Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Why I hate Windows...

This topic is 5868 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

I hate windows because: 1) Windows 95 had a funny bug (By funny I don''t mean funny ''haha'') in the GDI whereby DestroyObject did not destroy an allocated font resource. This bug was not fixed even in Windows ME, I have yet to find out whether XP has fixed it. 2) The memory management model is crap. 3) The kernel is buggy. If there''s one thing that shouldn''t crash, only one thing, it should be the kernel. 4) The driver architecture sucks. 5) The core of Windows is command.com, which is a 16 bit executable. Don''t believe me? Install DOS and look in root of C:, there will be command.com, now delete it - the system will not work. Now repeat for an installation of Windows. Windows isn''t even a true 32 bit OS! 6) I had Windows98 installed on my computer, shut it down the way Windows likes you to, tried my computer the next day and explorer had become corrupted. I''m posting this on my laptop which is a fraction as powerful as my desktop PC. I may now be forced not to enter the Apocalypse competition which I have been anticipating entering since it was first announced last month. I am absolutely gutted, but there''s nothing I can do about it. I could beg to have the deadline put back another week or two, but that would be unfair on everyone else, not to mention the fact that the competition was originally meant to end at the 25th of last month! So I''m screwed, and it''s all thanks to windows. Funnily enough my Linux distro is still fine. Everything is working perfectly fine - no crashes, no hardware problems, just fine! Windows on the other hand, is now unusable. I''ve got to format the system and start again. Bear in mind that I last reformatted my system 3 days ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by TheGilb


5) The core of Windows is command.com, which is a 16 bit executable. Don''t believe me? Install DOS and look in root of C:, there will be command.com, now delete it - the system will not work. Now repeat for an installation of Windows. Windows isn''t even a true 32 bit OS!




Well, windows 9X/ME isn''t completely 32 bit, but NT based OSes, (such as Win2K or XP) are completely 32 bit. They finally got there just in time to start running their 32 bit code on 64 bit processors, though. Heh.

Also, did you know that command.com hasn''t even been in .com format since windows 3.1? It''s actually an .exe file now, but they were forced to give it a .com extension to be backward compatible with old 3.1 code.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheGilb : You cant critisize ALL windows...OK, I agree that win9x systems (95/98/SE/ME) are piecr of c****.(what do you expect form DOS based OS?)
But winNT/2K/XP/(LH?) are just just GREAT...

There are more worlds than the one that you hold in your hand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
TheGilb: You are *absolutely* right.

Win95/98/Me is crap, but WinNT/2k/XP are even worse.
I dumped Windows alltogether for over a year now, and my work got much more productive. Finally I can concentrate on my work, rather than trying to get the system up and working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a windows98 box at home that''s been up for over 5 weeks. It''s just a spare computer that I browse the web on while playing games like Everquest, or running my network apps on during development, but its still holding out.

I would upgrade to win2000 but theres just a lot less hassle when dealing with Win98 with regards to permissions and stuff. I''ve had Win2k give me an Access is Denied error when trying to shutdown a simple service such as VNC even logged in as the local admin account. Also theres a lot of nitpicky things I don''t like about the GUI compared to Win98, for example, in Win98 when browsing a directory and hitting Start->Run and running command it defaults to the directory that i was working with in explorer. Win2k doesnt do this.

Theres quite a few other little things like this that I enjoy with Win98 but don''t get in Win2k. Granted Win2k is somewhat more stable than Win98, if such a time comes that I do need to reboot, due to a crash or something, I don''t mind the whole 30 seconds that it takes.

*shrug* To each their own I guess.. =)

Gerald Filimonov
-=[ Megahertz ]=-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why I hate Linux and the BSDs:
1) The "community" is rather divided. GTK vs. QT, KDE vs. Gnome,
etc. etc. etc.

