LibriumArcana.Games

Okay, who are you, and what have you done to Adam?

Seriously, I am a big fan of Microsoft Windows. As a user, it is easy and visually appealing (very visually appealing IMO). As an administrator, I can appreciate many of its advanced features, though I am not as well learned in those as I should be. As a developer, I admire its technical merit.

My gripes with Windows are with its license, weak command line, (relatively) heavy resource use, and sucky third party software (which is not a problem with Windows itself, but what good is an OS without applications).

Nothing I can do about the license. The command line can be improved with some custom software to a state where it is OK, but still not as good as I like. The resource use is irrelevant on newer systems. Third party software still sucks though, but what comes with Windows is generally pretty good (I am a fan of WMP and IE especially). It also has IIS which can do oh so many web server tasks, and Visual Studio which is a decent programming system.

Windows is a good system. Now, I prefer Linux for a number of reasons for my general use, but that does not make Windows any less meritworthy on its many good points.

Destructionator XV wrote:Seriously, I am a big fan of Microsoft Windows.

Windows is a good system.

Stofsk wrote:What the christ?

I hate installing it too; I have never had a Windows installation go as smoothly as I have come to like (Slackware Linux installations are trivial yet heavily customizable and work well every damn time).

But once a clean Windows install is set up, it is a good system. You might have noticed how I spend quite a bit of time in threads defending it (moreso on SDN than here because more G&C traffic over there).

It has its faults, but not nearly as many as its detractors like to say. Most people who attempt to criticize Windows don't know what they are talking about, and are saying those things either out of frustration (meaning, there is a problem, but likely exaggerated), or out of hatred for Microsoft (which so many of them have because it is the cool thing to do).

Windows and IE standing on their own as computer programs really aren't that bad.

Microsoft's business practices, now those are debatable.

Destructionator XV wrote:

Stofsk wrote:What the christ?

I hate installing it too; I have never had a Windows installation go as smoothly as I have come to like (Slackware Linux installations are trivial yet heavily customizable and work well every damn time).

But once a clean Windows install is set up, it is a good system. You might have noticed how I spend quite a bit of time in threads defending it (moreso on SDN than here because more G&C traffic over there).

It has its faults, but not nearly as many as its detractors like to say. Most people who attempt to criticize Windows don't know what they are talking about, and are saying those things either out of frustration (meaning, there is a problem, but likely exaggerated), or out of hatred for Microsoft (which so many of them have because it is the cool thing to do).

Windows and IE standing on their own as computer programs really aren't that bad.

Microsoft's business practices, now those are debatable.

Just to quickly answer this, I have to take exception with the mention of IE being remotely capable for modern day work outside of company intranet that utilise custom web based programs.

My own vent? wtf, I log in, half the board is covered with Allens av, the other half says profile,IP and BAN. I refresh, all gone.

Ace Pace wrote:Just to quickly answer this, I have to take exception with the mention of IE being remotely capable for modern day work outside of company intranet that utilise custom web based programs.

Then how do you explain the fact that over 80% of users on the Internet use IE as their primary browser and the vast majority of websites work fine on Internet Explorer?

Destructionator XV wrote:

Ace Pace wrote:Just to quickly answer this, I have to take exception with the mention of IE being remotely capable for modern day work outside of company intranet that utilise custom web based programs.

Then how do you explain the fact that over 80% of users on the Internet use IE as their primary browser and the vast majority of websites work fine on Internet Explorer?

It's a WORKING net browser, not a GOOD one, appeals to popularity irrelevent.

IE6 works, this dosn't mean you should use it.

A 60s/70s gaz guzzling sports car works, does it mean you should use it in a crowded hostile freeway?

A 60s/70s gaz guzzling sports car works, does it mean you should use it in a crowded hostile freeway?

Well considering that thing is gonna have way more steel in it than modern cars... It depends on how much damage I want to do to everyone else don't it?

frigidmagi wrote:

A 60s/70s gaz guzzling sports car works, does it mean you should use it in a crowded hostile freeway?

Well considering that thing is gonna have way more steel in it than modern cars... It depends on how much damage I want to do to everyone else don't it?

I think my point was clear, but if you want to nitpick, this is equivilent to walking around in a gay pride parade with a sign 'I hate gays, come and beat me up'

I think my point was clear, but if you want to nitpick, this is equivilent to walking around in a gay pride parade with a sign 'I hate gays, come and beat me up'

Thinks about sterotype of gay haters....

Thinks about sterotype of gays...

Oh man I want to say... No! No.. To easy!

frigidmagi wrote:

I think my point was clear, but if you want to nitpick, this is equivilent to walking around in a gay pride parade with a sign 'I hate gays, come and beat me up'

Thinks about sterotype of gay haters....

Thinks about sterotype of gays...

Oh man I want to say... No! No.. To easy!

Goddamn you.

And splitting the motherfucking spam, several times.

Good work Ace. Don't forget to post "Spam Split" in the actual thread.

That's just to let people like me wonder WTF is going on, although I figured it out. A link to the new thread isn't necessarily required but it couldn't hurt, know what I'm saying. F'real.

Ace Pace wrote:It's a WORKING net browser, not a GOOD one, appeals to popularity irrelevent.

You said it wasn't even "remotely capable for modern day work outside of company intranet". If that were true, no one would use it at all.

IE6 works, this dosn't mean you should use it.

Specifically, why not? What is so bad about it so you shouldn't use it?

Destructionator XV wrote:

Ace Pace wrote:It's a WORKING net browser, not a GOOD one, appeals to popularity irrelevent.

You said it wasn't even "remotely capable for modern day work outside of company intranet". If that were true, no one would use it at all.

Stupidity and laziness, most people have no idea what other options are, how they compare to IE, or that there is something outside IE. Yes, people ARE that stupid.

IE6 works, this dosn't mean you should use it.

Specifically, why not? What is so bad about it so you shouldn't use it?

For the following, bear in mind I'm talking about IE6, with no addons.
1) No tabbed browsing
2) Useless ad blocking(can I count how many pop ups bypass the IE filter and how much it filters popups I launch?)
3) The security holes, some of which stay there for months, though again, this is user stupidity.
4) General feeling of not enough. Whenever I browse with Opera, or if I'm forced to use firefox, I feel like I have everything I need within hand, with IE6, its a hassle. IE7 is a big improvement, enough that I would ditch Opera once it goes out of beta, but it's kinda irrelevent.

Ace Pace wrote:Stupidity and laziness, most people have no idea what other options are, how they compare to IE, or that there is something outside IE. Yes, people ARE that stupid.

Yes, they are, but still, IE on its own isn't that bad. The alternatives are better than it in some ways, and it beats them in others.

1) No tabbed browsing

Tabbed browsing is nice, but not having them is not that bad.

2) Useless ad blocking(can I count how many pop ups bypass the IE filter and how much it filters popups I launch?)

The Firefox and Konqueror popup blockers suck too. That is not a defense for IE, but it also is no good reason to switch away.

3) The security holes, some of which stay there for months, though again, this is user stupidity.

Again, all browsers have security holes that stay around for a long time. As you said here, stupid users are the ones really at fault here.

I used an unpatched IE6 for about one year on Windows 98 in 2004, unpatched meaning no SP1 nor SP2, both of which were significant improvements. I had a malware problem exactly once, because I ignored the warnings that came up. Responsible browsing matters far more than obscure holes that may take some time to patch.

4) General feeling of not enough. Whenever I browse with Opera, or if I'm forced to use firefox, I feel like I have everything I need within hand, with IE6, its a hassle. IE7 is a big improvement, enough that I would ditch Opera once it goes out of beta, but it's kinda irrelevent.

IE has more features than Firefox, except tabbed browsing, but let's face it, how many of those do the average person use? Go, reload, home, and back are by far the browser features most often used.

If this is just your feeling of not enough, fine, but note that most those features are rarely used by most people, including myself.

Posting a log in a proper fashion.

This started as an IE discussion, which I shall quickly quote and ignore.

:13:37 Ace Pace: the main problem with IE6(for me) is not what it has(though I have issues there), but rather what it dosn't have
:13:41 Ace Pace: IE7 is a great fix for all that
:14:22 Destructionator4: yeah, that is legit, but I wouldn't call it a show stopper. Those things are nice to have, but you can live without them.
:15:02 Ace Pace: personally, I was using IE for work, its not capable, it slows down the work, it slows down responsiveness
:15:13 Destructionator4: IE's standards support could be better
:15:42 Destructionator4: really? I find IE to be one of the faster browsers in rendering stuff. the lack of tabs sucks, but not a killer on itsown
:16:43 Ace Pace: its fast in rendering, if its working alone, when using several heavy windows, I noticed it slowing down, and not just on the puny machine I was running. The main use I see with IE6 right now is using it in custom built intranets, which actully find IE6s deep acess to WinXP VERY usful
:17:39 Destructionator4: I hear about this deep access, but have never really seen it. Do you mean ActiveX controls?
:19:19 Ace Pace: the office I was working in basicly had nearly all their project management and file acess control over IE, it was a mix of Jscript and something that tied into XP, I wasn't aware of particulars
:20:32 Ace Pace: this was something that was apprently IE only
:21:04 Destructionator4: probably ActiveX. The fools at Firefox think it is a major security risk and refuse to implement it.
:21:19 Destructionator4: I believe Opera supports it though, but not the same as IE.
:21:27 Ace Pace: I think not, but I'm not sure
:21:43 Destructionator4: either way, that is not a strike against IE as a browser.
:21:57 Ace Pace: my strike against IE is NOT based on ActiveX
:22:47 Destructionator4: you say speed, but are you sure that was a problem with IE? If they had most their management stuff going through it, maybe it was server slowdown or bandwidth limitations
:23:38 Ace Pace: Speed is overall, IE renders fast, but it feels slower in everything else, I.E if the net is doing nothing at the time, sure, it'll blaze, but while opera skips merrily along with 3kb/s to play with, IE just...does nothing
:24:19 Destructionator4: true, I think the reason is IE tries to buffer full tables before it renders them where as Opera dows it as soon as it comes in
:24:46 Ace Pace: possibly, I'm not sure technicly what makes them preform differant, I'm not very aware of how browser rendering works
:25:20 Destructionator4: that is one strike against it.
:27:39 Ace Pace: look at it this way, my main beef with IE6 is gone with IE7, that says something :P
:27:56 Destructionator4: aye
:28:18 Ace Pace: Avant was also nice, it was a nice shell for IE6 that made stuff work properly for me
:28:42 Destructionator4: I am a little touchy on it right now because I have been hearing so much bullshit in the last few days against IE, and most of it is not true at all. Especially the lies from the Firefox marketing people.
:29:24 Destructionator4: Same with Windows. I don't use it, but I really do like it, and am tired of hearing it get constantly smeared by liars who don't know what they are talking about.
:29:46 Ace Pace: hey, don't blame me, I'm a proud WinXP user who will only move to OSX

We then moved to OSX

:30:24 Destructionator4: Macs, barf
:30:44 Ace Pace: whats the reason to argue against macs?
:32:10 Destructionator4: the Mac fanboys, the marketing lies (have you seen their commericials?), and the fact that they simply take open source software and market it as their own. They also used to be a vertical monopoly; but with the switch to Intel that has been lessened.
Nothing technical against them, but I have alot politically against Apple.
:32:52 Ace Pace: political action against Apple is no better then against microsoft, you can argue against both OSes on political grounds but technicly, OSX is a masterpeice

From here, formatting to proper quoting.

Ace wrote:

Destructionator wrote: it is BSD rebranded.

you're talking about the kernel, I belive you of all people should know that while the core is important, in this case, the wrappings make a massive difference

Destructionator wrote:

Ace wrote:

Destructionator wrote:the BSD userspace. the X.org X server, the OpenSSH ssh server and client.
Apple's contributions are Quartz (which is not bad) and some GUI wrapper tools (which again, are not bad).

these make the differences. Apples GUI is simply worlds ahead of anything Windows has, and watching Linux trying to make a GUI to compete is funny. Between Quartz moving everything to 3D allowing for features like Expose(sorry Vista, bad copycatting there) and better preformance, to the Dock, its taking things found elsewhere, and making them usful

everything to 3D is overrated. GUIs are bitmaps, 3d crap is eyecandy that increases system requirements for no actual usage gain. performance, I don't know about, but Windows and Linux work plenty fast enough for me. I've never had a use for anything like their Dock (Linux has had things similar to it; I don't use any of them), and by Apple GUI being ahead, do you mean the GUI tools are much better? If so there, I'll agree, if you prefer the theme, ewww, Aqua is possibly the ugliest theme I have ever seen (personal opinon of course)

Point by Point.

Destructionator wrote: verything to 3D is overrated. GUIs are bitmaps, 3d crap is eyecandy that increases system requirements for no actual usage gain.

but in this case, the eye candy does bring gains, work gains. You might be able to keep track of many windows, most people would like eye candy to easily sort it out for them, its VERY usful eye candy.

Destructionator wrote:performance, I don't know about, but Windows and Linux work plenty fast enough for me.

Sys reqs in this case, since its propiety and therfor easily optimised, are useless. OSX scales from IIRC a 9600SE to anything today, all with smooth movement, no, its not smooth with a 486, but seriously, wtf?

Destructionator wrote:I've never had a use for anything like their Dock (Linux has had things similar to it; I don't use any of them), and by Apple GUI being ahead, do you mean the GUI tools are much better? If so there, I'll agree, if you prefer the theme, ewww, Aqua is possibly the ugliest theme I have ever seen (personal opinon of course)

I mean in that by having an intergrated GUI, that easily lets me reach anything I reach, its superior. You can design a WinXp desktop to do similar things, but its all hacked together, not intergrated. Apple has a massive sucess in that they can combine stuff from Findar(complex Search done easy), drag and drop to any app, etc. It's all smooth and easy to an idiot, while someone like you can get nasty with the CLI

Ace Pace wrote:but in this case, the eye candy does bring gains, work gains. You might be able to keep track of many windows, most people would like eye candy to easily sort it out for them, its VERY usful eye candy.

Must be people who think differently than I do, as I fail to find any advantage when using it myself.

I'd take my taskbar and hotkey task switching.

OSX scales from IIRC a 9600SE to anything today, all with smooth movement, no, its not smooth with a 486, but seriously, wtf?

So does Linux and to a lesser extent, Windows.

It's all smooth and easy to an idiot, while someone like you can get nasty with the CLI

OK, so the Mac is good for idiots. No reason to switch to it.

As I said, my complaints are far more political than anything else. Technically, I have no complaints against OSX, nor do I see any compelling reason to switch to it or put it up as being spectacularly great.

Destructionator XV wrote:

Ace Pace wrote:but in this case, the eye candy does bring gains, work gains. You might be able to keep track of many windows, most people would like eye candy to easily sort it out for them, its VERY usful eye candy.

Must be people who think differently than I do, as I fail to find any advantage when using it myself.

I'd take my taskbar and hotkey task switching.

After using OSX for a few hours, I'd say while hotkey task switching and such are workable solution, there is an advantage to being able to use eye candy to control the screen.

OSX scales from IIRC a 9600SE to anything today, all with smooth movement, no, its not smooth with a 486, but seriously, wtf?

So does Linux and to a lesser extent, Windows.

Neither do it with all their eye candy on, like OSX does. And windows scales like a fat widow, I've just had the recent pleasure to run it on a Celeron M with enough RAM, above min spec. That thing ran, I managed to complete my work, productivity dropped like a cheap whore.

It's all smooth and easy to an idiot, while someone like you can get nasty with the CLI

OK, so the Mac is good for idiots. No reason to switch to it.

As I said, my complaints are far more political than anything else. Technically, I have no complaints against OSX, nor do I see any compelling reason to switch to it or put it up as being spectacularly great.

My main reasons for switching would be, probebly in descending order.

1)It works, just fucking works.
2) OSX GUI

There is no great technical masterpeice to point at and say 'wow, I need that' and switch, there's a great intergration of everything the average user(and nearly all power users) use day to day. From search to photo manipulation to development, it's built to work together perfectly.

Ace Pace wrote:1)It works, just fucking works.

Windows does too, once it is installed. Linux does, except for third party software (think DLL Hell but with source code)

Just working all the time is surely nice for most though.

there's a great intergration of everything the average user(and nearly all power users) use day to day.

There is on my command line too. Different methods for different folks, I guess.

Destructionator XV wrote:

Ace Pace wrote:1)It works, just fucking works.

Windows does too, once it is installed. Linux does, except for third party software (think DLL Hell but with source code)

Just working all the time is surely nice for most though.

I'd disagree about Windows, unless you're using customised discs, the average box will take anywhere from 2 hours to a full day to get properly fitted out, and this assums you have every program you need on hand, every setting you need to tweak easily acessible.

As a Windows user, I can tell you how much stuff simply working would help me. It'd save me. There is nothing like sheer frustration at an OS 'WHY THE FLYING FUCK CAN"T I FIND THIS FUCKING FILE'.

There is on my command line too. Different methods for different folks, I guess.

Agree to disagree.

And now to browsers...

Destructionator XV wrote: Yes, they are, but still, IE on its own isn't that bad. The alternatives are better than it in some ways, and it beats them in others.

I can think offhand of only two ways IE6 is superior to any other browser.
Speed of response and ease of development.

Tabbed browsing is nice, but not having them is not that bad.

I'd disagree, I'm not sure how it works in Linux GUIs, but having 30-40 tabs open(not uncommon at any workplace I've seen) is a damn sight better then 30-40 windows, taking up taskbar room.

The Firefox and Konqueror popup blockers suck too. That is not a defense for IE, but it also is no good reason to switch away.

I'll just say Opera and move on.

Again, all browsers have security holes that stay around for a long time. As you said here, stupid users are the ones really at fault here.

The problem in this case is that a hole in most browsers is a hole in that browser, due to IE6s tight intergration with the OS(another thing IE7 dosn't have), a hole is a critical opening.

I used an unpatched IE6 for about one year on Windows 98 in 2004, unpatched meaning no SP1 nor SP2, both of which were significant improvements. I had a malware problem exactly once, because I ignored the warnings that came up. Responsible browsing matters far more than obscure holes that may take some time to patch.

Yes, yet since most people are idiots, you have to cater to idiots.

IE has more features than Firefox, except tabbed browsing, but let's face it, how many of those do the average person use? Go, reload, home, and back are by far the browser features most often used.

And it dosn't even those right, losing your text field every time you move or refresh. Maybe it's differant in Firefox(apprently it is), but when I see opera doing it so easily, it feels like it should be obvious.

If this is just your feeling of not enough, fine, but note that most those features are rarely used by most people, including myself.

In this case, I'll just defer to IE7 and hope it saves text fields, as aside from that, it has me.

Ace Pace wrote:I'd disagree about Windows, unless you're using customised discs, the average box will take anywhere from 2 hours to a full day to get properly fitted out, and this assums you have every program you need on hand, every setting you need to tweak easily acessible.

Hence the qualifier "once it is installed". Set up takes a bit of time, but after that, Windows works well.

There is nothing like sheer frustration at an OS 'WHY THE FLYING FUCK CAN"T I FIND THIS FUCKING FILE'.

The Windows XP find files utility sucks. I prefered the one in Win98, or better yet, the Linux slocate utility (assuming you keep its database up to date)

But, how often do you lose files?

I can think offhand of only two ways IE6 is superior to any other browser.
Speed of response and ease of development.

Smaller memory footprint (important on older systems).

ActiveX (makes things like Windows Update possible among other things).

