EggXpert.com

I would have to say that it is a tie between Ubuntu (v7.10 - Gutsy Gibbon) Linux & future Windows Vista Home Premium, Business, or Ultimate SP2.

But I don't have much personal experience with any thing pre-win95 and I HATE Macs so you can consider me biased.

Ubuntu Linux.

WinXP for games is the best for games and ease of setup, but that's about it.

BSDs are great for stability, but IMO near impossible to use. DragonFly looks to have some really interesting technology developing in it, so I'll keep my eye on it.

Solaris is just dog-slow.  Can't really comment on its capabilities because I got fed up with waiting for everything.  Takes minutes to boot, and usually 30+ seconds for a freakin' terminal window to load, nevermind firefox.  This on a Athlon 3800 with 2GB of ram.

Linux strikes a great compromise.  More difficult to set up for a desktop than Windows, but at least it can be accomplished by mere mortals.  Great stability and security, maybe less than BSD, but much better thant Windows.  Unfortunately, Linux doesn't have many polished games natively.

So basically, dual boot WinXP and Linux.  Use Windows for games, and linux for everything else.

Hands down My...............Vista Home Premium Home Edition, all though i do like xp pro and 2000 pro they don't even come close to this Machine i just built. My timings are set to 3-3-3-8 on my one stick of memory that's installed on it, and it's not running in dual channel either. As noted PCI Turbo 2x2 gigs.

I would like to install the other stick of memory. But as you can see i have two Disk Controllers installed.

Disk Controller :    VIA Technologies Inc VT6420 SATA RAID Controller
Disk Controller :    VIA Technologies Inc VT82xxxx EIDE Controller (All VIA Chipsets

might this be the reason i can't install it, or is it that i had windows 2000 pro installed and then went over it with Vista and it saved files from a 32 bit system I tried a lot of different things with know luck yet.

she's running Great so i don't want to mess around with it to much? It seems to be a memory controller Problem.............HELP would be appreciated. My xp pro machine has better Hardware but doesn't even come close to this one.            Happy New Years to all!
 

 

Windows XP. It may not be as good in some aspects as Windows 2000, Vista or certain flavors of Linux, but in my opinion it gives the best overall user experience, especially in terms of hardware and software compatability. In my experience, it's the only OS that does everything I need, and does it well: gaming, music production, media viewing, internet browsing and document editing.

Ubuntu Linux (specifically, Gutsy/7.10) is second on my list. It may not do all the software tasks that I need it to, and it's not quite as easy to configure or administrate as XP, but everything I use it for it does spectacularly.

OSX would probably do most of the stuff I need it to, but I had terrible experiences with it in college (an early iteration that, apparently, had bad networking code, causing it to be completely unusable in class labs - we had to take over the nearby Windows lab to do presentations!), and I'm simply not a fan of Apple's locked-in hardware or many of its design decisions.

Vista is completely off my radar because its audio kernel would break all my music production software. Thanks for that, Microsoft.

As mad as I've been w/ M$ since the release of Vista I still like XP.  Did great for gaming, I could do pretty much anything I wanted in it and I knew how.  I won't claim that it's the best thing available as I believe one should use whatever works best for them.  I do think that it is some of M$'s better work though.

I see no real reason to switch to Vista yet, the only real advantages are support for 4gb+ of ram if your running the 64 bit version and Direct X10 but Vista consumes so many resources that you gain no real benefit from having the extra hardware as its swallowed up by the resource hungry vista monster.

lets also not forget about the "allow or deny" nagging when you do any minor thing and the issues with wireless hardware not being compatible with vista making people buy a new router.

ill stick with my XP Pro SP2 thank you
 

What is my favorite OS?  Well I guess that would be OS/2.  This is a historical favorite as I stopped using it a few years ago.  But it was rock stable when my Windows 3.0 was crashing five times daily.  It ran Windows programs stably, unlike Windows.  It was a genuine multitasking OS with protected memory so if I did have a crash all I had to do was close the program not reboot. 

I never used Win2000 before I started using XP because I didn't feel like paying $300 for another OS.  But when I got a hold of XP I was surprised at how much it reminded me of OS/2.  I subsequently used Win2000 as well and was quite impressed with its much tighter code.  It is hard to believe Vista comes from either.  It took Microsuck three years to take XP and screw it up into Vista.  Wow!  That takes talent.

Oh well, that is what Linux is for. 

 

MewMint:

I can't believe in a tech forum there's so little love for 2000. It has just about every feature that XP has, and it does it on less resources. Its kind of like Xp's efficient cousin.

Actually Win2000 is XP's mother.  And you are correct, her son is big but strong and very much like her.  Her grandchild is horridly obese and it is running out of time to slim down.  In addition he falls down a lot, takes forever to wake up or go to sleep, and often can't decide when he is going to run a program. In addition the kid is constantly asking me if I am really sure I want to do something.  I am thinking of adopting Linux.  Oooops, too late. 