Why I hate Windows:
1) It's a bitch to install drivers.
2) So someone installs an old directx. It breaks SDL programs,
and it breaks RayDream. Understandable. What sucks is that when
I reinstall a newer Directx, the problem isn't solved. It isn't
solved until I reinstall the whole OS.
3)Win32 has the registry database that is has to seek through
to get info for programs; It gets bigger and bigger as the
system ages. Eventually it lags the system searching through
the database for information for trivial programs.

Why I prefer (and use) Linux:
1) It has yet to break itself.
2) I like the way the widgets in KDE look.

Why I will never buy WindowsXP:
1) "Windows95 is now faster and more reliable!"
2) "Windows98 is now faster and more reliable!"
3) "WindowsME is now faster and more reliable!"
4) "Windows2000 is now faster and more reliable!"

I'm beginning to see a pattern in their definition
of "faster" and "reliable."
"Well that depends on what your definition of `is' is."

Edited by - Frapazoid on November 16, 2001 3:30:09 PM

Edited by - Frapazoid on November 16, 2001 3:33:53 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I concur.

Windows 9x and ME were just crap, always were. Until 2000, I was forced to use these just for games. Now, never again.

2000 I like--stable, full DX support.

XP -- I won''t migrate until I''m utterly forced too. I really don''t see any advantages beyond some of the built in tool, none of which can''t be found elsewhere for free or at a marginal price.

Linux -- If only it would commercialize a bit. Problem with Linux, while it''s great in theory, until end-users purchase software, there won''t be any commercial pressure to fix software. Most of the software out there is good, but just needs that last little $ push to be great. Still, for programming, networking, and administration, nothing beats Linux. End-User, getting closer, but the apps just don''t cross that line to "professional" quality yet.

I thought BeOS might have made a good contender, but now I''m thinking MacOSX might be a good contender (BSD core).

R.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by Rube
Linux -- If only it would commercialize a bit. Problem with Linux, while it''s great in theory, until end-users purchase software, there won''t be any commercial pressure to fix software. Most of the software out there is good, but just needs that last little $ push to be great. Still, for programming, networking, and administration, nothing beats Linux. End-User, getting closer, but the apps just don''t cross that line to "professional" quality yet.
R.


Microsoft has been supporting the SSSCA law, which if passed
will ban Linux in the US. Also, they call Linux users communist,
because competition between companies is communist, appearently.
So, I will not buy anything from Microsoft again, not even
their hardware, because they have offended me.

I think many of the apps do seem professional quality.
I use Gimp, StarOffice (6.0 beta), Mozilla, Gcc, and a text
editor.. I''ve also got 3 games on here; Quake3, Civilization,
Terminus. Works fantastic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hehe, well ive always been a windows/dos fan, so windows 98 is still running good for me. Ive tried linux a few times now, but i just dont see how everything is controlled by the OS. Windows on the other hand, i understand. I understand how the registry works, (so i can know if a trojan has been installed by some newb whereas in linux i wouldnt know where to look for it) how the filesystem works, how to use win32 code to get the OS to do what i want and when i want, and its just suitable for my usage.

I would love to start working in linux, just for trial''s sake, but being a programmer in pascal only understanding win32 code, i doubt linux would even support people like me.. who knows..

I dont like the way Microsoft operates, but i like the products they come out with. Sure my windows system crashes sometimes, but at least i know how to fix it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
1. a funny bug about fonts not being released? funny never happened on any of my systems. then again you may not code smart or read docs (ie you must deselect the obj before destroying it)

2. it is? and you know this how? because everyone else says so? face it windows has a pretty good virtual memory manager (some tests by linux ppl show it to be fatser hen linux''s virtual memory manager). Linux on the other hand works better for lower memory systems.

3. face it linux can be buggy as well. Many times i have crashed both my systems (linux and windows). Ussually it is because of programmer error doing things they are not supposed to do. Win2k is more stable then the consumer versions (win9x) Just try using USB in linux (the newer version have become better at it). A system is only as stable as the drivers that run with the kernal. Bad drivers in liunx cause crashes too or if you are root and do bad things. Think of the consumer win9x as a linux box stuck in root.

