[TechieXP]

Nice.

Your limitations you keep speaking are created by teh hardware itself. Windows XP was deigned to use only 2 CPU's because teh hardware that was out then was only using 2 CPU's . Geez! What a reach. And guess what...Intels new i7 is 4 cores with Hyperthreading on each...minicing 8 CPU's. Since Vista was designed to use 4...that means you need new code to use 8 properly. Just like Windows 98 had a 256MB memory issue. Well most system built then only used 256MB max. you can't develop an OS that uses something that doesn't exist. So how can MS make an OS that uses 512MB if it doesn't exist yet? Howver software can make adjustment easier. When I install Xp on my machine even before SP1 I sti;; see 4 cpu's in the taskmanager. What teh sevice packs does is make efficient use of teh additional hardware. If you install 4GB on a Vista system pre-sp1 it knows it is there, you just need updated code to make use of it. Just like on MB. The CPU look is controlled by teh BIOS. OEM's don['t update teh bios much. Asus does which give you free software to update teh bios to use newer cpu's and more ram. making it more cost efficient. Yes MS patched code into Vista and XP to use more cores and more ram, but it isn't the same as building the os for it outright.

You other rant about Windows Server. First off, who is going to need a system at hoe with 32 cpu's in it. aybe one day we will have that, but buy then they can code in teh features to use it without a sever version. Even though the Server version uses some code fro teh Client example Windows 2000 and Server 2000, this is only for compatibility. The code is very different, and is designed to handle resource different. Severs have more hardware, and more users connecting to it, then your desktop would have. With 100'sof users accessing teh same data, you need a OS that is efficenit at dispencing it.

The Family BS makes a huge difference. Yes the latest OS's are built on NT. But what you said about Notepad? Sure it probablyis teh same program writeen in 32bit...but noepad is a simple text editor for simple text...its not even as good as WordPad. So be far. Windows XP original is version 2600...with Service Pack 3 its version37xx. That is a major enhancement. Each OS takes advantage of breakthroughs in hardware...many hardwares we use now could not be made to even wotk in older versions of Windows especially NT. Without using the actual names Vista is basically the 6th version of Windows. I am aware MS has a Home Server version of Windows...this is a hybrid version of Windows XP. All it does is allows the sharing of hardware and media easier.It is similar to using a Server version as far as that, but it doesn'y provid any benefit that can't be done on a consumer level. Vista does everything that does an more. Again teh limits you speak of are dictated by teh hardware.

As far as Linux. Yes I agree and am aware that each distro has it varied differences...which is why a few are better on a consmer desktop level then others. And as withWindows, each kernel update dictates what that distro can do. Linux kernel 2.6 works with more hardware and sowafte then an easier one. If the hardware never changed there would be no need to improve the software. Just like with consoles. Games can only get so good...on said hardware. Since you can't physically updating teh console, the only fix is to make a new one. Nintedo however show'd that is not always teh case when they ade several 32bit games that ran on 16bit hardware.

The Netbook is a perfect exmple of how you can take a very powerful piece of software and compile it to run on lesser hardware. Just like you can compile Vista to run on a netbook (why you would is crazy) but it can be done, however with limiatations making it not work it. If Windows can be made to run on a phone, a netbook isn't an issue. And even tho Linux was on a netbook first, and a windows one cost more...the Windows one will do better here. But in developing countries as you see Linux has been doing well. You can't put very highend hardware in a small box. Linux which uses less resources then Windows won't be processing hard enough to make a cpu as hot as Windows does. In a small compartment where heat is a huge issue, you have to tone down resources and since a netbook isn't going to be doing more then surfing and email...this isn't hard to accomplish...even for Windows.

