Desktop

Ask something
Discussion Locked

Is Xp really that much better...

0 helpful
18 replies

by tekprncess

Closed to new repliesThis discussion is closed. It stays readable, but it takes no new replies.

Well I broke down... did a fresh formatted clean install of XP. Impressed?? I'm not really yet. Sure new bells & whistles.. but my HP 9700i Series Cd-writer won't work without a purchased CD of drivers. Ok so who else is on the "let's make them pay for everything" bandwagon? I think Microsoft has started a new nightmarish world. If they are pissed off about their lawsuits why are we paying the price? Haven't we been paying for OS's that can't & don't run correctly before release? I'm notsure anymore if I even believe that Bill Gates gives a damn about his customers. With all the fixes & srvpks, wouldn't it be ironic if we found out that he uses Linux!!

Just venting...
Tekprncess

18 replies

by djent

Better then what? If your interested in multi media it has some advantages, if on the otherhand you want a stable bugfree secure OS the answer is NO. MS has a long history of releasing buggy products, most savy users wont deploy a MS OS until SP2 isout. XP is not ready for prime time yet.

by arthurp

Why gripe about an O/S that you have just purchased ?

Did you not complete your home work first, or study the HCL ?

Accepting there are more versions than just the Home & Professional, Which system did you purchase ?

The fact that the driver for you HP 9700i is not available is not down to MS, but the problem of HP.

So please explain why you need to gripe at MS again - or do you just wish to climb upon the freeloading I wanna gripe bandwagon, to gain a little sympathy for not reading the information that is available at your fingertips

by james r linn

I had the same problem initially with my HP CDwriter -but then I went to HP's site and downloaded some new ones(for free) and voila it works fine.

I was on 98 SE before, and I am very happy with XP for added speed and improved stability. If I hadbeen on 2000, which I used at the office, I wouldn't have switched.

I've never been a big fan of MS, but I do think things have gotten better in the release of OSs.

James

by jklein

I love the stability XP offers a great improvement over W98. What I dont like is the way the interface has been oversimplified for basic users so that you are mired in layers of options to do a simple task. For example the Find/Search utility was fast and straitforward in W95/98. Search in XP is miered in options and criteria and is now so damn slow. Getting rid of Windows Explorer from the desktop was mindblowing. Using My Computer ads several clicks to a simple task of managing files. It was the first thing I was looking for after logging on for the first time. It was the first shortcut I added to my desktop. Why does MS not want you to navigate windows your way?

I think MS has dummied up XP and left the experienced user out in the cold.

by james r linn

You can change the theme to the classic theme and use the old menus and tools like Windows Explorer.

James

by blackcat55

I think you need to re think what you stated:
(I think MS has dummied up XP and left the experienced user out in the cold.) If you are an experienced user you would have changed to classic mode and found all the features you were used to. The dummied up part is an marketing tool,thats why XP looks like AOL when you first install it to make it user friendly, but the experienced user can customiuze it the way you (we) like. you get to use all features that way. XP by far is the smartest o/s out their and I have no trouble running it on my Dell 1.8g P4 or
my Athlon 1.4g. I run both of these 24/7 and surf or play Deusex 6-10 hrs a day without problems. My router cable/modem and networking were much easier to set up in XP than win 2000 pro which I swore by. Since using 98 I have learned to increase memory but XP really did not need it.

by rcdoferreira

I?ve been working around for several years with every version os Windows released bi Microsoft and one thing i can assure you. THIS IS THE BEST WINDOWS I?VE EVER WORKED WITH. Of course if you think that XP isn?t good just because it didn?t recognizeyour HP printer, then i should say that before installing any OS yous must study the HCL. On the other hand is you had to purchase a CD with the drivers for your HP printer why should Mr. Bill Gates be blamed for it. Blame the HP... Well i think youwill probably change your opinion as you really get to know the new fantastic XP.

by jbeaule

I don't know why everyone blames one single man (i.e. Bill Gates). If he were so wrong, why s he so successful? Then again, people that own a HP CDr device deserve no better. I myself have a Yamaha SCSI I bought when win95 was still new, I am notworking with WinXP/2000 and it is working fine, all I had to do is download the ASPI drivers and TADAA! So you better rant at HP if you ask me.

by 630111

Bill Gates is not so successful because he knows how to build an OS better than anyone else. He is successful because he knows how to build a business. Unfortunately, his idea of building a business includes methods for edging out the competition. Microsoft makes the most money not because it's better than any Linux distribution, but because people are stuck with it.

by garion11

What do you think it requires in building a business? Some sort of certification? He built a successfull business based on his software, his software didn't build him, if ya know what I mean. And what do you think business is all about big guy, it is about edging the competition, lol!. Oh yeah if you haven't heard it yet, you and all those millions of people that are "stuck" with Microsoft, go get a MAC or Unix machine, you still can you know...the power is all yours.

by ghstinshll

XP hasn't really been of any trouble for others I know who have used it who know what they're doing. The 1st post is really important, to where you need to consult the HCL when a new OS comes out, as only it will tell you if your computer will work or not...

by thechas

I upgraded from W98 to XP Pro, and like XP better with each passing day.