4. Driver architecture sucks? how? Because you have to reboot when you install drivers? (becoming less of a problem in the newer versions) Is it because the drivers aree not open source? Is it that you can find drivers for more hardware for windows then for linux?

5. the core of windows is not command.com (command interprator). That is like saying linux''s core is bash (or insert favorite shell here). In fact winme stays in 16bot only for very little time at the start. win9x is a true 32bit os, while it has backwards capabilities for 16bit apps. I have a little trick for you, delete all your shells that you use for linux and boot up. bet you linux wont work too well either.

6. maybe you have a bad harddrive, or a virus. you seem ignorent to contract one of those.

also the registry dont lag the pc. In fact many programs dont even use the registry. ussually only microsoft products and a few 3rd party apps. Most programs have their own config files. The registry though at least keeps things in a central place, and uses less space wasting (since small files take up more space then their actually size). Personally i dont use the registry for anythign i code, since i feel its best kept for only os stuff, driver stuff, and other larger apps.

if you windows is so terrible, remove it form ALL yoru systems. no excuses. no "well then use my Z hardware since there are not drivers yet". or "i cant use Y app since it is only for windows". Also dont use any component of windows either, that includes try to use the dlls from windows with WINE for better simulation. If ocurse you probally have some lame excuse why you are FORCED to keep windows on your pcs. Hell why even switch to linux? you can also use BeOS and a bunch or other alternitive OSs.

-groof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
quote:

if you windows is so terrible, remove it form ALL yoru systems. no excuses. no "well then use my Z hardware since there are not drivers yet". or "i cant use Y app since it is only for windows". Also dont use any component of windows either, that includes try to use the dlls from windows with WINE for better simulation. If ocurse you probally have some lame excuse why you are FORCED to keep windows on your pcs.



That''s exactly what I did - I removed *any* M$ software from my system. It''s a little bit more work, if you want to buy new hardware, you''ll have to be sure that it will work under Linux. But in the end you''ll be buying better quality hardware, since you informed yourself better about it. And Linux drivers are also more likely to be released for good HW than for noname crap, that would just make you problems even under Windows. I feel alot better since I killed M$ from my HD And the words ''stability'' and ''reliability'' has been taken to a whole new dimension on my PC...


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:

1. a funny bug about fonts not being released? funny never happened on any of my systems. then again you may not code smart or read docs (ie you must deselect the obj before destroying it)



How do you do that? There is no DeSelect or UnSelect function... and there''s no mention of how to deselect a brush or bitmap or whatnot in the docs in DeleteObject, even though it says that you have to deselect the object.

------------
- outRider -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll just quickly post my standard "Windows sux0rs, Linux r00lz" reply:

A system is only a stable as its use. Most people don't use their Linux boxes as extensively or intensively as their Windows boxes. Furthermore, anectodal evidence is meaningless. You need to compare specifics in a controlled environment and similar (read: near-identical) situations. Since noone has quoted standardized regression tests, then your argument is interesting but has no real implications.

IDC maintains a number of statistics on usage and performance of a wide variety of systems. For example, IIS was found to be better at basic server operations than Apache. Another: WinNT/2k+IIS is the fastest growing server platform among paying customers, and we all realize that without commercial support Linux will never achieve mainstream acceptance, right?

Linux is great. Windows is great. Use one, use both, whatever; just don't turn utility into some sort of pseudo-religious issue - it's a preference.

Have a nice day.



If you don't know, STFU!

Edited by - Oluseyi on November 16, 2001 12:05:32 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by outRider
How do you do that? There is no DeSelect or UnSelect function... and there's no mention of how to deselect a brush or bitmap or whatnot in the docs in DeleteObject, even though it says that you have to deselect the object.

You know that a call to SelectObject returns the previous object, right? So...

