine anyway.
2D games are accurate, there's some jumping in the graphics but as usual it shouldn't impede playing. Disgaea, Marvel Vs Capcom 2, these work just fine.
PS1 games work absolutely perfect.
So yes, if you have the time for it, I encourage you to try PCSX2. You'll just need to find BIOS. That shouldn't be a problem.

I've never really thought about Java because I have more feelings for a language that works closer to the computer than web based.
But yeah, Java does work both ways, doesn't it? I'll need to find a book and compare notes on that.
I also tried ActionScript 3.0, the language for Adobe Flash. I was partially interested in flash for web based applications for a while. I'd like to get back into it, but Flash just seems so painful to non-graphic design users.

Dlinker
April 8, 2013, 1:42 PM
Thanks for the info. Now I can use the time saved for Googling that PS2 BIOS :) How does the save feature work? The same as if you were playing it on an actual PS2? I'm checking it out some more and I'm almost sold.

Are you sure you're not remembering Javascript instead? They're similar, but for completely different platforms although you can use Java applications inside Javascript (not sure about the other way around, though). We have a couple of really old database programs in our office that were coded in Java and all are stand-alone/non-web based. You can tell by the user interface since there are only two that work really well with Java.

Now, ActionScript...that's beyond me. I tried getting into Flash in high school and it really wasn't for me. Simple and short videos of stuff and text moving in patterns? Fine, I can do that. Falling snow effects and anything complex? Nope, because it needs ActionScript. I'm no artist so I disregarded it and never looked back. How far were you able to get when you were still into it?

Shin Starlord
April 8, 2013, 2:01 PM
Yeah, everythings the same. If you ever played around with PSX emulators like pSX or ePSXe, you'll notice it has virtual memory cards. It's the same with PCSX2.
I'm a little curious how your computer will handle it. This is the only computer I've messed around with it. Just remember you'll also need a gamepad to play properly. If you do need help, I'm more than willing.

Yes, I might have been thinking of Javascript. I read on stackoverflow that they're different, but how? I just never got into it. I'll be looking at the one that's more versatile while not being on the web. I'm curious how far you've worked with Java. What are you capabilities when programming with Java?

For Flash (and AS3), I simply learned calculating functions, and essentials. Flash CS5 has a library of pre written script to use. It's nothing epic though.
If you want to make a game, you still need to learn the code for moving with arrow keys, artificial gravity, things like that. These are simple commands such as left clicking to go to another frame and the like. If you're learning this in college you'll have a better time than I have. I found online tutorials (a pain, btw).

Dlinker
April 8, 2013, 3:31 PM
I'm going to give PCSX2 a whirl sometime this week and see how far I get. My laptop has a Core i5 and pretty good graphics card so we'll see how it fares. Hopefully, having a 64-bit OS won't be a hindrance during installation. I'm more worried about the gamepad; I don't know where ours went, haha.

Javascript is mostly for controlling web-based and browser-based functions. Those annoying pop-ups you sometimes get from certain websites? Likely coded using Javascript. Fancy drop-down menus in an otherwise text-based navigation menu? Probably has some Javascript on it too. Java is all about self-contained programs. It's been a long time since I worked with Java, but I think I got as far as creating a program that calculated horsepower for cars, saves each entry for later reference, and have it available stand-alone and on the web. Sounds simple, but the logic design was difficult.

I can see why you had trouble with Flash and AS3. Sounds like the kind of thing you need to do in a structured classroom environment. It's not like HTML/CSS or even PHP where it can be easily learned through online tutorials.

Shin Starlord
April 8, 2013, 4:03 PM
If I'm able to play it on mine, you'll be able to on yours with relative ease. You'll have some troubles like the screen shaking. That's interlacing, and can be solved easily. I'll have to find a keyboard/mouse configuration if I can. It would be so nice. To play PS2 games like how you would play a modern 3rd person shooter, like Tomb Raider.

That program sounds like something I've programmed in C++ as an exercise. My exercise was to code a program that calculates weather based on user inputted numbers. The logic was hard, the actual code involved wasn't. I don't have to pay for any IDE or such, to begin Java, do I?

HTML was easy. I learned this back when I got started with the internet. I had a small free forum, and I wanted to explore options. Good times.
Yeah, AS3 is different from that. It's complicated. A lot of your time you'll be getting references from a book, or the web. It will take a while before you get experienced enough to work with it on your own. I know a person that actually works with AS3 for a living. It just amazes me how he does it.