And I also see you ahve no knowledge of licensing. OEM's have no choice. When you license Windows you cannot proote another software that does teh sae thing. This is what teh issue was with IBM. As you know IBM also had an office suite, but MS didn't want them to even install it if they were going to be installing MS Office. If an OEM promotes Windows, they can't promote a competeing OS. To do so they would have to stop licensing Windows. Just like you won't find Mac Donald's selling Burger King food. However both Dell and HP have been working on desktop version of Linux to release to the public, with teh money they have why do you think they aren't out? Its bec of Windows. The license bars teh OEM fro implementing another OS even on there own system while selling Windows. This is why teh DOJ has a case...The case mostly talking about how MS prevent other applications expecially OS's from gaining market. The only way Linux can be a real foe, is they have to be distributed by OEM's. Unless OEM's appear magically offering Linux desktops Windows has no true compeititor. And since Linux is free, no one has teh cash to make a desktop they aren't going to get paid for. As with all computers, compaies make money on software sells. If you ahve no good software, hardware no matter how good it is will succumb to someone else...example the PS3. Its a great system, but it can't even beat teh Wii or teh 360. and cost isn't teh issue...teh issue is 360 has better software and it is developed faster bec it is an easier platform. and of course MONEY.

And those 3 point you made? I agree 100%. And Windows is the sae. Are they inherently teh same OS...yes...are they teh same OS. No. Different versions for ddifferent uses, based on hardware that is avaiblae at eth time. I assume you Windows 3.1 can use USB, Firewire or a burner.

Also...Windows Server, is a poor desktop OS. For gamers, even thought it is more powerful then desktop version, teh resources are used differently. Games have lesser fraes rates. High level drivers aren't wriiten for the server as it is for desktop. Servers are ore csable then desktop versions which is why many business are still using Windows NT 5.1 and Windows 2000 wven with Windows 2003 and 2008 being out. Servers are used to process data, not use it for itself. Which means on a level, your cleint is more powerful on some levels then a sever is...which means MS won't rope you into buying a server product...and a server copy of Windows cost more....teh good thing...for $1500 you can install it on 5 machines vs 299 for just 1. See no benefit.

[waldojim]

Ok, now its your turn to READ. The Windows CPU limitation was ARTIFICIAL. They wanted you to buy a LICENSE to allow more than 2 CPU's in a workstation. The Windows 98 Ram limit - a PROPER 32 bit addressing scheme will allow 4GB of space to be addressed. 16Bit only allows for about 32MB ram max - SO to hit 256MB they HAD to use the 32 bit addressing space - but they limited the available ram on purpose. This is simple math here.... 32bit =4gb end of story. MS LIMITS the OS to LIMIT the hardware. This has NOTHING to do with " you can't develop an OS that uses something that doesn't exist." OH and btw - I can pull out my copy of red hat 4.2 (windows 95 days) and support 64 processors! and 4GB of ram! name me a machine that can take advantage of the OS at that time....
as to the build number - that is a number MS pulls out of thier ass - If I called Opensuse 11.1 - Suse build 5000000000000 does that make it newer? NO! its the same damned code that is in 11.1. My point about notepad is nothing more than the code does not get changed unless THEY HAVE TO. Its true with every program in Windows... EVEN THE WORDPAD YOU TRIED TO USE FOR YOUR EXAMPLE.

"And even tho Linux was on a netbook first, and a windows one cost more...the Windows one will do better here."

If windows requires STRIPPED hardware to be used, and Linux does not - I'll buy the Linux flavor. I would rather have the more powerful machine.


"And I also see you ahve no knowledge of licensing. OEM's have no choice. When you license
Windows you cannot proote another software that does teh sae thing."

no knowledge - did you even read my post?

"Just like you won't find Mac Donald's selling Burger King food."

you may want ot find a better analogy here - becuase this is more of a go to McDonalds and buy a damned chicken sandwich instead of Hamburger. DELL sells PC's not OS's the OS is included to make like easier for the customer. What you want on your PC is aking to what you want on your sandwhich -

"no tahnk you dell, I don't need a fattening Windows OS, Give me the Lean Linux one instead."


"The license bars teh OEM fro implementing another OS even on there own system while selling Windows."

This is part of what I was making a point of in my last post moron.


" The only way Linux can be a real foe, is they have to be distributed by OEM's."

OK, since the manufacturers website wasn't enough for you: BEST BUY WALMART


Those are available at the store... Still not retail enough for you?

"And since Linux is free, no one has teh cash to make a desktop they aren't going to get paid for"

Dude - are you on crack - this is just one way to save the OEM money - and reduce the cost to the consumer. Guess what - both the manufactuerer, and the consumer win here.