// using an HFONT as an example
HFONT hOldFnt, hNewFnt;
// hNewFont is created here
hOldFnt = SelectObject(hDC, hNewFnt);
// use new font here
...
// we are ready to "deselect" our font (restore old font):
SelectObject(hDC, hOldFnt);
DeleteObject(hNewFnt);




If you don't know, STFU!

Edited by - Oluseyi on November 16, 2001 12:05:57 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyone who doesn''t like windows because it crashes must be "mentally handicapped"
I have never had any problems with windows on my PC and i''ve been running it off of Win 98 for around 3 years(give or take)
I''ve installed hardware and removed it.
I haven''t had a single problem in that entire time.
The only crashes that i have experienced were because of my own stupidity. Things like not enabling DMA on my hard drive after installing a new one.
I''m not saying its perfect but it certainly shouldn''t be "hated" by anyone.
And try checking the windows update page every month or so.
It just might prevent some of those retarded crashes.

Next time try making your post a little more openGL related eh?
I don''t need some @$$ starting an anti-windows campaign here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous Poster
I''d say I''m somewhere in the middle. I don''t particularly like MS, but I''ve never really used any non MS operating systems (with the exception of OS/2 Warp, which came with a computer I had a few years ago). Over the years I''ve become accustomed to the various versions of Windows, and I really can''t be bothered moving to another OS now.

With regards to stability I''d say Win9x is really really shoddy. (especially win98). In my experience, Windows 98 is only stable if you don''t install any software on it! Great! I love using paint and wordpad, why would I need anything else? It doesn''t seem to matter how careful you are about your setup, within a few weeks it''ll be crashing every 5 minutes.

I have however installed Win2000, and although there are a few small problems with it, I''d say it''s a reasonably reliable OS. It doesn''t crash nearly as much, and it''s a lot faster. I''m quite happy to stick with it until forced to upgrade.

Can''t say I''m too happy with XP though, the whole product activation thing, and the fact that it needs a 500mhz pIII to run puts me right off. I''d rather keep my resources to run programs thanks, not a severly bloated OS with a pointlessly shiny interface. As for the product activation, I don''t want to have to phone MS every time I reformat. My computer is my property, and it''s my business what I do with it. Product activation is not going to stop piracy, so it''s really just an annoyance IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Product activation is the one thing that Microsoft came up with that anyone has a right to hate. Supposedly there are ways around it. I think one of them is to ghost your hard drive right after you install and activate windows. I''m not sure but my friend said that you don''t need to activate if you have the corporate version or something like that. Of course it costs more though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheGilb, why do you not develop your OpenGL programs under linux? It exists several good cross platform libraries so making it multi platform is easy.

wAVaRiaN, you can try Kylix from Borland. Should be like Delphi. The free (open) version can be downloaded free of charge and comes with IDE, debugger, VCL like classes and lots of other stuff. Also a trial version of the enterprise package is available. One project could be porting the NeHe tutorials...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I use windows 2000 and that is the best !!
About linux, I''m planning to get Mandrake (if I have enough free space in my hard drive), and get it triple boot (I install XP just for fun, it still sucks because I havn''t downloaded Voodoo3 Drivers).

Well if you hate windows, trash it and go play around with other Os. I still like windows, that''s whay I keep my dear Win2k (though i is still cryptic in some sort of coding)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whoah whoah -whoah- everyone! This is not an anti-windows campaign - this is my personal opinion on windows.

Did none of you read my message or did you just look at the subject and think "Hey I know I''ll take the piss coz he hates Windows coz everyone knows it''s the best OS there is!"? I dont know what you all were thinking! Can''t you accept my opinion? I stated it -because- I had to reformat my system and it jeopardized my chances of entering the Apocalypse contest.

To me the proof is there that windows sucks - no matter what you tell me or how crap a user you think I am or how brilliant windows is the fact remains that windows completely screwed up in just 3 days - whereas linux was fine. Now go ahead and tell me windows is the best and linux sux and I dont know shit about computers - but you can''t change my opinion that windows sux in comparison to linux. All my hardware works under Linux, I have all the software I need under Linux, and as soon as I can, I will be developing for Linux.