Dlinker
April 8, 2013, 6:45 PM
Alright, I'll keep an eye out for that. Thanks for the heads-up.

Code syntax becomes easy once you spend a few weeks doing it, but there's just something about Java that made it even easier for me. Within three weeks (with only a few hours a week studying it) I was able to write down code by hand without any reference material and I suck at memorizing syntax. There are some free IDEs out there like Eclipse, but I haven't tried them. We used Borland's JBuilder in my class and it was pretty intuitive, but our professor liked doing things simpler so we eventually went with textpad and the Java SDK for compiling.

Kinda sucks now how there are easier ways to create functional and visually pleasing websites that are cross-browser compatible without having to learn HTML/CSS all the way. I spent all that time learning it on my own for not much benefit, haha. Well, then again, I do still use CSS extensively when changing the design to a WordPress page. And that was several years ago so maybe it wasn't a complete waste.

Shin Starlord
April 9, 2013, 5:21 AM
Since I've never ventured into Java, I didn't think there would be any free IDE's since Java is, owned by a propietry company, right?
Flash is owned by adobe, so they have copyrighted the .fla file extension, so it's locked up for anything open source.

I've never been good at memorizing functions and other pieces of code myself. It's nice that IDE's like Code::Blocks gives you support when typing, so I appreciated that. I can't remember exact functions with C++. I'll be comparing Java and C++ to see how it's different.

Things have certainly changed, it's easier for people to design something now than it was 10 years ago. Typing up code was life to designers.
Now there are programs that help you design web pages, it's kind of a disgrace that these designers have it easy.

With HTML5, who knows what possibilities they're going to come up with?

Dlinker
April 9, 2013, 11:04 AM
It is owned by a proprietary company, but that company put out most of the licensing for use available to the public back in 2006 so it's not as proprietary as, say, Microsoft. That's why it's all over the place and development tools are easy to acquire.

You might find that Java has a more word-centric syntax. Maybe that's what made it easier to remember; You have less symbols and numbers to worry about.

Typing up code was the order of the day back then. I remember lurking in a web development forum and how the majority of the people there used text editors as their main development tool. When I first developed a proper website, I was so excited. Seeing it all come together (W3C-compliant HTML code and CSS, semantically correct structure, fancy CSS tricks for navigation menus) and actually displaying properly on IE, Firefox, and Opera was a high point. Now, you spend half an hour with any blogging platform and you're completely set. It's one of those things that make me feel old...

The one thing I'm looking forward to for HTML5 is the multimedia implementation. We might not have to rely on buggy code to put in videos or audio files anymore. Everything else that gets improved is just icing on the cake and I might just go back and re-learn it.

Shin Starlord
April 9, 2013, 2:14 PM
Saying this kills me. Yes, I hate all the crazy hard to remember symbols and functions that we humans would never use when facing each other.
The thing about programming languages, many of the key functions might be difficult to remember because we're not used to speaking that way, so it's like literally learning a new language, that's how I feel. Now numbers have never been my strong point, I just don't have much trouble with that.

I can sympathize with you on feeling old. Though I've never had professional experience with code, I've been using the internet since when people had to rely on manual effort. I feel alienated in this world where young users don't have to put much effort to make a gorgeous web page, or blog, like on Tumblr. That's why I keep it simple. I have to say, manually editing code is more refreshing than relying on a computer, because you know what you're doing, and automated interfaces can be frustrating _at times_.

I'm interested in knowing when HTML5 will appear mainstream. At the moment (for the past while), it's had mixed opinions.
If it's used for multimedia, it might be a winner. Currently you'll need various plugins to just to stream.
Did you ever have a problem with videos on loading? If they can make this work out, I'll be very happy.

Dlinker
April 9, 2013, 4:26 PM
Well, it just so happens that learning a new language is one of my weak points so that could be why I'm not good at programming languages, haha. I'll stick to easier stuff until I can find something fulfilling to make me want to jump back into programming.

I find that there's still a need for manually editing code even when using automated interfaces. I know I always have to go into the stylesheet of a blog or even the PHP files themselves in order to make a change I really want simply because the interface won't let you do it or doesn't do it correctly. About feeling old, I actually get that feeling only when I'm online and reading people's posts about related things, haha. A few months after I graduated from college, I visited my old ROP class in high school a number of times to work on a website and let me tell you, the up-and-coming generation (at least where I live) is pretty disappointing. Just consumers of video and online music, that's it. Nobody taking full advantage of the information that's so readily available to pick up any noteworthy tech skills. I'll stop now, I'm just ranting, haha.

