Vista Downgrade - Alternate OS Suggestions?

[Wayne]

Okay, so I'm thinking of downgrading from Vista to maybe XP or a free OS such as Ubuntu or Linux. I'm after a speedy OS tbh and Vista isn't helping me achieve the speedy OS reward I desire. Could anybody suggest OS's I could install over Vista that are quick?

Also, can I still use Windows programs on other OS's like Ubuntu? Thanks.

[ElliottThompson]

I dont know about running windows programs on linux but I think there are some programs for linux that make some windows programs compatible.

If you really want linux you could partition your hard drive and keep vista on one partition and linux on the other, that was you can still run all your windows applications easily on vista and use linux for everything else.

[Flisker]

Use Wine for running windows apps in Linux (Ubuntu) but it's not very good IMO.

What are your PC specs?

[Blinger1]

wait for windows 7.. or download the trial to see if its better?

[Suspective]

wait for windows 7.. or download the trial to see if its better?

I think hes trying to downgrade. So his computer is faster.

[Recursion]

Yes but Windows 7 runs extremely well on low end hardware compared to Vista.

[Suspective]

Yes but Windows 7 runs extremely well on low end hardware compared to Vista.

I haven't tried it. So your be right :)

[Wayne]

I dont know about running windows programs on linux but I think there are some programs for linux that make some windows programs compatible.

If you really want linux you could partition your hard drive and keep vista on one partition and linux on the other, that was you can still run all your windows applications easily on vista and use linux for everything else.

Ok, I'll try to install Linux on a partition. :) Thanks.


Use Wine for running windows apps in Linux (Ubuntu) but it's not very good IMO.

What are your PC specs?

Oh yeah I read about Wine, thanks.
- 120 GB hard drive.
- 2 GB ram.
- Intel Celeron D CPU 3.46GHz
- Nvidia GeForce 8400 GS


wait for windows 7.. or download the trial to see if its better?

I've downloaded the trial and I didn't think it was that fast tbh.


I think hes trying to downgrade. So his computer is faster.

True Jordan. :)

[Agnostic Bear]

Windows 7, will run just dandy on that hardware.

[Wayne]

Would it be faster than Vista and does Windows 7 have all the crappy start up services etc?

[Agnostic Bear]

Would it be faster than Vista and does Windows 7 have all the crappy start up services etc?

Yes, no.

[Wayne]

Short and helpful, thanks. :)

[Recursion]

I ran it on my UMPC, 800MHz CPU, 1GB RAM and it ran just fine :P

[Wayne]

I ran it on my UMPC, 800MHz CPU, 1GB RAM and it ran just fine :P

Nice one, thanks. :P

[The Professor]

And linux is a bugger if you've never used it before, unless you want to spend months learning how to do things that come naturally on windows I wouldn't even consider it :P

*Waits for linux fanboys to attack me with spears*

[Wayne]

And linux is a bugger if you've never used it before, unless you want to spend months learning how to do things that come naturally on windows I wouldn't even consider it :P

*Waits for linux fanboys to attack me with spears*

Haha, I'll get Windows 7 or XP then. :P

[Mentor]

I would question calling it a downgrade if your heading to linux, linux is an upgrade. XP on the other hand is far inferior to vista so definatly a downgrade - why not just wait till win7?

[Wayne]

I'm putting Windows 7 on my PC in a sec, the beta version. I've just made a 20gb partition.

[Agnostic Bear]

I would question calling it a downgrade if your heading to linux, linux is an upgrade. XP on the other hand is far inferior to vista so definatly a downgrade - why not just wait till win7?

Absolutely useless window managers (still haven't managed to fix vsync on ati card), horrible font rendering, having to build your own software, useless driver support on pretty much everything. I would call it a downgrade.


I'm putting Windows 7 on my PC in a sec, the beta version. I've just made a 20gb partition.

Beta or RC1 from the msft site, cause they are doing an official RC last few days to download.

[Wayne]

Lol, what's the difference between the beta and RC?

[Agnostic Bear]

Lol, what's the difference between the beta and RC?

RC is Release Candidate, Beta is Beta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#Change_significance

[Wayne]

Thanks.

[Mentor]

Absolutely useless window managers (still haven't managed to fix vsync on ati card), horrible font rendering, having to build your own software, useless driver support on pretty much everything. I would call it a downgrade.
By this logic when you shove a ferrari in a lake and it sinks so u cant sail across, it must be rubbish?
Your using it wrong, font rendering your choice, again totally customisable, kde, gnome, fluxbox and many more. Its your choice, stop useing ones you dont like. You also get to choose whether to work with a dock or taskbar, and even use the mac style unified menus thingy :)

Softwares even easier in linux than windows, no hunting for installers uninstaller's, open package manager, search software u want, tick it, install it, untick it, uninstall it. Everything updates via the updated too so no having to upgrade your programs all the time, they upgrade with the O/S
Supports pretty much everything, install restricted drivers if your having an issues. (i imagine u just ran it and expected it to work - try that in windows without downloading any installers - i'll bet linux does a better job)

Everything customizable, dont like something - change it. Its got the basics that new users need and the power features for pros. Plus pretty much all softwares free and i'll run rine on hardware xp wouldn't go near, with full 3d graphical effects that make flip3d look pretty poor :p

So, i'd say upgrade.

[Wayne]

Can I still burn DVDs & audio, use Internet Download Manager, Firefox, CCleaner, Auslogics, MSN, Audacity, VLC Media Player, AVG, iTunes, ConvertXtoDVD etc. Or are there alternatives for these programs?

[Agnostic Bear]

Your using it wrong, font rendering your choice, again totally customisable, kde, gnome, fluxbox and many more.
Gnome is the only somewhat usable DWM, kde looks like they just sprayed huge amounts of CHROME PAINT all over it. *box looks horrible and is about as useful as a chocolate fireman. Font rendering is horrible on lunix no matter what you use, nothing can compare with ClearType for readability. Hell even OS X font rendering is better and that's a pile of crap at best (in before someone says "hurr durr it conforms to the real font!!!". I don't give a damn, I want readability not BLURRY TEXT)


Its your choice, stop useing ones you dont like. You also get to choose whether to work with a dock or taskbar, and even use the mac style unified menus thingy :)
I know exactly what I can do with lunix, I don't like any of them because they all look horrible and are missing huge amounts of stuff I like.


