Game up for Linux?

Is the windows 7 beta able to run (properly) on netbooks? It was slower than Vista on a P4 notebook with 512MB of memory in my case. Installed the normal 32bit version. Is there a version specific for netbooks then?
 
Is the windows 7 beta able to run (properly) on netbooks? It was slower than Vista on a P4 notebook with 512MB of memory in my case. Installed the normal 32bit version. Is there a version specific for netbooks then?

Well the figure that's floating on the web is that Win7 (Vista SP2) is 20-30% slower than XP. If your hardware flies on XP, maybe it will be fast enough for
Vista SP2 (Windows 7).
 
There are more web servers running linux than windows for obvious reasons it has its place just like windows for dummies, game is far from up.
 
Well the figure that's floating on the web is that Win7 (Vista SP2) is 20-30% slower than XP. If your hardware flies on XP, maybe it will be fast enough for
Vista SP2 (Windows 7).

You do realize that SP2 for vista is coming out soon and it's not Windows 7, right? ;)
Will be buying a new notebook soon (I hope) anyway. :)
 
You do realize that SP2 for vista is coming out soon and it's not Windows 7, right? ;)
Will be buying a new notebook soon (I hope) anyway. :)

You do realise that Win 7 is Vista, right? Win 7 is SP2 - except that M$ will
charge you fanboys money for it. Enjoy the hype. ;)
 
Well said Garyvdh!

Are the many thousands of contributors around the world suddenly and collectively going to close up shop? This article is nothing more than FUD, if you ask me.
:D

and of course all the Linux users are actually going to go and BUY W7.
 
Um, KDE 4.2 looks a lot like Vista (as sad as I am to say it, it's true), but *KDE* has changed in the last year or so. KDE 4.2 is very flashy, and it looks like that out of the box. If you have a 3D graphics card, it enables a few effects by default, and it has other things like real transparency. It's Gnome that hasn't changed much in the last 5 or so years.

One does need to note that no one actually has a real idea of how many computers run Windows, Linux, or Mac OS X. Mac OS X is probably the easiest to figure out, and Linux is most certainly the most difficult to track. How can you track something that is given away freely and has so many different distributions?

Also, I don't know why anyone has to "get hald going" because when I plug in a camera or a usb drive or my mp3 player, KDE pops up a little notification and I can click on it to open the device. I hardly ever *have* to pop down to the command line to do any system work on my computer.
 
It is largely true Arthur, that M$ has dominated the market and used its monopoly to destroy competitors such as Borland and Lotus. M$ has pushed on us inferior products (OS/2 Warp WAS BETTER than run-atop-16bit-DOS-Windoze 95, ME was worse than 98SE, 98 and 95 should have been
98SE and Vista is a total dud while everyone is excited over Vista SP2 (7)).
For a long time Word for Windows couldn't copy-paste more than one page of text and formatting across properly. MS Office and other products were
artificially made obsolete and each new iteration of MS Operating Systems and applications brings more bloat. Windoze copied QuickTime in at attempt to get a functional Video for Windows functionality. M$ produced the ZUNE which trashed PlayForSure and partners like Creative, currently has a heavily DRM'ed non-transferrable mobile music solution and the origami dud etc etc...
Windows XP is GOOD enough for most people. Most people do not need DirectX 10 graphics, they don't need the eye-candy
and they don't need to trash a generation of adequate computers (1GB + Celeron is enough for 90% of consumer PC experience
short of recent games) to run a bloated, super expensive, new OS.


M$ just makes buggy, bloated software. The alternatives are better.

Just because you say so doesnt make it true! :rolleyes:

Loved the Article, Its spot on about Linux despite all the Linux fan boys on here who disagrees! :D
 
You do realise that Win 7 is Vista, right? Win 7 is SP2 - except that M$ will
charge you fanboys money for it. Enjoy the hype. ;)

Still on the same song but wildly still out of tune. Shame. I am running W7 for a few days now AND IT ROCKS> I will pay for it with pleasure. I am not cheapskate to have to be content with substandard freebie OS's and pirated XP versions. :D
 
This writer seems biased towards microsoft, but so would most industry players be, who are oriented towards the 'paid software' market.

Its ofcourse just hype for windows
 
I wonder if the all singing and dancing Windows 7 is going to give back the 5000 jobs MS cut.

Anyway when Symbian comes to the desktop, All your base will belong to us. :D
 
It is largely true Arthur, that M$ has dominated the market and used its monopoly to destroy competitors such as Borland and Lotus. M$ has pushed on us inferior products (OS/2 Warp WAS BETTER than run-atop-16bit-DOS-Windoze 95, ME was worse than 98SE, 98 and 95 should have been
98SE and Vista is a total dud while everyone is excited over Vista SP2 (7)).
For a long time Word for Windows couldn't copy-paste more than one page of text and formatting across properly. MS Office and other products were
artificially made obsolete and each new iteration of MS Operating Systems and applications brings more bloat. Windoze copied QuickTime in at attempt to get a functional Video for Windows functionality. M$ produced the ZUNE which trashed PlayForSure and partners like Creative, currently has a heavily DRM'ed non-transferrable mobile music solution and the origami dud etc etc...
Windows XP is GOOD enough for most people. Most people do not need DirectX 10 graphics, they don't need the eye-candy
and they don't need to trash a generation of adequate computers (1GB + Celeron is enough for 90% of consumer PC experience
short of recent games) to run a bloated, super expensive, new OS.

M$ just makes buggy, bloated software. The alternatives are better.

Yet you use 3 XP systems.
M$ did not kill those systems you claim about. THEY JUST COULD NOT COMPETE with M$. Nobody can kill any bussiness unless someone buys it and shut it down. The competition board would not allow that.
You say OS/2 was so great. A friend of mine wasted money on it. It looked nice but unfortunately he srapped it after a while due to lack of support and growth. Simple question of economics and service.

Now stop being disgruntled about something that itch but cannot be scratched and be happy with what you got. We are happy with the M$'s latest effort. At least they have an effort. Where are all those you are supporting or at least trying too. Where is the better alternatives? Then look at their value , effort and marketshare and show clearly why it is better. Then explain why you are using XP.

You are just being negative and anti anything new.

Whining seems to be a forte' of some members isnt it?
 
Is the windows 7 beta able to run (properly) on netbooks? It was slower than Vista on a P4 notebook with 512MB of memory in my case. Installed the normal 32bit version. Is there a version specific for netbooks then?

The 32 bit version of Win 7 runs quite nicely on my 2005 laptop (AMD 2.1 Ghz with 1.2 GB RAM).
 
Just because you say so doesnt make it true! :rolleyes:

Loved the Article, Its spot on about Linux despite all the Linux fan boys on here who disagrees! :D

If you're never going to need anything that's best suited to Linux ... then you won't ever need Linux. But it does make life easier sometimes, especially for power users.
 
Duncan MacCloud you re officially an idiot...

If the general populous is fooled by all those marketing smoke and mirrors instrumented by Microsoft and delivered by ignoramus like your self, so be it...
and let Linux be used and appreciated by minority of enlightened!!!

And we shall leave the rest to be devoured by the evil Microsoft corporation.


nough said...
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X