rec.autos.simulators

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

Eldre

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Eldre » Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:00:19



>The problem for most people on this newsgroup, is that we play gam-sorry,
>racing simulations on our PCs, under windows.  When directX 10 or 11 or
>whatever comes out, and is required to play the latest, greatest racing
>title ever to grace the PC, and that version isn't available for
>unsupported OSes, then we have to make the choice to upgrade, or do
>without.

I understand you, but it hasn't happened yet.  Even DX9 which is needed for
some games works on win98.  Granted you don't get all the bells and whistles,
but it's backwards compatible.  The first one that *isn't* will cost a bunch of
sales - I'm not sure vendors are willing to take that risk.

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.racesimcentral.net/~epickett
Member
Screamers Racing League
IICC League
GPLRank -2.4    MoGPL rank +302.38
ChallengeRank +54.48   MoC +743.77
Hist. +82.82  MoH in progress
N2k3 rank:in progress

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Eldre

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Eldre » Thu, 18 Dec 2003 23:54:49




>>I understand you, but it hasn't happened yet.  Even DX9 which is needed for
>>some games works on win98.  Granted you don't get all the bells and
>whistles,
>>but it's backwards compatible.  The first one that *isn't* will cost a bunch
>of
>>sales - I'm not sure vendors are willing to take that risk.

>>Eldred

>Win9x is an unstable POS. And there are no games I want to play
>available for Linux. No, I don't have any choice but to use XP. Well,
>maybe Win2K but it doesn't have  s good game compatibility as XP.

To each his own.  I was answering someone else's concerns.  I just don't feel
that I'm 'forced' to upgrade yet, so I haven't.  If you truly feel that you
have no choice, then I guess you don't.

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Member
Screamers Racing League
IICC League
GPLRank -2.4    MoGPL rank +302.38
ChallengeRank +54.48   MoC +743.77
Hist. +82.82  MoH in progress
N2k3 rank:in progress

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Alan Bernard

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Alan Bernard » Fri, 19 Dec 2003 05:07:08

I doubt you really are forced to upgrade.  It's only your hatred or envy of
Gates that makes you think that.  And even if you are forced to update, XP
is the better OS, by far.

Alanb

DB

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by DB » Fri, 19 Dec 2003 09:02:53

Interesting read on MS

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1414128,00.asp


DB

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by DB » Fri, 19 Dec 2003 12:07:16

Interesting read on M$

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1414128,00.asp


Alan Bernard

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Alan Bernard » Fri, 19 Dec 2003 21:29:37




> >I doubt you really are forced to upgrade.  It's only your hatred or envy
of
> >Gates that makes you think that.  And even if you are forced to update,
XP
> >is the better OS, by far.

> >Alanb

> Better a rebel who dies with honour than a boot***ing lacky.

I think you have an identity problem.

Not only that, you seem to think there are only two types of people--
suck-ups and martyrs.  Strange way of looking at things.

Alanb

Alan Bernard

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Alan Bernard » Fri, 19 Dec 2003 21:48:15


> Interesting read on MS

> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1414128,00.asp



> > > Win9x is an unstable POS. And there are no games I want to play
> > > available for Linux. No, I don't have any choice but to use XP. Well,
> > > maybe Win2K but it doesn't have  s good game compatibility as XP.

> > I doubt you really are forced to upgrade.  It's only your hatred or envy
> of
> > Gates that makes you think that.  And even if you are forced to update,
XP
> > is the better OS, by far.

> > Alanb

I am by no means a MS supporter; but they do make some good software,
comparatively speaking.  And XP is MS' best OS to date, hands down.

But there are those who are not happy with Microsoft products.  This has
more to do with Bill Gates than the quality of the software.  While it's
okay for actresses and actors to make millions and millions of dollars (and
waste probably billions more, blowing things up and whatnot), it's not okay
for athletes or Bill Gates to make the same amount of money.  I've never
understood why people feel this way, though I suspect it has something to do
with someone making a lot of money and enjoying it just the same.

As to the article about support, I don't think I've ever called MS for any
kind of help.  Users these days are sometimes too lazy to fix problems on
their own, though I do understand the problem users would be in if further
versions of Direct-X are incompatible with Win98.

Granted, MS should support its products.  But if you think about it, a
plumber who puts in a new toilet isn't going to come back six months later
and fix that same toilet for free, so I don't see how people think that
software support should be free.

And as to not supporting Win98, it doesn't surprise me that MS is going to
do this.  At some point they have to, out of necessity.  But too many think
that the reason MS is not supporting Win98 is because they want to force
users into using XP.  I doubt very much if the Brass at MS sits around and
says, "Okay, lets figure out some ways to force users to use XP."

In the end it's all about dependence.  The more a user is able to fix things
on his own, the better off he'll be.

Alanb

Ruud van Ga

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Ruud van Ga » Fri, 26 Dec 2003 00:08:52



...
...

Nice comparison. ;-)

I have but one (but major) problem with MS; their designs are overly
bloated, making things more complex (thus inefficient & even slow,
even on CPU's that do 3 billion operations per second).

Mind you, I find the same with KDE on Linux. It's just that with MS,
it seems company policy, and I can only make that out for lack of
skill (though obviously lots of people will disagree).