Softwares even easier in linux than windows, no hunting for installers uninstaller's, open package manager, search software u want, tick it, install it, untick it, uninstall it.
Package managers are somewhat acceptable as a software installer, I don't however find it easier to use them as I prefer to make backups and such of installers so I can just double click them should I be missing an internet connection.


Everything updates via the updated too so no having to upgrade your programs all the time, they upgrade with the O/S
So does OS X and Windows, they just don't update every program as that is quite stupid as I don't always want my internet being hammered looking for the latest updates of a program and I certainly don't want to be going through a list of potentially hundreds of things that need updating un-checking ones I don't want, I'd rather just have it update when I'm ready.


Supports pretty much everything, install restricted drivers if your having an issues. (i imagine u just ran it and expected it to work - try that in windows without downloading any installers - i'll bet linux does a better job)
Nope, Windows 7 fully supports all of my hardware out of the box apart from my sound card, looks perfect, runs perfect. Lunix is horrible and buggy without installing the ati restricted drivers, which are absolutely piss poor and don't even have simple vsync support. I know a little more about computers than you think I do.


Everything customizable, dont like something - change it. Its got the basics that new users need and the power features for pros. Plus pretty much all softwares free and i'll run rine on hardware xp wouldn't go near, with full 3d graphical effects that make flip3d look pretty poor :p
The graphical effects on Lunix consist of:
Wobbly Windows (Oh christ, my Windows wobble, how much will this improve my productivity? LOTS!!!!!!)
Fancy minimising which all look horrible and are poorly implemented (MY EYES BURN)
Font rendering that is absolutely atrocious (see previous argument)
Paint fire on the screen (man this is going to make me work so much better)
Rain on the screen (man this is going to make me work so much better)
Multiple virtual desktops (HEY!! where did my application go I can't find it)
A SPINNAN CUBE (man i can't wait to navigate around my CUBE)

About running on older hardware; Yes it does, that's fine and dandy but considering you can get 4gb of ram for £20 I'd say the point is pretty moot, just buy a new computer and get on with using some decent operating systems like Vista and 7.

So I'd say, downgrade.

[Mentor]

Gnome is the only somewhat usable DWM, kde looks like they just sprayed huge amounts of CHROME PAINT all over it. *box looks horrible and is about as useful as a chocolate fireman. Font rendering is horrible on lunix no matter what you use, nothing can compare with ClearType for readability. Hell even OS X font rendering is better and that's a pile of crap at best (in before someone says "hurr durr it conforms to the real font!!!". I don't give a damn, I want readability not BLURRY TEXT)


I know exactly what I can do with lunix, I don't like any of them because they all look horrible and are missing huge amounts of stuff I like.


Package managers are somewhat acceptable as a software installer, I don't however find it easier to use them as I prefer to make backups and such of installers so I can just double click them should I be missing an internet connection.


So does OS X and Windows, they just don't update every program as that is quite stupid as I don't always want my internet being hammered looking for the latest updates of a program and I certainly don't want to be going through a list of potentially hundreds of things that need updating un-checking ones I don't want, I'd rather just have it update when I'm ready.


Nope, Windows 7 fully supports all of my hardware out of the box apart from my sound card, looks perfect, runs perfect. Lunix is horrible and buggy without installing the ati restricted drivers, which are absolutely piss poor and don't even have simple vsync support. I know a little more about computers than you think I do.


The graphical effects on Lunix consist of:
Wobbly Windows (Oh christ, my Windows wobble, how much will this improve my productivity? LOTS!!!!!!)
Fancy minimising which all look horrible and are poorly implemented (MY EYES BURN)
Font rendering that is absolutely atrocious (see previous argument)
Paint fire on the screen (man this is going to make me work so much better)
Rain on the screen (man this is going to make me work so much better)
Multiple virtual desktops (HEY!! where did my application go I can't find it)
A SPINNAN CUBE (man i can't wait to navigate around my CUBE)

About running on older hardware; Yes it does, that's fine and dandy but considering you can get 4gb of ram for £20 I'd say the point is pretty moot, just buy a new computer and get on with using some decent operating systems like Vista and 7.

So I'd say, downgrade.
I can get whole computers linux would run upon for 20£ - infact xp runs on em pretty well too.
I like everything being upto date, if i didn't want a bit of software i wouldn't have installed it.
GUI will look exactly how you want it to look, if you made it ugly thats your fault, change it to a theme you like or shove your own together.

My laptop worked out of the box on linux, as did 3 desktops - for xp they needed drivers for the wireless cards and graphics cards, linux was fine from the get go.

Displays always been fine for me, no artifacts so guessing vsync works as opposed to your claim its not supported. Font renderings up to the user as well, fonts by default are pretty much 100% identical in rendered result to what u see on windows anyway? so dont know what your on about here - plus flip 3d aint all that useful ether and your missing about 90% of the gui effects... eye candy isnt necessary there for productivity, if i wanted that i'd stick to the terminal :)

[Agnostic Bear]

GUI will look exactly how you want it to look, if you made it ugly thats your fault, change it to a theme you like or shove your own together.
I don't want to piss about with themes installing and changing, I want to just use it without any changes, I really don't fancy spending hours getting everything perfect when Win 7 has it already done for me.


My laptop worked out of the box on linux, as did 3 desktops - for xp they needed drivers for the wireless cards and graphics cards, linux was fine from the get go.
And that's why you shouldn't use 8 year old operating systems.


Displays always been fine for me, no artifacts so guessing vsync works as opposed to your claim its not supported. Font renderings up to the user as well, fonts by default are pretty much 100% identical in rendered result to what u see on windows anyway? so dont know what your on about here
What are you on about? ClearType demolishes every other font rendering about. What graphics card do you use with this laptop of yours?


plus flip 3d aint all that useful ether and your missing about 90% of the gui effects... eye candy isnt necessary there for productivity, if i wanted that i'd stick to the terminal :)
Flip 3d is quite useful if you feel the need to use it, windows + tab, click the window you want with a quick preview.

[HotelUser]

@thread starter if you're still interested in Ubuntu check out wubi. It creates a virtual disk on a pre existing partition and installs Ubuntu to it. The disk ia mounted if you select Ubuntu from the dual boot menu upon starting your computer. This mounting proceedure takes secveral seconds and from there on Ubuntu works just as if you're using it from a real partition. All your files for Windows Vis- windows crap are mounted from within Ubuntu in /host. If you ever want to delete Ubuntu you can just uninstall it from add or remove progeams in XP
.