" I assume you Windows 3.1 can use USB, Firewire or a burner."

actually yes to all three - there are dos drivers for USB/Firewire, and I was burning in Windows 3.1 LONG before I ever got Win 95. (HP 9100B baby!) Nero 3.0 was the poo!


"Windows cost more....teh good thing...for $1500 you can install it on 5 machines vs 299 for just 1. See no benefit."

That licnse is to allow CLIENTS to CONNECT to the server, not run the OS. that is $1500 to SERVE 5 clients.




"For editing photos, you may not find a software as powerful as Photoshop"
Wrong Gimp is as powerful - just does not have all the scripts included that Photoshop has - it is also a PITA to learn....

"If you are a simple
gamer then Linux is fine...but if you want to play really highend
consumer games, you probably won't find a linux version...howevere ther
eis a workaround that allows you to either run Windows in Linux or you
can always dual boot."
Wine works for MANY games. And some games run better under Wine than they do in Windows (World of Warcraft for example)

"..if you want the best it is going to cost you money."

LIE


"Vista can't be as bad as said for it to be the number 2 most widely used OS"

and that of course is why it is the shortest lived OS?


"And I have said in
agreement with you whoever unseats MS it won't be Linux or Apple, but
whoever does will need more then just a better OS. Bec as you say Linux
is better yet is is only used by 1% of teh world, Mac OS is used by
about 11% and Windows is everyone else. On a consumer level. Have teh
best OS isn;t teh answer."
NO - it is going to take an OS that can completely use ALL MS crap for the time being, while proving to the world in a single shot that they have a superior platform, while trying to get OEMS to go "OMG, consumers want xxx." It is hard to change the mindset of someone used to garbage.

"So that means you need to do more then copy."

COPY?! What the hell did lInux COPY? Linux has developed EVERYTHING in house to make a Better, More Customizable, Friendlier OS than Windows Linux has many advances that MS had to COPY off of us.


"Also, those features aren't native to Linux you get them by install subset applications to create teh effects."

Technically - anything outside of the Kernel is not "native" the Window Manager is not native, the Xorg backend is not native - so what is your point? MOST distros ship with those "subsets" as you put it already in place.


"How disappointed I was that I had to go find other apps to copy teh effects. I didn't waste the time"

guess what - ubuntu likes to leave the system resources available to the user - unlike MS which assumes you want all your CPU time taken up by AERO, and makes you turn it off if your machine isn't quite up to it.

[waldojim]

ok, thier quoting system is really freaking broke.

[mphenterprises]

Gentlemen, I have branched this line of discussion into its own thread so that it does not interfere with the actual article responses. Please be mindful of the fact that not everyone wants to get numerous email notifications of things that have no bearing to the article. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask.

[mphenterprises]

Hi WaldoJim. Yes, the quoting system is "flaky" to say the least. I am not sure what you used to quote TechieXP but for future reference, you can use the Plain Text option, you can click on the quotation mark to quote a post. In Rich Text, you can use the icon to the left of the smiley face.

If you used one of these options and got this result, please let me know and I will let Bill, the PCWorld technician know.

[waldojim]

ah - I was just using quites around the text in rich text format. It seems to be catching the open quote, but not the closing quote.

[mphenterprises]

waldojim said:

>

Quote

ah - I was just using quites around the text in rich text format. It seems to be catching the open quote, but not the closing quote.

>
>




This is what it looks like when using the quote feature. If you run into any problems just let one of us know and we will report it to Bill.

[techie4fun]

mphenterprises said:

Hi WaldoJim. Yes, the quoting system is "flaky" to say the least. I am not sure what you used to quote TechieXP but for future reference, you can use the Plain Text option, you can click on the quotation mark to quote a post. In Rich Text, you can use the icon to the left of the smiley face.

If you used one of these options and got this result, please let me know and I will let Bill, the PCWorld technician know.

He must have done something wrong. Quoting seems to be okay.

[mphenterprises]

Hi Techie. Nope. He didn't do anything wrong. I believe he was manually quoting instead of using the system quotes. It should be fine now.