However, I did have to replace some older (outdated) hardware. (Aureal sound card)(3dfx video card)
Of course, with every new version of Windows older devices have often been left behind.

My CD burner worked fine after installing the updates from both Microsoft and Roxio.

My son just loves XP.

For the average user, it is not worth it to upgrade an older PC.

Also, for users that have multiple PCs, I would hesitate to have XP on just 1 PC.

For anyone getting a new PC, XP is the way to go.

Chas

by madmark

Back in the day, DOS was king. It could do more with less. TSR's were used to swap info in and out of RAM, running several apps at once. Games were fast, because they were only text. Well, that all changed. We added Win31 to the mix. All that it provided was a point and click interface. It was only a GUI run on top of DOS.

Win9x was the same thing, with code optimization to reduce its footprint. Hello. It's footprint was reduced by requiring an additional 30MB of RAM and additional HD space...

NT? Not Tested? NT seems a true seperation from DOS, but at the cost of proper memory management and compatibility with many types of hardware.

Next we 'progressed' to Win2k. No more DOS! Rubbish. It's still there handling the memory and I/O routines, just ported over to 32bit. It is what Win9x should have been.

Now we introduce XP. Universal Plug & Play? My god, what were they thinking when they left the holes in that thing unfilled? XP seemed more stable at first use, however I have had to re-install after 6 months, and have seen the dreaded blue screen. I get so many alerts when programs crash that I feel like a Microsoft beta tester!

I hope the new DOT-NET is more secure, and handles issues more gracefully. The power of positive thinking... The end users and employees will always pay for the monopolistic practices and accounting mistakes of the corporate fat cats. That is what makes this a wonderful time to be alive. Well, it sure beats the alternative!

by piaconis

HP has done a less than stellar job of supporting ANY of their devices under XP. Their updated drivers were extremely slow to arrive (with most arriving months after the formal release of XP), and most are not even certified to run correctly. I was disappointed, considering I've always installed HP hardware thinking that they were an industry standard. Let's hope this is one standard the rest of the industry doesn't follow.

by mrafrohead

Alright...

I would have to say that XP is just a crappy eXPerience... When I used it... I would get crashes often. The GUI... YUCK - maybe if I was a girl in a dress i would like it. WAY to pretty for me... Granted you can change it to a more "normal" look, but why should you have to hassle with it. When you use their great "wizard" you're stuck with for a Home Network, it messes up all of your file permissions. For me that was the straw that broke the camels back. That was where I returned to the almighty Windoze 2000.

And my opinions on some posts: wocka wocka

@ Piaconis: Hps's on the foot of MS by delivering crap.. Beware, specially after their "merger".

@ 630111: Right on the nose!

@ Arthur Pounder: Because a lot of MS products are just plain crap and chock full 'o bugs. They should get them right BEFORE final release!

Finally -

@ rcdoferreira: Bill... Is that you???

Well, hopefully the top half at least made some sense, since I know thebottom half is just plain rubbish, but I had to include it;)

Mrafrohead

by syadm

I got the same felling from XP as i got the first time i tried to replace my faily stable win 3.11 box with Win 95 a.
In my opinion XP is not more ready for sale than what W95a was.
As for the GUI.. well, it looks a lot like Linux, Mandrake 8.0 of2000.
/Tom

by james r linn

I've been a client on Honeywell, IBM mainframes, DEC PDP and WANG minis, HP and Sun Unix systems, used every version of DOS, Windows and every version of the Mac OS up to 8. I've also played with the Next OS and BeOS.

I too have an HP CDwriter, but other than that, which I don't blame MS for, I've had nothing but good luck with XP both at work on a corporate laptop and at home on a home built PC. I have had some older games which worked under 95/98 fail even under compatibility mode, but thats more the way the vendor wrote them than how MS set up compatibility mode.

And as you can tell from the "resume" I'm not a cheereleader for MS. Win 95a was a breeze compared to DOS 4.

I'd don't mind the GUI, and if I switch it to the classic theme I can hardly tell its not Windows 2000. I won't use the new multimdeia features much. At work I wouldn't have switched from 2000 unless I had been added to the XP rollout project. At home its made a big difference from my previous win 98 environment.

James

by garion11

I have an HP CD Burner and their drivers suck, period. So does their support and updates. Stop jumping on the bandwagon of blaming Microsoft, lol. Whatever they do, the truth is that they are a successfull company multi-billion dollar company, sothey must be doing something right. Sometimes these MS bashers are people who used to work for its competition and it hurts their pride...lol

This discussion is closed to new replies.