Gnome is the only somewhat usable DWM, kde looks like they just sprayed huge amounts of CHROME PAINT all over it. *box looks horrible and is about as useful as a chocolate fireman. Font rendering is horrible on lunix no matter what you use, nothing can compare with ClearType for readability. Hell even OS X font rendering is better and that's a pile of crap at best (in before someone says "hurr durr it conforms to the real font!!!". I don't give a damn, I want readability not BLURRY TEXT)


I know exactly what I can do with lunix, I don't like any of them because they all look horrible and are missing huge amounts of stuff I like.


Package managers are somewhat acceptable as a software installer, I don't however find it easier to use them as I prefer to make backups and such of installers so I can just double click them should I be missing an internet connection.


So does OS X and Windows, they just don't update every program as that is quite stupid as I don't always want my internet being hammered looking for the latest updates of a program and I certainly don't want to be going through a list of potentially hundreds of things that need updating un-checking ones I don't want, I'd rather just have it update when I'm ready.


Nope, Windows 7 fully supports all of my hardware out of the box apart from my sound card, looks perfect, runs perfect. Lunix is horrible and buggy without installing the ati restricted drivers, which are absolutely piss poor and don't even have simple vsync support. I know a little more about computers than you think I do.


The graphical effects on Lunix consist of:
Wobbly Windows (Oh christ, my Windows wobble, how much will this improve my productivity? LOTS!!!!!!)
Fancy minimising which all look horrible and are poorly implemented (MY EYES BURN)
Font rendering that is absolutely atrocious (see previous argument)
Paint fire on the screen (man this is going to make me work so much better)
Rain on the screen (man this is going to make me work so much better)
Multiple virtual desktops (HEY!! where did my application go I can't find it)
A SPINNAN CUBE (man i can't wait to navigate around my CUBE)

About running on older hardware; Yes it does, that's fine and dandy but considering you can get 4gb of ram for £20 I'd say the point is pretty moot, just buy a new computer and get on with using some decent operating systems like Vista and 7.

So I'd say, downgrade.

Ok im on a mobile device here so ill keep this response short.

1. There is absolutely nothing wrong with how osx smoohs fonts. Many people woul agree that the osx fnts look quite nice and the cleartype smoothing on indows looks like crap.

2. What in th heck is wrong wih a package manager? You dont require any sot of compiling and you don have to venture out into the intenet in search of you apps. The package manager on iponeos is a huge and sucessful feature. Something Microsoft is including soon with Windows Mobile. Oh and you think backing up installers is useful? If only installing apps didnt just require dragging one icon into a folder. Oh wait....you can do that. On osx. Then again, wouldnt want you to use an os that had beautiful/crappy? Font rendering.

3. Wobbly windows and the raindrop effects are part of Ubuntu desktop effects. Very nice looking effecrs that consume little juice to function. Oh wait, but um..Vista has nice window effects too. When windows freeze they turn a transparent white. Very nice.Oh and th new send dont send error reports are absolutely the most sexy thing ever.

4. Vista is NOT and never will be a "real" OS.




I would question calling it a downgrade if your heading to linux, linux is an upgrade. XP on the other hand is far inferior to vista so definatly a downgrade - why not just wait till win7?


Erm...Vista is inferior and absolute crap compared to XP.

[Agnostic Bear]

@thread starter if you're still interested in Ubuntu check out wubi.

Gonna go ahead and agree here, use Wubi before making any permanent changes.



1. There is absolutely nothing wrong with how osx smoohs fonts. Many people woul agree that the osx fnts look quite nice and the cleartype smoothing on indows looks like crap.
Those "many" people are a fraction of the people who would agree that ClearType is superior, it has been and always will be until they release it, which is highly unlikely.


2. What in th heck is wrong wih a package manager? You dont require any sot of compiling and you don have to venture out into the intenet in search of you apps. The package manager on iponeos is a huge and sucessful feature. Something Microsoft is including soon with Windows Mobile. Oh and you think backing up installers is useful? If only installing apps didnt just require dragging one icon into a folder. Oh wait....you can do that. On osx. Then again, wouldnt want you to use an os that had beautiful/crappy? Font rendering.
I see no problem with clicking a few buttons and installing it as opposed to "dragging one icon into a folder" as you so gracefully call it. I get to see exactly what it's installing and configure some options and settings before I install, potentially saving space!


3. Wobbly windows and the raindrop effects are part of Ubuntu desktop effects. Very nice looking effecrs that consume little juice to function. Oh wait, but um..Vista has nice window effects too. When windows freeze they turn a transparent white. Very nice.Oh and th new send dont send error reports are absolutely the most sexy thing ever.

Hey because OS X gives you an indication that one of your windows is frozen (which?) by giving you a spinning beach ball "thing" that is used for loading screens and such, definitely intuitive there.


4. Vista is NOT and never will be a "real" OS.
OS X is NOT and never will be a "real" OS.

But wait, it is! Just like Vista. Your point is moot.



Erm...Vista is inferior and absolute crap compared to XP.
No it's not, it's easier to use, more intuitive and securer, sounds a bunch better than XP to me.


And on an end note, go away, you are so ridiculously biased it's unfunny. (Guess what Operating System I'm posting from! (Hint: It has Roman in it's name!)

You see unlike you, I'm fairly open minded about Operating Systems, as long as it does what I need it to and doesn't get in my way, I will use it (This is why I dislike lunix).

I do believe you are going to ask mr. garner (hello) to close this thread. You are welcome to do so as I leave you with one word:

Told.

[Zokoli]

Just use Ubuntu, it's free and quick.
Easy to use because there is lots of tutorials on the internet on how to install things and what not.

[nvrspk4]

1. There is absolutely nothing wrong with how osx smoohs fonts. Many people woul agree that the osx fnts look quite nice and the cleartype smoothing on indows looks like crap.

I'm going to have to categorically disagree with that statement. Apple has a different philosophical strategy to rendering than Microsoft. Microsoft believes in readability and Apple believes in staying true to font designers at the cost of some readability.

Taken from: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000884.html which shows that ClearType is better clarity-wise than OSX

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/font-rendering-safari3-closeup.png
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/font-rendering-ie7-closeup.png

Furthermore, evidence on the difference in font rendering philosophy can be found here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000885.html

Jeff Atwood, the main writer makes a compelling case for cleartype in that Graphics Designers manually tweak the fonts for readability which is done automatically by cleartype. Furthermore, it appears that Apple is not necessarily wrong...they're just living in the future. On a 200 DPI screen it is theorized (and I say theorized because to me its not proven until its tested) that the differences would mete out and OSX font would be graphically superior. However, with 100 DPI screens the OSX font is unarguably inferior, definitely in clarity, probably in aesthetics.

It is (according to Atwood) documented that the clarity of the font has a lot to do with the accuracy in reading the article, so superior font clarity means less reading mistakes. And there is a final point about how catering to the pixel grid instead of the mythical 200 DPI screen changes clarity with this (stolen from the above site) massively blown up grayscale image of a font and a font with tweaking.

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/fontfocus.png
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/fontfocus-off.png


3. Wobbly windows and the raindrop effects are part of Ubuntu desktop effects. Very nice looking effecrs that consume little juice to function. Oh wait, but um..Vista has nice window effects too. When windows freeze they turn a transparent white. Very nice.Oh and th new send dont send error reports are absolutely the most sexy thing ever.

I don't think those have anything to do with functionality at all and are lacking at best as a rebuttal of the wobbly windows critique. The point he was making was that he didn't want wobbly windows and that it wasn't productive at all, he would prefer a straightforward system that didn't use that juice at all. Minimal use of resources can add up. However the things you're quoting aren't Vista effects at all (obviously) so aren't much of a rebuttal but instead a blatant rant on Windows.


4. Vista is NOT and never will be a "real" OS.

That's a rather unsubstantiated and ridiculous claim to make, backed by at best a skewed definition of a "real" OS :S

[Wayne]

@thread starter if you're still interested in Ubuntu check out wubi. It creates a virtual disk on a pre existing partition and installs Ubuntu to it. The disk ia mounted if you select Ubuntu from the dual boot menu upon starting your computer. This mounting proceedure takes secveral seconds and from there on Ubuntu works just as if you're using it from a real partition. All your files for Windows Vis- windows crap are mounted from within Ubuntu in /host. If you ever want to delete Ubuntu you can just uninstall it from add or remove progeams in XP.

Thanks, I'll try Wubi. :)

[Recursion]

-snip- -snip- -snip-

YOU ARE NOW OFFICIALLY AWESOME IN MY BOOKS NVR.

[The Professor]

*snip*
4. Vista is NOT and never will be a "real" OS.

Erm...Vista is inferior and absolute crap compared to XP.

I don't know about the rest of the forum but this OSX fanboy/ I hate Vista crap is starting to grate now. You don't like vista, we know, stop pushing it in our faces and flaming everyone who dares to disagree with you. ARRGHHHH HULK SMASH!

And woot woot to nvr, talk about knowing your stuff :P

[Mentor]

I don't want to piss about with themes installing and changing, I want to just use it without any changes, I really don't fancy spending hours getting everything perfect when Win 7 has it already done for me.
Then download a distro with a theme you like o.0, alot of people like linux mint for example (not myself)


And that's why you shouldn't use 8 year old operating systems.
The default drivers have increased dramatically - the big jump with vista, gfx drivers though are still needed to use a proper resolution.


What are you on about? ClearType demolishes every other font rendering about. What graphics card do you use with this laptop of yours?
Then set your font render settings to the same used in cleartype o.0


Flip 3d is quite useful if you feel the need to use it, windows + tab, click the window you want with a quick preview.
Ring switcher is better as i can actually see whats on all of my windows, works by the same keys - although being linux i could use about 40 difference effects to do the same thing if i wanted, its down to preference. I like having choice :)


@HotelUser : Don't believe the hype, vista is a great O/S, a little shaky out the door but far better than its given credit for. I would not want to downgrade to xp from it, only thing xp really has is the option to work on old, lower spec machines - but for that linux does a much better job.

@nvrspk4: im not a fan of the font rendering in osx ether, in ubuntu though you could do a side by side comparison with windows and not see the difference :) Linux lets you customize everything, even font rendering :)


I don't think those have anything to do with functionality at all and are lacking at best as a rebuttal of the wobbly windows critique. The point he was making was that he didn't want wobbly windows and that it wasn't productive at all, he would prefer a straightforward system that didn't use that juice at all. Minimal use of resources can add up. However the things you're quoting aren't Vista effects at all (obviously) so aren't much of a rebuttal but instead a blatant rant on Windows.
In ubuntu, u can choose each effect, customize it to your will, run lots, run none, you don't even to have the effects engine (compiz in my case, areo for windows) running. Ubuntus resource usage is so low though, you can have the same full set of effects and still run quicker than a copy of xp with no effects used at all :) With effects off though, linux will run on far far older hardware still with decent performance :)

[HotelUser]

Finally I'm back on a computer. Has anyone ever tried to make forum posts from their smartphone w/o a keyboard?


I see no problem with clicking a few buttons and installing it as opposed to "dragging one icon into a folder" as you so gracefully call it. I get to see exactly what it's installing and configure some options and settings before I install, potentially saving space!
Good for you, you can save 3 additional KB while installing a piece of software (then again, the installer's just going to add shortcuts to your desktop and that's lame). Clearly, moving one icon to an applications folder is far superior to having to go through an installation procedure. Most apps on OS X are installed like this. THe only flaw about this is when you first switch to OS X and don't know how to install anything:P.



Hey because OS X gives you an indication that one of your windows is frozen (which?) by giving you a spinning beach ball "thing" that is used for loading screens and such, definitely intuitive there.
Said spinning beach ball "thing" can be easily compared to a certain blue donut "thing" on Windows Vista.


OS X is NOT and never will be a "real" OS.

But wait, it is! Just like Vista. Your point is moot.
Not a point. Expressing my opinion. Although judging by the other posts in this thread, I've made my opinion regarding Vista quite clear ;).



No it's not, it's easier to use, more intuitive and securer, sounds a bunch better than XP to me.
Easier to use is debatable. They've moved many things around in the UI, so that a previous Windows user would have to re-learn the UI. Securer at a price (which is performance). If these new versions are superior to XP then why is XP still shipping on Netbooks and for Windows 7?


And on an end note, go away, you are so ridiculously biased it's unfunny. (Guess what Operating System I'm posting from! (Hint: It has Roman in it's name!)
And guess what operating system I used to post my previous posts? A Windows Mobile device!??! Amazing, isn't it? How I don't have an iPhone? ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!!!11


You see unlike you, I'm fairly open minded about Operating Systems, as long as it does what I need it to and doesn't get in my way, I will use it (This is why I dislike lunix).

No, you're not really. You have to know how to use Linux before you give it a chance:).


I'm going to have to categorically disagree with that statement. Apple has a different philosophical strategy to rendering than Microsoft. Microsoft believes in readability and Apple believes in staying true to font designers at the cost of some readability.
Apple smooths the fonts better. I can see why some people might not like that because the additional smoothing is annoying, but I for one see no problem with it. Infact, in some cases I think Apple font rendering looks absolutely stunning:
http://www.angier.co.uk/david/files/2007/06/rendersaf.PNG

And the Windows version:
http://www.angier.co.uk/david/files/2007/06/renderwin.PNG



Taken from: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000884.html which shows that ClearType is better clarity-wise than OSX

http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/font-rendering-safari3-closeup.png
http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/images/font-rendering-ie7-closeup.png

Furthermore, evidence on the difference in font rendering philosophy can be found here: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000885.html
Yes, if you're zoomed into an image that's used Apple font rendering it's going to look horrible compared to the Windows rendered text (though if you're zooming into pictures or looking this close to text then I don't see why you'd be looking for quality).




Jeff Atwood, the main writer makes a compelling case for cleartype in that Graphics Designers manually tweak the fonts for readability which is done automatically by cleartype. Furthermore, it appears that Apple is not necessarily wrong...they're just living in the future. On a 200 DPI screen it is theorized (and I say theorized because to me its not proven until its tested) that the differences would mete out and OSX font would be graphically superior. However, with 100 DPI screens the OSX font is unarguably inferior, definitely in clarity, probably in aesthetics.
I have a secondary monitor with a 106DPI (native) and I've used it with one of my Windows machines and my iMac. Font rendering on OS X to my eyes is not inferior to Window's font rendering at all.


I don't think those have anything to do with functionality at all and are lacking at best as a rebuttal of the wobbly windows critique. The point he was making was that he didn't want wobbly windows and that it wasn't productive at all,
Yes and I'm saying: No it might not be productive but is sure looks cool, and since it hardly consumes any processing power you're not going to notice a difference in your machine's performance.

he would prefer a straightforward system that didn't use that juice at all. Minimal use of resources can add up.
That's about the same thing I said regarding Windows Vista and its nice but sluggish UI when it was released.



That's a rather unsubstantiated and ridiculous claim to make, backed by at best a skewed definition of a "real" OS :S
In my opinion Windows Vista is not a "real" OS, meaning I would not wish to use it:):).



I don't know about the rest of the forum but this OSX fanboy/ I hate Vista crap is starting to grate now. You don't like vista, we know, stop pushing it in our faces and flaming everyone who dares to disagree with you. ARRGHHHH HULK SMASH!

And woot woot to nvr, talk about knowing your stuff :P

If you check out the post your setup thread you'll notice 2 out of 3 of my computers in that shot are running Windows. I also have a Gateway Desktop dual booting Ubuntu and Windows Vista (sadly) and an IBM thinkpad running Windows as well. I have an HTC Apache running Windows mobile 6.5 and the phone I'm using now, the HTC Vogue, running Windows mobile 6.1. I'm such an Apple fan;).

[Chippiewill]

iTouch so no quote w/ theme

@above windows vs mac wp render:

The windows is rendering it properly, it is meant to have a sharp feel to the font, especially since it is serif based...


+ windows mobile is rubbish

[HotelUser]

+ windows mobile is rubbish

It certainly takes its time to boot:D.

[Wayne]

So Linux and Ubuntu are the same?

[Mentor]

So Linux and Ubuntu are the same?

Not quite, Ubuntu is a distribution of linux. But their are plenty of others :)

[Wayne]

Not quite, Ubuntu is a distribution of linux. But their are plenty of others :)

Oh lol. Which would you say is the best/quickest?

[Blinger1]

ubuntu..

thats why they have suggested it every time :rolleyes:

[Wayne]

ubuntu..

thats why they have suggested it every time :rolleyes:

Yes but there are many different variances of it.

[Mentor]

Oh lol. Which would you say is the best/quickest?

Ubuntu... or maybe linux mint if your new. (linux mint is based on ubuntu)

Ubuntu will generally just work, soon as installed. Other distro's usually require quite a bit more configuration to support all the hardware.
Linux mints much the same but includes what many think is a nicer theme and bundles some restricted (non open source) content such as dvd and media support. (easily added though)

Tis a different o/s so does have some very different ways of doing things, which can take a while to get used to though as a warning :)

[Wayne]

Thank you. :) I'm installing Ubuntu now. :P

[Agnostic Bear]

Right time to roll up my sleeves and get busy.

(Thanks to Mentor for using a post format that doesn't bunch everything up into one massive blog (Hey HotelUser, press enter!)


Then download a distro with a theme you like o.0, alot of people like linux mint for example (not myself)
There are no themes I like on any Lunix distro because they're all horrible and have 4304820934824 developers just dragging it down. Unity = Better design, better code (for applications).



The default drivers have increased dramatically - the big jump with vista, gfx drivers though are still needed to use a proper resolution.
Windows 7 jumps even further, I fail to see how this has anything to do with XP being old as hell.



Then set your font render settings to the same used in cleartype o.0
You can't, it's patented to hell and back and nobody has created something that matches it.



Ring switcher is better as i can actually see whats on all of my windows, works by the same keys - although being linux i could use about 40 difference effects to do the same thing if i wanted, its down to preference. I like having choice :)
And what happens when I use ATI? which doesn't support mipmaps or vsync? I would prefer something that works to something that looks "fancy", flip 3d has mipmaps and vsync. So I use flip 3d.

Thanks for playing Mentor! Hope you had fun.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~squiggly lines~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Good for you, you can save 3 additional KB while installing a piece of software (then again, the installer's just going to add shortcuts to your desktop and that's lame).
There are things called options, these usually give you the option of adding links to your desktop. I choose not to because I don't want them there, it's ~*magic*~



Clearly, moving one icon to an applications folder is far superior to having to go through an installation procedure. Most apps on OS X are installed like this.
Not really, going through an installation procedure can save you 100mb+, stop crap you don't want being installed and add things extra that aren't in the default installation. I think installing and choosing exactly what you want is far superior.



Easier to use is debatable. They've moved many things around in the UI, so that a previous Windows user would have to re-learn the UI. Securer at a price (which is performance). If these new versions are superior to XP then why is XP still shipping on Netbooks and for Windows 7?
Why is Ubuntu being supported for several years? Because a lot of people use it. Just like a lot of people use XP, 7 should change that though.


And guess what operating system I used to post my previous posts? A Windows Mobile device!??! Amazing, isn't it? How I don't have an iPhone? ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!!!11
Not really, I don't have an iPhone or a Windows Mobile, or a smart phone for that matter because I don't need my phone to wipe my ass for me whenever I make a phone call. I need texting, calling and the occasional internet browsing. My phone does all of that without fancy "apps" or being a "smart phone".


No, you're not really. You have to know how to use Linux before you give it a chance:).
Used lunix, made programs, edited themes, butted about with it for a few months. I think I know how to use lunix.


Apple smooths the fonts better. I can see why some people might not like that because the additional smoothing is annoying, but I for one see no problem with it. Infact, in some cases I think Apple font rendering looks absolutely stunning:
http://www.angier.co.uk/david/files/2007/06/rendersaf.PNG

And the Windows version:
http://www.angier.co.uk/david/files/2007/06/renderwin.PNG

If I'm not mistaken the Windows font doesn't have ClearType at all, I can't see any sub-pixel rendering on the text below wordpress.




In my opinion Windows Vista is not a "real" OS, meaning I would not wish to use it:):).
Your opinion is wrong (yes they can be wrong), Windows Vista is a valid Operating System (and by all definition real) that is used by millions of people across the world who all know it to be real (It's a fact!). Your opinion is moot.



If you check out the post your setup thread you'll notice 2 out of 3 of my computers in that shot are running Windows. I also have a Gateway Desktop dual booting Ubuntu and Windows Vista (sadly) and an IBM thinkpad running Windows as well. I have an HTC Apache running Windows mobile 6.5 and the phone I'm using now, the HTC Vogue, running Windows mobile 6.1. I'm such an Apple fan;).

That's like being racist to a black person and saying it's ok because you have black friends.

Thanks for playing guys!

[Wayne]

Omg, I'm on Ubuntu now and it's so amazing. :) I love it. Shame I can't find an integrated IDM to use. :(

[xPrecedent]

hoteluser i knew you would post in this thread
you have a weird obsession with vista dude

[Metric1]

I really like Vista, sure it's not fast but if you have a lot of ram and a good dual-core processor, it makes a world of difference!

[Agnostic Bear]

Omg, I'm on Ubuntu now and it's so amazing. :) I love it. Shame I can't find an integrated IDM to use. :(

Intelligent Dance Music?

[HotelUser]

Right time to roll up my sleeves and get busy.
And get ready to pwn me as usual:rolleyes:

(Thanks to Mentor for using a post format that doesn't bunch everything up into one massive blog (Hey HotelUser, press enter!)
I think you mean press return.


There are no themes I like on any Lunix distro because they're all horrible and have 4304820934824 developers just dragging it down. Unity = Better design, better code (for applications).
GNOME is very customizable. KDE is terrible all around, but GNOME is amazing. The amount of beautiful themes and icon sets for GNOME are vast.

Thanks for playing Mentor! Hope you had fun.
You sure beat him in a game of HxDiscussion:eusa_clap.

Not really, going through an installation procedure can save you 100mb+, stop crap you don't want being installed and add things extra that aren't in the default installation. I think installing and choosing exactly what you want is far superior.
Yeah but that's an extra click on a dialog. If you don't want the crap installed on OS X simply don't drag its icon into the applications folder.


Why is Ubuntu being supported for several years? Because a lot of people use it. Just like a lot of people use XP, 7 should change that though.
And a lot of people use XP because of netbooks and they obviously like it. If they didn't they would upgrade to Vista. Or maybe it's that they don't even care at all what they're using? Either way, XPs survival is a clear indication that Vista, to an extent, was not successful.



Not really, I don't have an iPhone or a Windows Mobile, or a smart phone for that matter because I don't need my phone to wipe my ass for me whenever I make a phone call. I need texting, calling and the occasional internet browsing. My phone does all of that without fancy "apps" or being a "smart phone".
I was simply stating that I used Microsoft software to construct my post.



Used lunix, made programs, edited themes, butted about with it for a few months. I think I know how to use lunix.
Yeah, tell me how you know so much about skinning it next;).



If I'm not mistaken the Windows font doesn't have ClearType at all, I can't see any sub-pixel rendering on the text below wordpress.
I was more or less trying to show an OS X rendering example. Here's a better example displaying how both platforms render pretty text:
http://macmee.com/screenshots/picture-20090725-230023.png
Both platforms render fonts professionally. Apple's rendering is smoother, and Microsoft's more crisp. Honestly, I can even zoom in ridiculously close to either representation and still read everything. It's ugly as heck, but both work fine?



Your opinion is wrong (yes they can be wrong), Windows Vista is a valid Operating System (and by all definition real) that is used by millions of people across the world who all know it to be real (It's a fact!). Your opinion is moot.


No, to me Windows Vista is not "real" because it does not meet the requirements I'm looking for in a reasonable to use Operating System. Therefore, when I say it's not "real", I'm indicating that I would not consider it a decent Operating System (notice the double-quote symbols around the word real, which are indicating that I don't mean the sentence literally).



That's like being racist to a black person and saying it's ok because you have black friends.

Hardly. I'm able to defame Vista because of my experiences with it.
Thanks for playing guys!
What's my prize for winning;)?


hoteluser i knew you would post in this thread
you have a weird obsession with vista dude

Ah, I suppose I've become predictable:(.


I really like Vista, sure it's not fast but if you have a lot of ram and a good dual-core processor, it makes a world of difference!

True, it does make a difference. Although, I heard Tom (*****) at a point was running it on his UMPC:O!

[Agnostic Bear]

What's my prize for winning;)?


There is no prize because you are not winning because there is no contest, only a game where you can neither win nor lose. However I will let you in on a little something:

I need to find out if breasts can actually hypnotize people, and if they can, how can I use this to my advantage?

[nvrspk4]

@nvrspk4: im not a fan of the font rendering in osx ether, in ubuntu though you could do a side by side comparison with windows and not see the difference :) Linux lets you customize everything, even font rendering :)

In ubuntu, u can choose each effect, customize it to your will, run lots, run none, you don't even to have the effects engine (compiz in my case, areo for windows) running. Ubuntus resource usage is so low though, you can have the same full set of effects and still run quicker than a copy of xp with no effects used at all :) With effects off though, linux will run on far far older hardware still with decent performance :)

Now that's a fair rebuttal :) I don't know enough about Ubuntu to make a mildly informed comment so I'll take you at your word ;)


Apple smooths the fonts better. I can see why some people might not like that because the additional smoothing is annoying, but I for one see no problem with it. Infact, in some cases I think Apple font rendering looks absolutely stunning:
http://www.angier.co.uk/david/files/2007/06/rendersaf.PNG

And the Windows version:
http://www.angier.co.uk/david/files/2007/06/renderwin.PNG

Hang on, if I'm not mistaken that's an application's font so its also down somewhat to the maker of the application. A Safari vs IE comparison is probably better suited to making your case. Regardless, you missed the point...the Windows font is much more pragmatic and easier to read and easier to design with (though Apple is supposed to be better for arteests)

The difference is hard to see because its a white background. However, if someone put that font into a graphic or perhaps was viewing it on a colored page it'd be different. To avoid any bias whatsoever I've taken your example and simple clicked the paint can ONCE on paint.

http://www.uploadpicz.com/view-37fontcomparison.png

As you can see, the normal sized, everyday reading font shows up perfectly in the Windows but not in the OSX. Due to me not actually using a legit system and clicking the paint can the big text isn't quite a good assessment (though that doesn't look like ClearText to me...it looks like the bottom WordPress is closer to OSX and the top is closer to cleartype, at least going by the blown up comparison...


Yes, if you're zoomed into an image that's used Apple font rendering it's going to look horrible compared to the Windows rendered text (though if you're zooming into pictures or looking this close to text then I don't see why you'd be looking for quality).

I have a secondary monitor with a 106DPI (native) and I've used it with one of my Windows machines and my iMac. Font rendering on OS X to my eyes is not inferior to Window's font rendering at all.
Yes and I'm saying: No it might not be productive but is sure looks cool, and since it hardly consumes any processing power you're not going to notice a difference in your machine's performance.That's about the same thing I said regarding Windows Vista and its nice but sluggish UI when it was released.

I'm not talking about performance, I'm talking about readability. Not to be dismissive of your opinion here but it may look better to your eyes however according to professionals it is shown that Windows font rendering is clearer, sticking to presentation over artistry whereas Apple sticks to the theory that font designer's wishes should be honored and go for the artistry over presentation.

What is the effect? According to studies, more reading accuracy with ClearType font. Perhaps if you are an art purist (and this would mean you also have never illegally downloaded a song because THINK OF THE ARTISTS) the OSX font rendering would be better. But pragmatically the ClearType rendering is better.

I'm not saying you're not able to read a word on the mac but the idea that OSX rendering isn't worse than ClearType, at least from the viewpoint of efficiency and pragmatism.



In my opinion Windows Vista is not a "real" OS, meaning I would not wish to use it:):).

I rest my case :8





Can I remind everybody to keep our posts aimed at comments instead of people? *COUGH*

Though it seems the OP has his issue resolved and we're hijacking the poor boy's threads for our own capricious purposes.



*Facepalm* Typed this entire thing out and forgot to hit enter, its been sitting among 20 tabs in one of 6 windows all lonely for hours.

[Recursion]

GNOME is very customizable. KDE is terrible all around, but GNOME is amazing. The amount of beautiful themes and icon sets for GNOME are vast.

Just thought I would say, www.gnome-look.org, www.kde-look.org.

And obviously Microsoft is doing a lot right seeing as Windows is the most widely used OS on the market by a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG shot.

Thanks.

[Josh-H]

Just go to Windows 7 :)

[Wayne]

Intelligent Dance Music?

Internet Download Manager. ;)

[Recursion]

Intelligent Dance Music?

That doesn't even exist.

[Wayne]

So for installing Ubuntu, I download the ISO from the Ubuntu website, burn it to a CD, format my PC, uninstall Vista then insert the Ubuntu CD to install that?

[MrPinkPanther]

OSX Mobile > Windows Mobile
OSX < Windows 7/Vista/XP

End of.

PS: Anyone who disagrees with me likes Intellgient Dance Music

[Recursion]

OSX Mobile > Windows Mobile
OSX < Windows 7/Vista/XP

End of.

PS: Anyone who disagrees with me likes Intellgient Dance Music

Agreed to an extent, OS X is better than Windows in some ways and vice versa.

You just download the Ubuntu ISO, then burn it to disk, Ubuntu will do the partitioning etc for you.

[MrPinkPanther]

Agreed to an extent, OS X is better than Windows in some ways and vice versa.
I'm not a big fan of OSX, to me it feels a little bit too "Floaty" although I think Mac Hardware is fantastic.

[Wayne]

Agreed to an extent, OS X is better than Windows in some ways and vice versa.

You just download the Ubuntu ISO, then burn it to disk, Ubuntu will do the partitioning etc for you.

So I just back up the stuff I want from Windows, then put the Ubuntu disk in and it will overwrite Windows so I should be able to use my full amount of disk space in Ubuntu?

[Agnostic Bear]

That doesn't even exist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_dance_music

Hrmpf.

I occasionally listen to the odd IDM track here and there.

[HotelUser]

Hang on, if I'm not mistaken that's an application's font so its also down somewhat to the maker of the application. A Safari vs IE comparison is probably better suited to making your case. Regardless, you missed the point...the Windows font is much more pragmatic and easier to read and easier to design with (though Apple is supposed to be better for arteests)
Nope, WordPress is a webscript. I believe it's coded in PHP. I'm not quite sure designing would matter very much when it comes down to how the two different Operating Systems render their fonts. For example if you were doing pixel art in MSPAINT, and you wanted to use a font and, lets say, you wanted to have the font white and outline it with black. You'd probably have to end up disabling cleartype altogether. Perhaps Window's font rendering does have its advantages though. I'm just not sure of scenarios where the difference would be significant.


The difference is hard to see because its a white background. However, if someone put that font into a graphic or perhaps was viewing it on a colored page it'd be different. To avoid any bias whatsoever I've taken your example and simple clicked the paint can ONCE on paint.

http://www.uploadpicz.com/view-37fontcomparison.png

As you can see, the normal sized, everyday reading font shows up perfectly in the Windows but not in the OSX. Due to me not actually using a legit system and clicking the paint can the big text isn't quite a good assessment (though that doesn't look like ClearText to me...it looks like the bottom WordPress is closer to OSX and the top is closer to cleartype, at least going by the blown up comparison...
Actually the WordPress example was only displaying OS X really. "Use these links to get started" on Windows isn't using ClearType. I posted another example in response to jb, I'll give it the paintcan treatment:
http://macmee.com/screenshots/Picture_2-20090726-112741.png
The top shot being OS X and the bottom shot being Windows. To me, both shots look horrible. The Windows version maybe being a little more legible, but no person in their right mind would use either of these as graphics, because the smoothing on both would cause problems. In photoshop and other designing applications, you could use the magic tool to fix this problem quite nicely. So, perhaps Windows is rendering the font slightly better for designing purposes, but it's not so much to matter.




I'm not talking about performance, I'm talking about readability. Not to be dismissive of your opinion here but it may look better to your eyes however according to professionals it is shown that Windows font rendering is clearer, sticking to presentation over artistry whereas Apple sticks to the theory that font designer's wishes should be honored and go for the artistry over presentation.
What is the effect? According to studies, more reading accuracy with ClearType font. Perhaps if you are an art purist (and this would mean you also have never illegally downloaded a song because THINK OF THE ARTISTS) the OSX font rendering would be better. But pragmatically the ClearType rendering is better.
I was talking about performance regarding Desktop Effects on Ubuntu. Apple is very professional. Their Keynote presentation applications is far beyond PowerPoint.

I'm not saying you're not able to read a word on the mac but the idea that OSX rendering isn't worse than ClearType, at least from the viewpoint of efficiency and pragmatism.

I just think it's different. Both look good.



I rest my case :8

:)


*Facepalm* Typed this entire thing out and forgot to hit enter, its been sitting among 20 tabs in one of 6 windows all lonely for hours.
[/QUOTE]

Lmao I did that with my last post. I even went as far as to close Safari without realizing what I've done! I had to retype the entire post:(.

[Recursion]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_dance_music

Hrmpf.

I occasionally listen to the odd IDM track here and there.

I meant the Intelligent bit.

[MrPinkPanther]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_dance_music

Hrmpf.

I occasionally listen to the odd IDM track here and there.
I do believe he was saying no Dance music is "Intelligent". It was a joke :).

[Recursion]

I do believe he was saying no Dance music is "Intelligent". It was a joke :).

Wahey! xD

[Wayne]

Will the Ubuntu installation disk when inserted install over Windows?

[Recursion]

Will the Ubuntu installation disk when inserted install over Windows?

It'll ask you if you want to install over Windows or install side-by-side.

[MrPinkPanther]

More imporantly:
http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/4306/peopleh.png

[Wayne]

It'll ask you if you want to install over Windows or install side-by-side.

Ahh right, nice 1 thanks.

[Mentor]

How did this end up as a Osx V windows? Unless you wana buy a mac / get a hackintosh working, you aint gonna be able to downgrade to osx anyway - its lock to hardware as apple doesnt have a conept of drivers.

Until you can create a file on right click, or just merge a folder without sending the original data to an unretrivable file pergatory i dont really think osx desrves to be in with a shot. It lacks the most basic feature of any O/S - actually being able to operate hardware that isnt its own. I'm honestly not a big apple fan.

Linux on the other hand, totally customisable to your needs.

There are no themes I like on any Lunix distro because they're all horrible and have 4304820934824 developers just dragging it down. Unity = Better design, better code (for applications).
:O Thats unpossible! www.gnome-look.org , www.kde-look.org . Infact, i guess my own theme must not exist ether.. what on earth am i useing then??


You can't, it's patented to hell and back and nobody has created something that matches it.
Clear type is a method of subpixel rendering, not the end result reached with it :)


And what happens when I use ATI? which doesn't support mipmaps or vsync? I would prefer something that works to something that looks "fancy", flip 3d has mipmaps and vsync. So I use flip 3d.

Thanks for playing Mentor! Hope you had fun.
My media pc is running on an ATI card... looks to be working fine to me. Flip 3d is far less useful than desktop spinners, alt-tab which is avaible on pretty much all o/s's does a better job than flip 3d, desktop spinner a better job thatn that..

Not so bothered by font rendering since it can be changed to my likeings on the linux :P Also who gives a crap what a font looks like zoomed in 1000 times, how often do you plan to do that?

[MrPinkPanther]

Also who gives a crap what a font looks like zoomed in 1000 times
I do, font fetish.

[Agnostic Bear]

Clear type is a method of subpixel rendering, not the end result reached with it :)


I'm pretty sure the only way to get to the end result is with the method used :eusa_thin

[The Professor]

How did this end up as a Osx V windows? Unless you wana buy a mac / get a hackintosh working, you aint gonna be able to downgrade to osx anyway - its lock to hardware as apple doesnt have a conept of drivers.

HotelUser posted.

Can we make intelligent dance music a hxf meme? It sound so amazing :D

[Wayne]

HotelUser posted.

Can we make intelligent dance music a hxf meme? It sound so amazing :D

Lmao, nice idea. ;)

[Recursion]

HotelUser posted.

Can we make intelligent dance music a hxf meme? It sound so amazing :D

Habbox Forum doesn't deserve to have any memes. EVER.

[The Professor]

Habbox Forum doesn't deserve to have any memes. EVER.

TRY AND STOP MEEEEE :D

[Wayne]

TRY AND STOP MEEEEE :D

You got Ubuntu Alex?

[The Professor]

You got Ubuntu Alex?

I tried using it for a week while Packard Bell shipped me a new XP disc and gave up on it after a couple of hours. I have no patience when it comes to unintuitive things and trying to find and set up drivers and programs on linux was more trouble than it was worth so I just went without a computer for a week :P

[Wayne]

Lol, yeah I just did a clean format and installed XP over Ubuntu haha. ;)

[The Professor]

And linux is a bugger if you've never used it before, unless you want to spend months learning how to do things that come naturally on windows I wouldn't even consider it :P

*Waits for linux fanboys to attack me with spears*

Hate to say I told you so.. :P

[Wayne]

Haha, I'm just having some trouble at the moment with Firefox downloads. Every download I make is about 80kb/s tops. :( I used to get 600kb/s - 1.2mb/s using Vista.

[Agnostic Bear]

Haha, I'm just having some trouble at the moment with Firefox downloads. Every download I make is about 80kb/s tops. :( I used to get 600kb/s - 1.2mb/s using Vista.

XP's network stack is pretty meh, install Win 7 and it'll improve.

[Wayne]

It's averaging about 800kb/s now. :)

[Mentor]

Hate to say I told you so.. :P

Honestly, that statement alone that was why i bothered replying :p