"Anyone who doesn''t like windows because it crashes must be ''mentally handicapped''" - Yeah!!! What kind of developer would want a stable system to develop on??? Pfft! Testing code on a stable system??? Why on earth would you bother? It sure does make me feel warm inside knowing you''ve never had any problems with windows though, just makes me want to install it... Then every time it crashes on me or I have to spend hours re-installing it I can rest easy knowing that some people out there don''t have those problems...

I must be one bad, -bad- windows user because it seems as though no matter how much I know about my system and how much I configure windows it just doesn''t want to be stable... Saying that though, Windows98SE is quite good... Just the -occasional- crash...



At the end of the day I have posted my opinion and you have all posted your opinions, but can you leave your opinions about me out of this? This is meant to be an intellectual discussion. Not a slandering match...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''d like to start by saying that this months linux journal had an interesting survay about web browsers that applys to the os dispute as well. they said that a common opinion of the available browsers (netscape, mozilla, IE, Kongorer) most useres said they all suck just in different ways. That''s true in the windows - Linux dispute too.

I personaly have 3 systems.
2 running win2K and one running Linux.
1 of the windows machines was a server that I''ve been migrating to the linux system and will probably stop using as a server in the next few months. Both my Win2K and Linux servers have been up and running for over 8 mo. and were only shutdown once so that they could be moved.

Windows is an easy target because MS is a big company that has total control over the os and can easily be blamed for everything. Linux on the other hand is open source and if theres somthing wrong with it people can go fix it themself''s. If they don''t then they can''t blame anyone but themselfs for there system not working right. Windows users on the other hand has to wait for MS to acknowledg and release a fix.

Of course if you read the EULA for windows there some fine print that says something allong the lines of ... If you change the original configuration of the system from the default instalation the system is no longer gaurenteed to function properly ... meaning that if you change the desktop color you violate the EULA. I think they removed/ reworded that but it''s something they''ve said before.

As for windows crashing... that''s about 30% MS''s fault and 70% the software / hardwar fault. There are bugs in Windows just like there are bugs in Windows. Most of the problems I''ve ever had with windows crashing is due to programs/drivers that behaved badly.
Don''t beleve me? the most recent crashing problem I''ve had started when I upgraded from 256M ram to 768M and started getting 1-2 random crashes a day. after about a week I figured out that it was durring hw accelerated graphics operations so I replaced the OEM drivers with the lattest nVidia refference drivers and poof, No more problem. Turn''s out the OEM drivers had a bug in them that would cause problems in any system with > 512M ram that they already knew about and was fixed in a latter version of the driver.

Other problems have been with software that failed to check return values from API calles. Improper handling of window messages, failing to free allocated memory. I actually found a program once that didn''t properly check the return value of getmessage and didn''t leave the message loop. all the windows were closed but the thread still exsisted (wasting resourses)

There''s any number of exapmles I can think of where friends have had me look at some problem there computer has where they were blaming MS and it turned out to be somehting they had installed.

Am I defending MS? NO! I wish Linux would become the major OS but not untill certian problems with it are fixed. Or more to the point with the Linux comunity. Problem #1: Most (not all) people I''ve talked to that like linux also think that every piece of software should eather be free or opensource or both. Untill the Linux community starts showing a willingness to pay $$$ for software the big companys are going to keep developing for Windows so they can make a profit. Problem #2: there are 20 different programs available to do any given task and they all come with every distrabution of linux and everyone uses different ones and so you have to try to translate doc''s to whatever one your using. and lastly Problem #3: point and click user configuration, this is one area that HAS been improving. Mandrake 8 has some good GUI user interfaces for the instalation and configuration of the system.

With that out of my system I''d just like to add one more point.
Were all going to die anyway and then it won''t matter how stable your system is!

"The only system that never crashes is the one that''s never turned on!" - Me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites