I Hate Windows Xp!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Fuzzy Logik

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 16, 2001
Messages
1,055
Ok for for the record let's state that i am already really pissed.

First things first... I have to re check my auto login settings every time I make a change to the system.

When I hold down the shift key for 8 seconds, an accessability option called Filter keys comes on, that I can only remove if I reboot.

I tried to remove accessibilty options, but i can't seem to remove them with remove componenets.

XP doesn't boot faster than win 98 SE...

Why did I take win 98 SE off mymachine for XP proffesional?

XP is shitty...

Not to mention when I use MSCONFIG i have NO idea what all those "Services" running me. In 98 I knew that those startup itmes needed to go, but in XP... wtf is all theis ervices shit. and What exactly is it doing to my system resources?

Maybe it's just me... but my keyboard backspace key is slower on XP as well.

I have been a die hard 98 SE fan for years now... I switched because i thought XP might run my machine better... NO WAY!

I am sure all this can be fixed with all kinds of guru knowledge... but guess wht...

IN 98 I NEER HAD TO GO BACK AND CHANGE, FIX OR REMOVE ANYTHING!

Like the fade effects that eat up all your resources... WTF?


AGHHH!!!!

:mad:



I want this to work damnit! Otherwise I woud have formatted and through 98 SE back on... I hte to give up. I am just super aggrivated at the OS.

I mean wtf... who designed this POs and WHY is it better than 98SE?
 
Well as for it loading slower than 98SE, I would have to diagree. I've ran 98SE for years and now been using XP for about a year and have to say that XP is much better and faster.
What are you running for a setup? (Motherboard, CPU, Memory)

I'll say this, XP is a memory and resource hog compared to 98SE.

Yeah that stupid shift key accessability crap pisses me off every time too:mad: Just been too lazy to figure it out. :p

EDIT: Just found this, I'm gonna try it tonight. Link
 
First off take a deep breath :p The link for the sticky key looks like a winner for starters. One of the easier programs to rid your startup from clutter is Startup Control Panel by Mike Lin http://www.mlin.net/StartupCPL.shtml it easily removes anything you don't want to slow down your boot up. If you are experiencing mulitproblems with XP, your install may not have been error free. You could consider doing a repair installation off of your XP disk to fix any corruption you may have encountered.
 
Originally posted by Fuzzy Logik
Ok for for the record let's state that i am already really pissed.

First things first... I have to re check my auto login settings every time I make a change to the system.

When I hold down the shift key for 8 seconds, an accessability option called Filter keys comes on, that I can only remove if I reboot.

I tried to remove accessibilty options, but i can't seem to remove them with remove componenets.

XP doesn't boot faster than win 98 SE...

Why did I take win 98 SE off mymachine for XP proffesional?

XP is shitty...

Not to mention when I use MSCONFIG i have NO idea what all those "Services" running me. In 98 I knew that those startup itmes needed to go, but in XP... wtf is all theis ervices shit. and What exactly is it doing to my system resources?

Maybe it's just me... but my keyboard backspace key is slower on XP as well.

I have been a die hard 98 SE fan for years now... I switched because i thought XP might run my machine better... NO WAY!

I am sure all this can be fixed with all kinds of guru knowledge... but guess wht...

IN 98 I NEER HAD TO GO BACK AND CHANGE, FIX OR REMOVE ANYTHING!

Like the fade effects that eat up all your resources... WTF?


AGHHH!!!!

:mad:



I want this to work damnit! Otherwise I woud have formatted and through 98 SE back on... I hte to give up. I am just super aggrivated at the OS.

I mean wtf... who designed this POs and WHY is it better than 98SE?
Click to expand...

Rant, rant, rant, rant....rant some more. Yada yada yada. Oh I like what you've done here. Blah, blah, blah. Dude, 98SE sucked. Plain and simple, but I guess if you you like an OS that can't address more than 128megs of RAM and was extensibly crash prone, GO BACK. If you can't make XP work for you, it's your fault. It seems to work for me and alota other people, so I'm guessing the problem is PEBKAC (Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair).

Oh and btw, what new OS isn't a resource hog? If you don't like the fruitiness, TURN IT OFF. XP is for powerful machines. If your machine doesn't run it well, what does that tell you?:rolleyes:

Load times are proven to be shorter with XP than 98SE (pst, it's called defragging after you install). Games play better, things work better, etc. Plug n' Play is awesome in XP, I remember trying to use USB and other Plug n' Play devices in 98, what a piece of shit, it'd say it loaded and it either A)wouldn't work or B) crash promptly after it "loaded."
 
1st off, if you don't like it, switch back. Nobody's holding a gun to your head.

Secondly, XP may have it's faults, but don't confuse your ignorance of it's workings with legitimate OS issues. Do some research, it might do you good.

IMO XP is much better than 9x. It may take more resources, but it certainly manages them better. Plug & play actually works most of the time. I have yet to see a BSOD in the 3 yrs I've been running XP, if I went 3 mos in 9x I considered myself lucky. NTFS offers security and stability that FAT never could.

[edit] Too bad you've got so many posts, or you'd have cheeze with your whine.
 
did you upgrade or fresh install? system specs? there is a vast majority satisfied with xp

the fade effects can be disabled
 
BTW there's only like a frickin zillion web articles dealing with configuring and optimizing XP, might help if you learned how to Google.

[edit] Let me guess, your next question is when HL2 and D3 are coming out, and will they run on your rig :rolleyes:
 
Thank you to all who were mature enough to not immediately flame me for being annoyed with computers. Anyone who feels they have never been in the same boat of aggrivation with a computer, regardless of the circumstances and delimas is a lieing POS... or just an inexperienced child.

YEs , I mainly wanted to rant because I feel all these new fangled "pretty" things that XP is adorned with is just garbage.

I find that I had to completely customize it to run well... Which to me isn't a very nice way to get things started. The only thing giving me problems was my lack of understand with the key functioning things in the accesabiity.

It is quite vaque exactly what it does and how to disable it. This is true , otherwise not as many people would experience problems with it.

I am willing to give the OS a shot... I mainly just wanted to bitch because i thought how much time was wasted in a dev room for all the fade effect crap to capture the eye of some unkowledged user.
 
Well, sometimes the replies you may recieve are representative of the post you submit. If you've never been tempted to respond to a stupid post, then you're a lieing pos. Mature? Better re-read your original post before you comment on that.

Who made you the xp poster child? Should the os have been designed around your wants or needs? You could always develop your own personal os in your spare time that will suit your needs. A major os like XP has to accomodate millions of different desires. The features you claim are 'garbage' may be desired by others. One only needs to look at the popularity of sites like Wincustimize or any of the variety of themes and skins for a myriad of applications to see that features like the fade effect and other eye candy are welcomed by a large population. These things are all options. Learn about them. If you're confused, ask about them. But to claim it's all junk is foolish and non-productive.

The only thing giving me problems was my lack of understand with the key functioning things in the accesabiity.
Click to expand...
Couldn't have said it better myself.
 
BTW, many of the accessibility options help a lot of people use a pc who may otherwise not be able to. Be glad that you don't need them. Although I've been caught offguard with the sticky keys option, I know enough to realise there's a reason that it's there.
 
Agent, that was a post only a man seasoned by life could have done.

I could not agree more. I often find I have the problem of not seeing the flaws within my own paradigm.

I suppose the aggrivation is due to my age as well... I'm only 24.

Fighting is still the first thing that springs to mind... :D
 
All that said, I would refrain from changing any of the services before you have an opportunity to thouroughly research the implications. Many services have far reaching effects and can cause more problems if disabled than any performance increases they can gain. There are several threads in this forum (search is fubared, but scan down a few pages) discussing this. Be wary of claims of increased performance by 'fly-by-night' websites. And realize that many of the 'tweaks' publicised are not based on any benchmarking, only on 'it seems faster', if even that.

The major resource hogs in XP are the display effects and the disk indexing service, which can be virtually disabled by right clicking on your drives in My Computer or such and unchecking the box for 'Allow indexing service to index this drive...', located in the drive properties. You can tackle the rest in time as you gain knowledge.
 
People like Fuzzy Logik piss me off. They get angry at something else when the REAL problem is their own ignorance. If you don't know what a service is, LEARN it damnit. Don't come here and bitch when you can very well fix the problem yourself by spending maybe 5-10 minutes max learning what most of the services in XP do.
 
Originally posted by Pixeleet
People like Fuzzy Logik piss me off. They get angry at something else when the REAL problem is their own ignorance. If you don't know what a service is, LEARN it damnit. Don't come here and bitch when you can very well fix the problem yourself by spending maybe 5-10 minutes max learning what most of the services in XP do.
Click to expand...


Just like it took you 5-10 minutes to post your opinion which is ultimately meaningless :p
 
Originally posted by Fuzzy Logik
Just like it took you 5-10 minutes to post your opinion which is ultimately meaningless :p
Click to expand...

Well if you believe in that philosophy then you saying "XP is shitty..." is completely meaningless also.:rolleyes:
 
Originally posted by Phantum
Well if you believe in that philosophy then you saying "XP is shitty..." is completely meaningless also.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

pwned.

7 seconds
 
I enjoy how this thread has been hijacked into a personal flame on yours truly...

Even after a few futile attempts to redeem this thread by aplogising i see that it still fails to penetrate the skulls of everyone.

So if my saying "XP is shitty" is meaningless, then why continue making it apparent...? Why not get to the point of the thread to possibly discuss certain aspects of an operating system... unless you simply have no real knowledge to add and just want to add your own personal opinion... which is meaningless to me... and since I am the one who started this thread, what correlates as meaning to me is paramount to me... since I satrted it... woudn't you say?:rolleyes:
 
XP is not all that bad after you do go through it and disable ass loads of things.

I would say it does boot up faster than 98SE after most of those services are disabled.

I just never had to do all this initial shit when i installd 98SE.

One thing, my pc couldn't handle 512 ram.. i wan to see if maybe using XP will allow it to use 512 instead of 320


I think i will go do that now.
 
yes it will, win98 can not address more than 256 megs of ram unless you tweak some shit, winxp can handle 2 terabytes of ram.
 
So what does 98 SE do with all the xtra ram. My friend has a 1.4 TBird with 800 soem odd megs of SDRam and it boots just fine.

My machine wouldn't even boot up
 
that is not correct. windows 9x does not always exhibit the more than 512meg vcache problem due to system configuration differences. win9x memory managemnt is not as robust as winxp but it will use the ram. if the error is exhibited then a vcache needs to be configured to only use x amount and the cache will dynamically adjust within the value.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;253912&Product=w98

win9x does have another problem with systems that have 1g and more configuration of system memory. this is when windows cannot truely use the ram.

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;304943&Product=w98

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;184447&Product=w98

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;311871&Product=w98

windows xp is by far a better product and should be used for modern systems.
 
i think you need to (re)read the original post.....

linux is not always an option, specially for the typical end user. if it were there would be a tremendous gravitation to it.
 
Linux...

That is something i don't think I should endeavor into. I tried once with red hat and really wasn't used to it.

I have been trained on mircosoft products all my life :D
 
This is why I use Windows 2000 pro .. Its all the stability of Xp minus all the extra "Pretty" resource eating features.. I like to call it "Diet windows xp" :p
 
Like so many before have said, you can always turn off the eye candy if you wish to do so. Having the option though is really nice. I don't like the default eye candy (Blue, Silver, Green), but I like to use Style XP and use some cool themes. Check out the 'Zion' theme. ;)
 
Originally posted by Fuzzy Logik


I mean wtf... who designed this POs and WHY is it better than 98SE?
Click to expand...

my XP has never crashed on me. more then i can say for SE
 
Fuzzy - with your original post - you deserved all the flames. You still haven't told us you system specs which go a long way in helping figure out problems.

It looks like you're coming around though... I agree with the post about blkviper - his OS guides are great. Use his XP guide to know what services to disable.

In add/remove programs you can add/remove windows components and get rid of all the junk. Get rid of MSN, Messenger, games, fax service etc. There are bunch of stuff you can delete there.

Also, get xp-antispy and use it. I also suggest refresh force.

Hopefully you installed it clean and not as an upgrade to 98. Once you install it, get SP1 and the updates. Get chipset drivers for your motherboard and any other drivers you may need. Then go through the uninstall windows components, turning off services and running XP antispy and refresh force. Defrag and you should notice that it's much more stable and faster than 98.
 
i love your sig nomar. i'm guessing it hasn't been updated since the search died though... pity.
 
Wow nomar, that truely is an excellent sig..ahem.. anyhow..time to get back to topic. If you like the look and feel of 98, go with Windows 2000, thats just my opinion.
 
Some thoughts on XP from a recent convert...

If I had to describe XP in one word it would probably be "overhyped". It's a good OS but it's not the miracle code a lot of people in forums like this (and threads like this) make it out to be.

NT seems more stable than 9x, but having used Windows since 3.1 I never had a problem getting a lean, stable install of 98SE. The only problems I had with 98SE would come after a year or so when the registry got dirty. Some friends who've worked every day with Win2k since it launched tell me XP/2k will go longer than 9x before needing a reformat and reinstall, but it's still part of running a Wintel rig.

For being derived from NT/2k, I was surprised to see the level of "childproofing" that Microsoft built into XP. I remember when XP came out someone described it as the offspring of 2x and WinME, and that's the best description I have for it, too. It doesn't get said a lot but there is a lot of ME on this operating system. You have to dig deeper to find administrative and system controls on XP and when you get there, the options are more restrictive than on 98SE, or the options are written with no supportive information that would allow you to make an informed decision without consulting a third-party source. Compare the level of options between TweakUI for 9x and XP to see what I mean. Or look at the number of third-party XP utilities like antispy and refresh force.

The biggest advantage I see with XP is plug and play of external peripherals. That's a huge improvement. Configuring printers on 9x was always a pain in the ass. XP autodetected and installed the drivers for my Brother laser on the first boot.

I also like the large drive support and higher memory capacity. But I don't think its fair to beat 98SE because it only supports 512MB of memory and FAT32 can only see a 80GB drive. There are still only a small handful of desktop applications that show a measurable performance difference between 512MB and a gig of system memory, and if you need a huge unpartitioned drive on a 9x system it's as easy as running the drive into a $15 ATA100 controller card.

I'm running an XP/98SE dual boot setup because I have a lot of older games that don't translate well (or at all) to XP. My system has a gig of memory, and that was a big problem in getting a stable 98SE install until I found the memory limit control in the msconfig control panel for 98SE. (Why Microsoft allows a default capacity setting of 999MB of system memory for an OS that has many known problems above 512 is something I'd love to know.) Since capping the memory 98SE tries to use at 512MB it's been as stable as XP and as stable as my previous installs of 98SE.

Since last summer these conversations always include someone saying that you shouldn't run 98SE because Microsoft is shutting off support for it. True to a point, Microsoft is no longer developing patches for the OS. But when was the last time there was a security hole in 98SE itself? I just ran Windows Update when I did this fresh install and all the patches in the last three years were for Internet Explorer, WMP and different OS and browser plugins. I'm confident that your security with 98SE will be much better next summer than it will be for XP.

But 98SE clearly is an archival operating system. I don't expect to ever add another program to my 98SE installation and I expect driver support to fade over the next few years. I'm not expecting DDR2 or PCI-X/PCI Express support for any 9x operating system, and I think that is what will finally put 98SE into the ground.






BHD
 
Heh - about my sig - I used to have one that said
"# of replies that say "use the damn search button" even though the search function doesn't work"
But then the search worked again so I took it out - but now it doesn't work again.....

Anyway - one very important thing I do and would suggest to 98/2000 converts is right click on start menu, properties and select "classic start menu". The new start menu for XP is terrible IMO and not as quick to navigate with.
 
Originally posted by Pixeleet
People like Fuzzy Logik piss me off. They get angry at something else when the REAL problem is their own ignorance. If you don't know what a service is, LEARN it damnit. Don't come here and bitch when you can very well fix the problem yourself by spending maybe 5-10 minutes max learning what most of the services in XP do.
Click to expand...
I was going to post something similiar. However at least Fuzzy Logik is coming around.
 
Originally posted by BaldHeadedDork
Some thoughts on XP from a recent convert...

If I had to describe XP in one word it would probably be "overhyped". It's a good OS but it's not the miracle code a lot of people in forums like this (and threads like this) make it out to be.

NT seems more stable than 9x, but having used Windows since 3.1 I never had a problem getting a lean, stable install of 98SE. The only problems I had with 98SE would come after a year or so when the registry got dirty. Some friends who've worked every day with Win2k since it launched tell me XP/2k will go longer than 9x before needing a reformat and reinstall, but it's still part of running a Wintel rig.

For being derived from NT/2k, I was surprised to see the level of "childproofing" that Microsoft built into XP. I remember when XP came out someone described it as the offspring of 2x and WinME, and that's the best description I have for it, too. It doesn't get said a lot but there is a lot of ME on this operating system. You have to dig deeper to find administrative and system controls on XP and when you get there, the options are more restrictive than on 98SE, or the options are written with no supportive information that would allow you to make an informed decision without consulting a third-party source. Compare the level of options between TweakUI for 9x and XP to see what I mean. Or look at the number of third-party XP utilities like antispy and refresh force.

The biggest advantage I see with XP is plug and play of external peripherals. That's a huge improvement. Configuring printers on 9x was always a pain in the ass. XP autodetected and installed the drivers for my Brother laser on the first boot.

I also like the large drive support and higher memory capacity. But I don't think its fair to beat 98SE because it only supports 512MB of memory and FAT32 can only see a 80GB drive. There are still only a small handful of desktop applications that show a measurable performance difference between 512MB and a gig of system memory, and if you need a huge unpartitioned drive on a 9x system it's as easy as running the drive into a $15 ATA100 controller card.

I'm running an XP/98SE dual boot setup because I have a lot of older games that don't translate well (or at all) to XP. My system has a gig of memory, and that was a big problem in getting a stable 98SE install until I found the memory limit control in the msconfig control panel for 98SE. (Why Microsoft allows a default capacity setting of 999MB of system memory for an OS that has many known problems above 512 is something I'd love to know.) Since capping the memory 98SE tries to use at 512MB it's been as stable as XP and as stable as my previous installs of 98SE.

Since last summer these conversations always include someone saying that you shouldn't run 98SE because Microsoft is shutting off support for it. True to a point, Microsoft is no longer developing patches for the OS. But when was the last time there was a security hole in 98SE itself? I just ran Windows Update when I did this fresh install and all the patches in the last three years were for Internet Explorer, WMP and different OS and browser plugins. I'm confident that your security with 98SE will be much better next summer than it will be for XP.

But 98SE clearly is an archival operating system. I don't expect to ever add another program to my 98SE installation and I expect driver support to fade over the next few years. I'm not expecting DDR2 or PCI-X/PCI Express support for any 9x operating system, and I think that is what will finally put 98SE into the ground.






BHD
Click to expand...

I hadn't wanted to ressurect this old thread... However, this post has mad me do so.

This is EXACTLY, the response I expect out of this forum, not same cocky, ass flame from a lot of you people. Regardless if I am pissed and expressing it on the forum... why even bother dignifying my post with a comment if it is that platry?
Wouldn't you be stooping to my level.. and did? Yes... I believe Bruce Lee said it best when he said,"When acting like an ass... always expect another ass to come ride you for a laugh"

I agree... I act like an ass , and what did I get, a whole lot of you asses out in the forum ride my back for a laugh... or shits and giggles. Anyways.. I can admit my asinine behavior... I doubt many others will... Just restate some futile attempt at flaming this post... it's like beating a dead horse.

In any event... Forum members such as BaldHeadedDork, are to be admired. That was a very authorative post on the OS. Thank you.

Now that I have been using XP for some weeks. I must say I do like it. I have becoem acustomed to the nuances of this new OS. I used Win98SE from th moment it hit my friends computer shop, till I posted that rant.

So you could imagine why I was aggrivted with everyone gloating about XP over 98SE.

My machine boots a tad bit faster, and seems to handle some graphic content better. This could be due to the fact my machine needed an fdisking and reformating to begin with, and 98SE would run just as well on this old ass machine.

SPECS: 433 Celery
320 SDRAM
MB: I wish I Knew
Vid: 3d Rage Pro AGP X2 Onboard video

It's an old POS i use for internet and Ultima Online... I need to upgrade it anyways. I am just very poor. It's the only machine I own now.

Anyways... I am fine with using XP now. Like BaldHeadedDork said, the support for 98SE will die out soon anyhow. I need to move on...*sniffle*

Anyways... Thank you all for your patients. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top