[TechieXP]

ur so funny...first off everyone knows Netbooks come with Linux. Now show me a full size desktop and laptop from Wal-Mart and Best Buy with Linux.

As far as your explaination of memory...I want you to explain...how when Windows 98 was out...and when windows was released several systems had a maximum limitation of 256MB of ram. In fact they all came configured with 2 x 128MB. Also...When Windows XP was released...how many dual processor system could you buy retail...NONE. the only way to get a board with dual processors is to buy it yourself...or you was a business that bought server boards. A home user would have no need for dual processor back then. And back then most boards that offered dual processor were expensive and beyond the cost of what a typical user would buy. You still can't address ram that doesnt exist. When Vista was being worked on...most system were maxing at 512 or 1GB of ram...which is why many who had laptops couldnt really use Windows Vista bec they had a ram barrier. This isn't imposed by the software. It is imposed by hardware. Using your example, Windows Vista was designed to use 3GB of ram. Why? From what I saw this was the max many laptops i saw dell selling could use. Once they made 4GB..as you see Microsoft patched Vista to be able to make use of 4GB. Just like Windows XP wasn't designed to use Core processing. How could it when core processing didn't exist. If you install Windows XP Pro with SP1a...it will show 4 CPU's because it is an NT based OS's. But since XP wasnt designed to use it...it wont make proper use of it. That is why this was included in SP3. This is teh same thing MS has always done with NT. NT 5 had so many services packs bec MS was enhancing the code to try to bring the OS up to date. As they still do. Just like they are going to have to patch Vista to use the i7 platform properly...which could be the reason or one of the reasons they delayed SP2. 7 is due later, it will obviously have i7 support natively bec the hardware exists.

And MS doesnt pull it out of there a$$ as far as numbers. The numbers help them track update in code. I assure you if you install the original Windows XP and try to use programs that require SP2 or better, they won't work. Sure it is teh same OS...but the code has been changed enough that it requires different things to make them work. The higher the number the more significant the change. There is no way MS can code Windows 98 to do what XP does and Vista does now. The code is to old and requires a huge rewrite...which is what a whole new OS is. Windows 98 is version 4 of Windows. Explain how it can be patch to do what 5 (XP) 6(Vista) 7(Windows 7) Windows 98 will install on a dual cpu system yet it will on see one...why do you think that is?

And just as pc users say to mac users if you prefer linux so much then why comment on Windows...? i never go to mac forums an comment on mac in a bad way. i dont dislike them. i dont dislike linux either. i simply made my choice and i am happy with it. and so are many others. yes lots of ppl have problems with Windows...but not everyone does. to say one is better than another is simply choice. It appears the world made their cchoice years ago.

[waldojim]

ok, I am going to keep this short.

1. the only 256MB limit - is the one in your head. For the sake of checking it out - I pulled out My PERFORMANCE dual processor PII board and tossed a full 512MB in there... Win 98 ran like a champ with all 512. Guess that limit doesn't exist.

2. MOST memmory limits have been addressed in the past, before it became an issue. Lets see if I can find a good way to explain this... If you build an OS that can ONLY use current hardware, then for EVERY new advance, a new OS is needed. For the sake of argument XP 32 supports 4GB ram, XP 64 supports 16GB ram. Now quick thought, why keep the same limits in a NEW OS with no headroom? You were correct, when XP was released the average machine was runnung 256MB, and yet MS left a full 8x headroom! When Vista launched - 2Gb was standard on new machines.... so only a 2x headroom???? By contrast, the 2.4 Linux kernel (32bit) supports up to 64GB ram! Thats a freaking crapload of ram, back BEFORE 2Gb even became the industry standard.

3. pick your side on what you are wanting to use a build number for. You were trying to pull some BS about "but the build number is higher, it must be better" crap. And its just that CRAP. My point was only that a build number means NOTHING as to changes in the build.

4. I use Windows as needed - this was mentioned in a previous post. I just get tired of seeing little Whiners spreading BS about a product.

5. Walmart was the FIRST reatailer to MAKE a POINT of selling PC's with linux... Just google, walmart $199 PC. They ran that machine with Lycoris (at first) Lindows, Redhat, Xandros, and at somepoint Mandrake

[waldojim]

"He must have done something wrong. Quoting seems to be okay."
It seemed to be having issues with multiple quotes.

This will hopefully give a good example.

"{quote:title=mphenterprises wrote:}{quote}Hi
WaldoJim. Yes, the quoting system is "flaky" to say the least. I am not
sure what you used to quote TechieXP but for future reference, you can
use the Plain Text option, you can click on the quotation mark to quote
a post. In Rich Text, you can use the icon to the left of the smiley
face.
If you used one of these options and got this result, please let me know and I will let Bill, the PCWorld technician know."



For the sake of mentioning it - I am just useing the qutation keys on the keyboard, not the systems... and that is probably the problem here

[TechieXP]

In order for an OS to address said hardware, teh said hardware has to be there.
As cpu speed increases, the bus also has too...and thus more memory can be addressed. If you look at teh requiremenst of each OS they practically double, and the hardware available at teh time is there as well. But the OS isnt there before it.

Look at the hardware available out after each release. Even though each OS took about 5 years...hardware changes faster and thus MS patches to bring whatever OS is available.

Windows 3.1
(enhanced mode)
REQUIREMENTS
Released 1992
Computer: 100% IBM Compatible
Processor: 80386 or higher processor
Memory: 2MB + RAM
Drives: 8MB Hard disk drive space
3.5" / 5.25"Floppy
Sound:
Video: VGA
Controls: keyboard / Mouse
operating system: DOS 3.1 and Higher

System requirements for installing Windows 95:
Personal computer with a 386DX or higher processor (486 recommended)
4 megabytes (MB) of memory (8 MB recommended)
Typical hard disk space required to upgrade to Windows 95: 35-40 MB The actual requirement varies depending on the features you choose to install.
Typical hard disk space required to install Windows 95 on a clean system: 50-55 MB The actual requirement varies depending on the features you choose to install.
One 3.5-inch high-density floppy disk drive
VGA or higher resolution (256-color SVGA recommended)

The following list describes the minimum hardware requirements for Windows 98:
A personal computer with a 486DX 66 megahertz (MHz) or faster processor (Pentium central processing unit recommended).
16 megabytes (MB) of memory (24 MB recommended).
A typical upgrade from Windows 95 requires approximately 195 MB of free hard disk space, but the hard disk space may range from between 120 MB and 295 MB, depending on your computer configuration and the options that you choose to install.
A full install of Windows 98 on a FAT16 drive requires 225 MB of free hard disk space, but may range from between 165 MB and 355 MB, depending on your computer configuration and that options that you choose to install.
A full install of Windows 98 on a FAT32 drive requires 175 MB of free hard disk space, but may range from between 140 MB and 255 MB, depending on your computer configuration and the options that you choose to install.
One 3.5-inch high-density floppy disk drive.
VGA or higher resolution (16-bit or 24-bit color SVGA recommended).

The minimum hardware requirements for Windows Me include:
Pentium 150-MHz processor or better
32 megabytes (MB) of RAM or better
Minimum 320 MB of free hard-disk space
CD-ROM or DVD-ROM drive
3.5-inch high-density floppy disk drive
Microsoft Mouse or compatible pointing device
Video adapter and monitor that support VGA or higher resolution
Sound card
Speakers or headphones

Before you install the Windows 2000 Professional desktop operating system, make sure that your computer meets the following minimum system requirements:
133 MHz or more Pentium microprocessor (or equivalent). Windows 2000 Professional supports up to two processors on a single computer.
64 megabytes (MB) of RAM recommended minimum. 32 MB of RAM is the minimum supported. 4 gigabytes (GB) of RAM is the maximum.
A 2 GB hard disk that has 650 MB of free space. If you are installing over a network, more free hard disk space is required.
VGA or higher-resolution monitor.
Keyboard.
Mouse or compatible pointing device (optional).

PC with 300 megahertz or higher processor clock speed recommended; 233 MHz minimum required (single or dual processor system);* Intel Pentium/Celeron family, or AMD K6/Athlon/Duron family, or compatible processor recommended

? 128 megabytes (MB) of RAM or higher recommended (64 MB minimum supported; may limit performance and some features)

? 1.5 gigabytes (GB) of available hard disk space*

? Super VGA (800 x 600) or higher-resolution video adapter and monitor

? CD-ROM or DVD drive

? Keyboard and Microsoft Mouse or compatible pointing device

Also Linux was made for a server platform before client, which is opposite of how MS does Windows with teh exception of Windows 9x. Windows 95 was teh client OS for Windows NT, so was Windows 98. THis is the only instance a client was after the Server product. After that Windows 2000 Pro was release before Windows 2000 Server, Windows XP was release before Windows Server 2003, Windows Vista was released before Windows Server 2008. The first 64bit CPU I know of on an x86 platform was the Itanium Processor. Intel didn't make a 64bit cpu for client based systems. No one at home would need this type of power. This is also why Windows 9x didnt support huge amounts of ram or dual processors. However this type of capability was always in Server versions of Windows and until Windows XP this was teh first time we could have such capabilities. AMD was teh first to offer a 64Bit CPU for clients. Thus now teh hardware exist and thus MS made a client x64 version of its Server and Client OS. This hasn't changed. MS added mutiprocessor support on the client side bec several tech savvy ppl build their own systems and they use boards with ore than 1 CPU. However on teh client side, when XO was release no board used ore than 2 or them. Even Pentium IV with HT on mimics 2 CPU's. This has now changed and so Vista supports more cores and XP was given this ability with SP3. Again it was after the hardware was available. Patching it was easily bec the capability is already avilable in the Server Edition. In fact Windows XP and 2003 are almost identical. The registry is what changes them as this is how MS turns features on and off...outside of teh additional code. The IIS in XP is the exact same one in Server accept limitations. Server allows unlimited FTP/HTTP sites...while teh client allows one of each. But I changed that in my Xp once, buy simply finding the registry key and changing the code. I wasn't able to get umlimited sites...i simply was able to do more then one.

As far as what hardware was out after each OS release...not exceed these by much. Sure you ca always find systems with more. But on average they all were in the range. They had to be. This is based on OEM systems not self built. Bec even tho Vista had a 3GB memory limitation...the board I bought the same year support 8GB. Your OEM is who limits what you buy and forces you to buy a new machine every 5 years and Microsoft simply uses that to their advantage.

If you look at hardware every 4-5 years, the capability of teh hardware doubles the previous...but it is goinf faster now. Intel has already took core processing to a whole new level. Has increased the bus speed and even more cores. Just like with P4. First it was P4, then P4 with hyperthreading, now they have 2 or 4 cores. Now with i7 its 4 cores with HT, eaning a CPU with eight cores is right around the corner..and when it hits MS will have a new OS to take advantage of it.

Using what you said...in a large city with lots of motorist, your solution would be simply to address teh problem by adding ore blocks. You have to relive the traffic buy creating more lanes which is what teh bus does. Count how uch connectors have increase am ra modules. The increase in connectors are lanes on the bus that lead to teh CPU. If you dont have enough lanes you get a bottleneck. On what you said...an OS like Windows 98Se would like a brand new Ferrari on todays pc...when it fact it wont. Bec it isnt capable of using teh new technology. Advanced hardware needs advanced software to run it.

[mphenterprises]

Hi TechieXP. Unfortunately, the forum has a lot of idiosyncrasies that we have to try and work around. One of them is that the title of a branched Discussion will not stay the same if someone responds to a post with the previous Discussion's title.

For your next post, could you please either respond to this post or the initial post of the Discussion so that the current title remains visible?

Thanks. Also, thanks for understanding the reason why this topic was split in the first place.

[waldojim]

ok, I stopped reading when you linked the Bus speed with the memmory capacity.

[waldojim]

for the sake of mentioning it.

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Intel_80386

"The 80386 featured three operating modes: real mode, protected mode and virtual mode. The protected mode which debuted in the 286 was extended to allow the 386 to address up to 4 GB of memory. The all new virtual 8086 mode (or VM86) made it possible to run one or more real mode programs in a protected environment."

This is not a speed related issue.