DISQUS

carlo.comments: carlo.log → Apr 23rd 2004, 10:21 GMT

  • petrol · 5 years ago
    I've heard a lot about WinXP dying - as you put it - but have yet to see this (cross your fingers). And I put the XP machines we have here through a whole lot. Win98 is less dependable. So, pardon the noobness of this question but, what do you mean by XP dying slowly?

    PS. Given I've yet to cross over to SUSE Linux, but when I do it's AMF to WinXP (:
  • jeck · 5 years ago
    [Quote] but I still think the "buybuybuy!!!" cycle is a tad slower for Mac users than it is for PC users [Quote]


    Not really. It may seem so cause their is only one company throwing products on the market, but I think you have a two year cycle - just like with PCs and it's more expensive.
  • Morn · 5 years ago
    Come on, you're just too scared to admit that you're GAY.

    :P
  • FanBoy · 5 years ago
    I'm with Petrol on this Gossip, what're ya seeing when you say WinXP is "slowly dying"?
  • terpsichoros · 5 years ago
    Can you use the same memory chips you get from the PC dealers in an Apple?
  • Carlo Zottmann · 5 years ago
    #1, #4: it's getting slower and slower and more sluggish.

    #5: Yes, they use your standard DDR modules.
  • ekoostik · 5 years ago
    I have the same problem with XP dying slowly (just about time for a fresh install, maybe that's a to-do for the weekend).

    XP and sluggishness: It just slowly starts to SUCK more and more. Things take longer to load, response times on everything are more sluggish, startup/shutdown gets worse and worse, gradual appearance of random carshes, etc....

    I know that a lot of it is due to the amount that I tend to fuck around with my system entirely too much, trying various drivers and whatnot in order to see waht I can get out of it. Lots of installs/reinstalls probably aren't doing wonders for it either.

    So, 1) I'd love to own a Mac but 2) There's no way I can afford/justify a Mac (especially from the software-purchasing standpoint) 3) I can't bear to make the switch while they're still not being included in so many game releases.

    I'll probably give it a few years.
  • Effendi · 5 years ago
    I don't have any issues with XP dying the way you guys describe, and we're running 40+ machines with it on with 8 hours per day usage. My 2 machines at home get thrashed with gaming, and no problems there either.

    I actually have to tell clients to reboot their computers every so often. Dunno whats up with your installations, but it sounds odd. Maybe its something to do with the processor, I just don't trust anything without an Intel badge. (Past personal experience only granted).

    I'm toying with the idea of a Mac, but I really cant get one due to work reliance on Windows. Also, although they are starting to port many games over, its still pretty thin on the ground, and although I hate to say it, the download scene for PC apps/games is much more fluid. (I do buy stuff! I just like to have a quick look first before I shell out my hard earned).

    But as I've said elsewhere, OSX = Rhapsody = OpenStep = NeXTStep, so I need one now!
  • FanBoy · 5 years ago
    Huh.

    I run WinXP on an Athalon 2700, 512MB ram. It's on 24/7, barring the occasional power outage. The only crashing/reboot problems I've had to deal with are related to 3rd party software causing page faults (only happened once), and once when my power cord was going wonky (replaced cable, system stopped arbitrarily rebooting).

    I've not seen ANY problem with programs launching slow, or even slower over time. So um...yeah. Sorry guys.
  • Carlo Zottmann · 5 years ago
    Yeah, but see, that's one of the problem I'm having here. For some people it works fine, for others it doesn't, and noone can tell me what's wrong.

    PS: I'm not gay. :P
  • Spam · 5 years ago
    It's probably registry-related. Every random program that comes along throws a bunch of crap into the Windows registry and leaves it there forever, even after an uninstall. When the registry gets larger, access times get slower*. Hence, stuff like explorer.exe and pals, which constantly access the registry, get slower and slower as well.

    The only good way I know of to fix it is to reinstall. Microsoft has a program called RegClean that will clean out unnecessary keys from your registry. The only problem here is that keys needed by competitors' programs are often considered "unnecessary." RegClean consistently broke Netscape 4, for example.

    I really have to wonder how the registry is stored on disk. If I were doing it, I'd use a b-tree. Sure, accessing a deeply-buried key would be slow, but having one large, deep subtree wouldn't slow down accesses to the rest of the registry.

    * No, I don't know why. I can't find out what the on-disk format of the Windows registry is.
  • petrol · 5 years ago
    @ #9 Fanboy: Same here - (at least with the XP machines which all run on Athlon chips). Maybe it's an Intel-WinXP thing?!

    @ #8 Effendi: The reboot always is a quick and easy fix (: And if it's not, that's prolly a sign that something's really wrong on the machine.

    My old instructor was very keen on us being careful with mucking about on registries... But you know what they say about forbidding something. (heh)