The preferences and security settings are easier to manage than other browsers I've used. The zones for Internet and intranet are nice when on an internal network.

Integrated full featured FTP browser. With IE, using FTP feels just like using Windows Explorer on local files, and permits many of the same operations, including drag and drop that works well. The only other browser I've seen that comes close to being as good in this regard is Konqueror on Linux.

I like it visually, but that is very subjective.

I'd disagree, I'm not sure how it works in Linux GUIs, but having 30-40 tabs open(not uncommon at any workplace I've seen) is a damn sight better then 30-40 windows, taking up taskbar room.

Tabs are indeed much better than Windows in that case, but even 30 tabs are hard to manage.

Recently, I've been finding I only use 3-4 tabs at once anyway; and detach them to separate windows if I am not using them currently. (The reason for that is I can stick them to the background and not see them at all until I am ready for them again. On Linux, I use the multiple desktops feature, on Windows, I wrote a small program that shrinks them all down to one single system tray icon when I am not using them).

But yes, tabs are very nice (literally every program I have open right now have tabs; my terminal emulator, my browser, my text editor, and my IM client, so I do like them), but I, and many people, can live without them.

I place the lack of tabs on IE6 as a neutral point. I place the presence of tabs on the other browsers as a positive point.

The problem in this case is that a hole in most browsers is a hole in that browser, due to IE6s tight intergration with the OS(another thing IE7 dosn't have), a hole is a critical opening.

I've heard this repeated many times, but have not seen this be a big deal, and am not even convinced it exists.

When IE crashes, the rest of the system remains running. If they were so tightly integrated, shouldn't an IE crash do something to the rest of the system too?

Security wise, any browser has access to the OS's API. That API can do many many things that are not in the realm of normal browser activity. If a browser, or even a fucking "Hello World" program has a security hole, it can be forced into doing anything any program run by that used could do.

That is hardly something IE specific.

Smaller memory footprint (important on older systems).

*checks * conceeded.

Integrated full featured FTP browser. With IE, using FTP feels just like using Windows Explorer on local files, and permits many of the same operations, including drag and drop that works well. The only other browser I've seen that comes close to being as good in this regard is Konqueror on Linux.

All very nice and used frequently, but in this case, if IE crashs, it takes Explorer with it, quite annoying. My problem is what happens if IE crashs while tightly connected.

I've heard this repeated many times, but have not seen this be a big deal, and am not even convinced it exists.

When IE crashes, the rest of the system remains running. If they were so tightly integrated, shouldn't an IE crash do something to the rest of the system too?

Depends on WHAT IE was doing, if it just hangs on rendering flash, it dies quietly, maybe only that specific window. If its doing anything related to system, such as streaming music, its more complicated and I've seen entire lockups resulting from it. Something I've yet to see from any other browser locking up.


I feel I should explain my problem with intergration, on one hand, it enables alot of cool stuff like IE turning into an FTP program easily, switching back and forth between file managing and surfing, but when it goes, the fallout is alot larger. A payoff I, personally, am not willing to make.

The answer to all your Windows Woes. Or atleast it will be some where down the line.

JEAP wrote:The answer to all your Windows Woes. Or atleast it will be some where down the line.

NO NO NO

First of all, ReactOS sucks, and will always suck. There aren't enough hackers who give a damn to finish it. All the Win32 API hackers focus their attention towards the Wine project, which is far superior in many ways. And even if there were enough hackers to work on it, Windows will still be far, far better, simply because Microsoft has a big head start.

Secondly, the ReactOS developers have taken leaked source code from Windows 2000 before and plagarized it. They claim to have excised all the plagarized code, but, frankly, they stole it in the first place, and there goes all their credibility, and additionally, they are considered tainted by other Free projects. Nearly every other project director in the Free Software world tells you to not even look at the ReactOS code because if there is still anything stolen in there, it become a legal minefield for them to accept it.


ReactOS sucks and lacks honour. Don't even look at it.

Ah, well alright then. I shall strike the link from my bookmarks.