I haven't read up on HTML5 in a while so maybe I should do that soon. I didn't have much problems with videos loading, but I did have problems with the embedded videos playing nice with the rest of the site's stylesheet. I had to learn a number of hacks to get them to stay put where I placed them at. I had problems with audio players, though, but since every developer out there tells you not to include audio on a website, this is just an isolated issue.

Shin Starlord
April 10, 2013, 6:12 AM
Learning a new language is hell without a teacher, I can tell you that. At the moment I'm more of a casual learning of programming languages, since I have no need to pursue knowledge of them other than personal interest.

Though one thing I've been interested in knowing about, and it's Assembly.

Don't you just hate it when you talk to people over the web, and they simply say "I'm bored."?
It's always stunned me how an individual could be bored on the internet. It's chock full of random information. So yes, it bugs me that newer generation internet users only know how to download mp3's, stream videos, and make use of twitter and facebook. Twit and FB aren't making it easier too, there's no page customization. Hell.

I've once had a problem with an audio track playing. I visited a page of a friend, and my browser completely froze until that track was done.
My advice: Don't install quicktime player to integrate with your browser.
To my knowledge, in 2006, there where more browser based players that made use of Quicktime or Windows Media Player plugins (or the like), than Flash based.
I only started using broadband in 2011. In 2007 I was invited to a site called Imeem where people share music. The thing I liked about this site, as a dial up user, I could stream music without much waiting. Dial up is incredibly incredibly slow for streaming.

Dlinker
April 10, 2013, 12:16 PM
That's actually a good thing since programming can be take up a bunch of your time. Most of the guys I've seen who are into programming practically made it their life.

Assembly, eh? That's a low-level language so I assume it's tough to learn. Then again, you're learning for fun so I don't see why not.

I hate to say this, but I've actually found myself bored of the web a few times. I might have to blame information overload for that, though. Once I found something to focus on, I was excited to be on the web again. I've realized the web is best used when you have a direction and not just for aimless wandering. I think that's the root of the problem: the new generation isn't taught to use the web for specific productive tasks, but rather to take in whatever gets their attention first. Flashy ads, word of mouth, the TV, all point them to things on the web that aren't productive.

Regarding audio on websites, I'm lucky enough to have never implemented Quicktime. From the first website I had to work on (back in 2005), it's always been Flash and the difference in ease of setup, ease of use, and control is amazing. The only thing that sucks is that I've been relying on the same Flash audio player for years so it's ancient. Luckily it still works well. Even for videos, I would always go for Flash since it's that much easier to work with. Yeah, I know many people will say Flash sucks, but I don't really care. Unless something better comes along that doesn't suck, I'll keep using it.

Shin Starlord
April 10, 2013, 1:52 PM
My interest in assembly is purely for the sake of niche activities, such as rom hacking. It's kind of premature, but I've been interested in making translations and things like that.

That's alright, one might not find the internet specifically useful if they don't have need of it. Like if you come home from school, you won't want ot go to wikipedia to read about something. But I havn't found myself aimlessly wondering since I become a bit of a veteran to the web. I use firefox, I assign bookmarks, and I visit these bookmarks to navigate around. Firefox is also useful in this regard because you simply have to enter something remotely related to a page you want to visit.

Speaking of better things, Microsoft have had Silverlight out for a good while. I just havn't seen it being put to much use. I believe it's used for various Microsoft services, like their cloud service, SkyDrive, and maybe email. It has good potential (if you like Microsoft. haha)

Dlinker
April 10, 2013, 2:18 PM
Oh, I see. I thought you were thinking of coming up with your own BIOS or something similar.

I've been visiting Wikipedia often lately, mostly for things like movie/show summaries. Specifically, getting myself acquainted with the earlier seasons of the Simpsons so I won't be confused on which season to look for what episode :) When it comes to info to entertain yourself, nothing beats Wikipedia. I've garnered a collection of bookmarks myself and go straight to them whenever I'm on the web. The only time I ever do wandering is when I'm searching for something new. How does Firefox perform for you? I've found it to be sluggish so now I'm mostly a Chrome user.