I'm surprised they've supported it up to here. But indeed, XP is far
better, it just intervenes with nicely operating your OWN computer
sometimes, giving all the wrong defaults when installed. ;-)

That is the Unix route though. Much cleaner & transparent. Compare
'the registry'; worst mixup of independent information ever, and the
cause presumably of most slowdowns on Windows I've ever seen.

Ruud van Gaal
Free car sim: http://www.racer.nl/
Pencil art  : http://www.marketgraph.nl/gallery/

Greg Dun

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Greg Dun » Fri, 26 Dec 2003 07:21:33



> I have but one (but major) problem with MS; their designs are overly
> bloated, making things more complex (thus inefficient & even slow,
> even on CPU's that do 3 billion operations per second).

NT was quoted by MS as having 16 million lines of source code.  Of
course, it was likely C++, which is notoriously inefficient at
producing executable code. ;-)  I'm certain XP is much larger.

I'm still boggled by the alleged need for the registry.  Unix gets
along with a handful (depending on how much bloat the user wishes to
add after installation ;-) of human-readable text files, while the Mac
uses a database that can be automatically rebuilt by the computer if it
gets corrupt -- which rarely happens.  Contrast this with a clumsy
hashtable that, if it gets trashed or you reinstall the OS, loses all
your defaults.  Urgh.

Tim

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Tim » Sat, 27 Dec 2003 23:57:25

On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 20:34:26 GMT, JM


>The problem for most people on this newsgroup, is that we play gam-sorry,
>racing simulations on our PCs, under windows.  When directX 10 or 11 or
>whatever comes out, and is required to play the latest, greatest racing
>title ever to grace the PC, and that version isn't available for
>unsupported OSes, then we have to make the choice to upgrade, or do
>without.

One XP issue I haven't seen mentioned here... With Windows 98, the
fact that Microsoft stops supporting it doesn't mean you can't
continue to use it for another 10 years if you're capable of
installing it on new machines and acquiring some kind of working
drivers.

In the future (probably 5 years or so), when MS drops XP support,
you're going to be hosed. Sure, you'll be able to use your existing
install for as long as you want -until the time you want to migrate to
a piece of hardware that triggers Microsofts registration process.
Then you'll most likely find they won't be issuing any more serial
numbers because support has ceased.
Forget putting it on a new machine. Unless you're using a hacked
version, it will truly be a dead OS.

Eldre

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Eldre » Sun, 28 Dec 2003 02:50:04



>One XP issue I haven't seen mentioned here... With Windows 98, the
>fact that Microsoft stops supporting it doesn't mean you can't
>continue to use it for another 10 years if you're capable of
>installing it on new machines and acquiring some kind of working
>drivers.

I've said that before.  It doesn't just stop working because MS drops support
for it.  There are still people running Windows 3.1...<g>

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Member
Screamers Racing League
IICC League
GPLRank -2.4    MoGPL rank +302.38
ChallengeRank +54.48   MoC +743.77
Hist. +82.82  MoH in progress
N2k3 rank:in progress

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Mitch_

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Mitch_ » Sun, 28 Dec 2003 03:07:46

MS doesnt issue a License, you purchase it.  When you register XP your
profile is created for the License YOU own.  So long as you dont try to
register the same License 100's of times it won't even show on MS radar
and you can use it indefinitely.

Mitch

<<<<---- Posted using Pineapple News for BeOS ---->>>>


> In the future (probably 5 years or so), when MS drops XP support,
> you're going to be hosed. Sure, you'll be able to use your existing
> install for as long as you want -until the time you want to migrate to
> a piece of hardware that triggers Microsofts registration process.
> Then you'll most likely find they won't be issuing any more serial
> numbers because support has ceased.
> Forget putting it on a new machine. Unless you're using a hacked
> version, it will truly be a dead OS.

Tim

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Tim » Sun, 28 Dec 2003 03:18:34


Perhaps I wasn't clear enough... 3.1 doesn't lock you out when you
re-install or make certain hardware upgrades like XP does.

Eldre

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Eldre » Sun, 28 Dec 2003 06:32:22




>>I've said that before.  It doesn't just stop working because MS drops
>support
>>for it.  There are still people running Windows 3.1...<g>

>Perhaps I wasn't clear enough... 3.1 doesn't lock you out when you
>re-install or make certain hardware upgrades like XP does.

I was agreeing with you about win 9x still being 'viable'.  I didn't realize
you were just trying to show how effed up XP is...

Eldred
--
Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett
Member
Screamers Racing League
IICC League
GPLRank -2.4    MoGPL rank +302.38
ChallengeRank +54.48   MoC +743.77
Hist. +82.82  MoH in progress
N2k3 rank:in progress

Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

Larr

LFS Team, What is wrong with these guys.

by Larr » Sun, 28 Dec 2003 10:29:37

The "All your eggs in one basket" Registry is the stupidist idea Microsoft
ever had.

90% of my need for customer re-images are because of that stupid thing.

-Larry




> I'm still boggled by the alleged need for the registry.  Unix gets
> along with a handful (depending on how much bloat the user wishes to
> add after installation ;-) of human-readable text files, while the Mac
> uses a database that can be automatically rebuilt by the computer if it
> gets corrupt -- which rarely happens.  Contrast this with a clumsy
> hashtable that, if it gets trashed or you reinstall the OS, loses all
> your defaults.  Urgh.


rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.