We use Silverlight for our intranet in the office. Basically an MS version of Flash-like content and I'm assuming it makes things easier to implement than using .NET or .ASP (what our intranet used before). It's certainly quicker and doesn't have as much hiccups when loading pages.

Shin Starlord
April 10, 2013, 3:10 PM
BIOS? I wouldn't even imagine where to start. lol

Wikipedia has everything! Even though there are more comprehensive Wiki's for everything (Like Gundam), Wikipedia gives the most straight answers, doesn't it?
The one other place you can get good information on shows, is tvtropes.

Concerning Firefox, it works brilliantly for me. I choose to use Firefox because, well, I trust it. Like everyone else (mostly) I started out with Internet Explorer until somebody told me to install Firefox, and I've loved it since. I have tried Chrome, and for browsing it's flawless. It's fast, and unlike Firefox, it doesn't lag.
But I do have several Add-Ons that are valuable to me on Firefox, I'll list them:

Adblock Edge: Does what it says, it blocks ads. Extremely useful.

Desktop: I can't really explain this one much. I prefer to use this over a Speed Dial, take a look at this link. (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/desktop/?src=search)

Flash Video Downloader: For downloading videos. I'm sure there's something for Chrome too, right?

Foxy Proxy Standard: Proxy. I just use this to view videos or pages that aren't accessible in South Africa.

And I have a download manager for mass downloading off pages.
So you see, Firefox has become apart of my life. I probably couldn't live without it. Even if the addons will freeze at times...

Dlinker
April 10, 2013, 4:19 PM
Haha, I enjoy visiting tvtropes too. Many of the entries and explanations are incredibly funny. I always visit it to see what they have to say for my favorite movies and video games. I always take what I read from Wikipedia with a grain of salt. Some are true, others only half true. Still, it does give you a direction and that's important.

Lucky you, Firefox isn't a pain. It's gotten to the point where the only time I use it is if I need to use a certain add-on that Chrome doesn't have yet. And yes, Chrome does have a Flash video downloaded that works rather well, although it's not as intuitive. One thing I found Firefox doing often on my machine is it either freezes up or slows to a crawl when visiting certain websites. I'm attributing it to a background script in the page, but I'm not entirely sure. What I do know is that Chrome handles these pages without issue.

Being a web developer during the semi-early days got me used to relying on different browsers for different purposes so I won't consider myself a single browser person. I still use IE for those IE-only sites, still use FireFox for the add-ons, and Chrome for general use. My favorite add-ons for Firefox have to be Video DownloadHelper and DownThemAll. For those times when I'm perusing adult stuff, haha.

Speaking of adult stuff, it's amazing how it can build up to the point where you need a NAS.

Shin Starlord
April 10, 2013, 4:41 PM
They do need to really fix that problem with the freezing. The strange thing is, it only became occurant once they kept on blasting us with updates. Before Chrome, we where at Firefox 3. Now we're at 19. Maybe Mozilla's struggle to keep up with competition is making them careless?

In any case, I might have a fix. I simply delete all files and start over. This doesn't mean to uninstall. Actually, I don't know, I never uninstalled FF...
Go to C:\Users\*Shin*\AppData\Roaming , and find the Mozilla folder, and just delete that. Make sure Firefox isn't open, naturally.
This might or might not work. Deleting and starting over is good sometimes. I occasionally make use of 2 browsers. Firefox or Chrome, or whatever is needed. I do this when I can't afford a crash. Like when I'm playing a browser based game.

There is a browser designed specifically for porn. But it's annoying. No surprise there. It encrypts images and videos so nobody else can access it without having access to the browser. It's still flawed. Unless it's portable. Now saving your private content to a portable device is the safest thing you can do.
If you're paranoid, use a portable browser. The problem I have is organizing that ammount of media so I can view it just by searching. I tried tagging it, but it apparently only works with JPGs.

Dlinker
April 11, 2013, 1:12 AM
Ah, isn't that essentially clearing the profile? I believe that's where it resides. Haven't tried that yet so it's worth a shot. I've tried uninstalling and reinstalling the latest version with no success.

I've heard of that porn-specific browser before and I have no use for it. Nobody touches my laptop and the only place I take it is my GF's house or my office for when I have to help with network downtimes. Also, I hide related bookmarks and content in unusual places so there is very little chance anyone can find them (at least in my situation). Surprisingly, I'm not very paranoid when it comes to browsing porn. I do it at the office often and I actually consider my online banking to be more of a worry, haha.

I just realized now what I should bring with me to the office: a Linux virtual machine. And then use that for any personal stuff I need to do.

Shin Starlord
April 11, 2013, 6:46 AM
This is a common problem with a lot of programs, it's probably a build up of junk data that accumulates over time. And I doubt Internet Explorer is plagued by this. IE is just utter crap. Pointless, crap. Though that coloured tab groups is nice. That can be added as an add-on in FF.

How will you move a virtual machine to the office from home? Wouldn't you still be required to install VirtualBox or the like on the computer?

Dlinker
April 11, 2013, 11:14 AM
You'd think that, but in my case, the issue is something else. Then again, this is on an XP machine that needs to be re-imaged. I haven't tried it on a Win7 machine yet due to the web filtering restrictions (the XP machine was exempted some two years ago).

Haha, I actually don't mind the new IE. All I've had to deal with was IE8 so anything new is better. Does a great job of loading pages that won't load in other browsers too so I always have it handy.

The VM I'm planning to use will be made using VMWare Workstation so all I need is VMWare Player (Or VirtualBox since this is a Linux VM) on my office computer, which won't be a problem to install. I may have to borrow one of our big external drives to copy it over, but that's a given. I think it's time I re-familiarize myself with Linux...Last time I had to use it was close to two years ago for a big case in the office and it was pure luck that I was able to recall some knowledge on how to get around on short notice.

Shin Starlord
April 11, 2013, 11:46 AM
XP had that issue too, yeah. I'd say it's all the junk temporary files building up, and causing the system to recheck it which causes problems. Also, a couple of posts back I said Antivirus, yes, antivirus software on XP is like wearing weighted clothing. Okay, but it is possible it could be something else.
Everyone here knows that you only install trusted programs. This is so important these days. Unknown sources usually give you Adware, which puts stuff in the background, like there's something called PC Speedup, which to me is just a load of crap. Almost everything has Adware now. Winamp for example gets you to download and install something.

I've never really used Workstration because, it isn't free, unlike VirtualBox. And VMWare Player apparently doesn't have the features Workstation does.
There are some things I'll be looking up, one of them is the possibility to open a VHD/VDI image as a drive on My Computer.
This is also less likely, but being able to boot a virtual machine as a drive, from a USB, it's unlikely, yes.
Does Workstation provide full integration with the Guest and Host? For example, being able to run installed software from the Guest machine on the Host without booting the Guest? Microsoft had this feature in Windows XP Mode for a long time, I just really want to be able to try it.
Just curious, and I just want to experiment.

VMLite: http://www.vmlite.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47&Itemid=128
Have you ever tried this?
I have, but it completely screwed up my VirtualBox installation.
This is the issue:

VMLite XP Mode offers similar functions as Microsoft Windows XP Mode, but doesn't require hardware virtualization. It allows you to run Windows XP at the same time from your desktop running on a different host operating system.

Dlinker
April 11, 2013, 1:35 PM
Yeah, most free applications on the web hide things like that during installation and of course, the common user would just click through everything, thus resulting in random stuff getting installed as well. That's why I've gotten into the habit of going slowly during any such installation to make sure I'm not installing extra crap. As for XP, it needs to rest permanently now. It did its job admirably, it held on rather well, but it's showing its age and there's no way to make it better anymore. I see it too often in the office now which makes me very glad we're moving to Win7.

I tend to keep things as simple as possible so my use of VMs is limited to either testing network-related things (like when I was working on Active Directory and I had to set up a test domain with two workstations connecting to it) or learning something new. Workstation does not provide that kind of integration, which is strange because VMWare Fusion on OSX does it. As is, with Workstation, Guest and Host systems are still pretty much separate in terms of application use.

Never heard of that VMLite before. Seems like another potential program to use for things like running old games.

Shin Starlord
April 11, 2013, 2:03 PM
If anyone still actually uses XP, they won't be getting support for it anyway, which I believe has ended. Finally.

So you'll agree that Virtualization software still has a long way to go before it gives perfect synchronization between guest and host?
While I really don't mind how Virtualization between Windows goes on, I'd like better support between Linux and Windows, such as dragging files and folders between them instantly. This is possibly between Windows but not Linux or Windows. So far, I've only tried this with Linux Mint, it used to be my favourite.

From what I'm gathering on VMLite, it's derived from VirtualBox, that's why it doesn't work with each other.

Dlinker
April 11, 2013, 3:44 PM
Yeah, I was reading an article on how support for XP will be gone this year. Good riddance, but I mean that in a good way since XP was the easiest version of Windows to work with so far.

And yes, I agree that virtualization, when it comes to workstations, is still a long ways off in terms of guest/host syncing. I think it's due to the purpose of the product, though. VMWare Fusion is meant to compete against Parallels for virtualization support in an OSX environment so it has be able to sync the different systems perfectly. Then comes everything else that is currently not meant for that kind of thing in a Windows environment and so the capability is either half-way implemented or not present at all.

Whenever I read about virtual machines being used, it's always for maximizing hardware resources, teaching material, running legacy software (mostly for Windows), or security-related tasks where an isolated system that is quick to setup and bring back to its original state after futzing with it is important. Until there is a strong need for the ability to run applications in a guest VM seamlessly and easily from the host system as if said app is installed on the host itself (and it's not an OSX host), I doubt we will be seeing it anytime soon.

You'd think software that was derived from another would work with its original source, especially if it's open-source.

Shin Starlord
April 12, 2013, 8:40 AM
To my knowledge, computers pre installed with Windows XP where still being sold until after 2008. Atleast it was like that here.
I was really glad to transition to Windows Vista a year after it was released. I understand that Vista came under fire for some reason. I didn't mind it much, I really liked Vista. I never had slow down issues, and I only had 448 MB RAM. Wow. I can't believe I went through life for 3 years with hardware like that. Just one reason why I like Vista.

When it comes to choosing Virtual Machine clients (I think it's called that), I'll have to make comparisons between them.
At the moment, VirtualBox has everything the limited VMWare Player has, except for the Unity function that visually merges the guest and host (and that's all it does). I might be willing one day to purchase VMWare Workstation provided it has functions that the free VirtualBox is incapable of.

Legacy programs are most likely the main reason people turn to virtualization, but I think that's for private uses. Corporations would use it for more complex reasons, but I'm starting to wonder why they would, if not for the security related matters.

VirtualBox does have an open-source version called VirtualBox OSE. I just don't know how it's different.
It's being run by Oracle after all, I just hope we all don't get screwed later.

Dlinker
April 12, 2013, 11:37 AM
The general negativity towards Vista came from the many reports of people saying drivers weren't working properly, system resource usage was intensive even though nothing intensive was going on, and the poor implementation of user access restrictions. These reports likely came from business users. It worked fine for me too when I used it for a year, but if I had a choice between that and Win7, I'll always pick Win7.

VMWare products are pricey so there's nothing wrong with using a free product that offers similar functionality and quality. The only reason I used it was because my college had a student license available and we had a big discount on it. Kinda got lucky that it was a good product, haha.

If my office is any indication, most of the virtualization needs come from servers. When you can cram three or four virtual servers in a single physical server and they all work just like physical servers, the cost savings and ease of management (which VMWare ESX Server does really well) is too good to pass up. At the moment, we're not using it for legacy apps simply because we're just ditching them and getting something new. We tried to use it for remote access to the network, but it didn't pan out and we stuck with Citrix instead.

I read up a bit on VirtualBox OSE. Looks like it's the same thing, but without any proprietary stuff.

Shin Starlord
April 12, 2013, 1:38 PM
I'll naturally say 7 over Vista too, having experience in both. But Vista over XP for Vista's functionality, which was expanded in 7.
The people I knew that complained about Vista where friends. I suppose they're just being picky.
It was fun. Aero made me feel at home, but I could have done without it. I use 7 Home Basic which doesn't have Aero. I prefer it without, though I wouldn't mind having my taskbar painted Black. Just because I don't care much for visual design doesn't mean I don't like personalizing to an extent.
This is my Firefox after clearing the data: link (http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/383703_4161016748490_1749123997_n.jpg)
I also feel that 7's taskbar is ingenious, while 8's Metro caters to those with less time on their hands. 7's is better. For more savvy users, anyway.

If I where in your shoes, I would have also purchased it. So was it just a discount for casual use or did you really do things with it at your college?
As for using it as servers, I never would have thought it could be used like that. My thoughts where using a normal unit as a server, or some such.