I choose Win XP because I'm a gamer.  If you're using any other OS, you're not much of a gamer.

I tried Linux and, while I can see it's usefulness for servers and basic uses, it completely fails at gaming and being a media box.  I can hear the linux fanbois crying already about MyhTV.  You know what?  MythTV is still a myth.  Until Linux gains support for the better TV tuners out there, it will remain that way.  I tried to build a myth box and the experience was like a slap in the face.  I bought a card specifically for it's compatibility with Linux and getting everything to work right ... I still haven't gotten it to work right.  I haven't had such an unpleasant computer experience since my early days of Win 95(which wins the award for most unstable OS in history, if you ask me).  Needless to say, it'll be years before I even consider giving Linux another try as a media box but by then the media box and TV tuners will be completely obsolete.  For the record, I tried MythDora and Mythbuntu.  Neither of which liked my old 17" CRT monitor very much.  I thought Linux was supposed to be known for it's compatibility with old c**p.  In any case, Mythbuntu was the most functional but MythDora was the easier of the two.

As for Vista, I plan to completely skip it just like I did ME.  After all, Vista has the same reek to it that ME did.  If nothing else, Vista fails for it's lack of compatibility.  Compatibility is what made Windows.  Windows without compatibility is like Linux without stability, completely useless.

I agree about liking Win 2000 but it lacked the compatibility that I needed and that I get from XP.
 

I primarily use my PC for gaming, multimedia, and school work. I've been switching back and forth between XP and Vista, and I'll stick with XP for as long as I can. I have XP Pro SP2 and Vista Ultimate SP1 64 in dual-boot and highly prefer using XP because it uses my resources more efficiently.

 Vista is just too slow to be used on my gaming rig. It wasn't designed to be a faster, better performing OS. In reality, Microsoft focused on safety and security for Vista, since they were slammed with one security threat after another on XP. I'm hoping that Windows 7 (I've heard the nickname Vienna) will be a faster and more efficient OS, with the same security of Vista.

 As for DX10 graphics being "exclusive" to Vista, well that was a stupid move IMO. Higher resource requirements for graphics on an OS that often requires >1GB of memory for idle processes? I don't think so. There's been ways to get the Very High graphics in Crysis on XP, and I have no doubt that DX10 graphics will be available on XP via workarounds that people create. You've got to love it when Microsoft "encourages" (forces) people to commit to an OS that was hyped up to be the next best thing, only to be incredibly disappointed and frustrated.

[/rant]

I voted for Linux -- first off it's free open source -- and easily the most powerful and most useful by far.

As for Vista it will not recognize any RAID array, and driver issues abound, although it's sure pretty.  In fact I don't think I've ever seen a turd so well spit shined.

Which brings me to XP I have used XP for a long time to run those applications that just weren't written for linux.  It has served me well for many years, although I have to admit when we were all waiting for Vista to be released I was excited to see what the next generation of windows would be like, unfortunately I found out.

 I really would use linux for everything except that some games just don't work right through emulators.
 

xp all the way!

Linux, hands down. My uptime on my LAPTOP (running Ubuntu, tweaked just how I like it) is over 1 month now... no crashes at all... running stable the whole time.

For the enthusiasts out there, Unix/Linux. For gamers and everyone else, XP. After SP2, then go Vista. 

As a comp repair tech, with 7 or 8 different kinds of personal machines and the need to know about different o s's for customers i say it depends on the hardware your runnin'. if you have high perf. lastest tech stuff Vista is good, but a little bloated. if you are running something that does not have the horsepower, vista is a drag. I have loaded vista on ten year old stuff, it just wasnt designed for it; but it still works. The only o s i havent tried yet is 64 bit vista. I just purchased a machine that should run it fine. If you have a windows experience index of less than 3.0, you are more likely to not like the vista o s. in the last year i've worked on many vista machines, hard drive defects, corrupted o s's, viruses, spyware, bloated start folders, and excessive registry entries and bad drivers/ program installs are still the main culprits of problems no matter what o s your runnin'. Personally I like vista, its easy to load and update. If you machine is 2 years or older XP may be better for you.

    Dont put a 500 hp engine in a volkswagon, youll die right after reaching escape velocity. Same goes for computers, If it wasn't designed for it, dont expect to be very happy with it.

my latest endeavor is below- this post is on the machine below-so far its fast, flawless, highly experimental.

qx9700 3.2 quad--xfx 790i mb--4gig( 2x2 ) ocz ddr3 1333 cas 6--2 xfx 9600gt 700mhz sli--zalmon9700 adj hsf + 52' ceiling fan ( LOL , but true )--twin 450 watt logisys power--running 30 day test vista ultimate 32 on temp laptop drive on test bed not installed in case yet.  A 5.9 windows experience index on all but the test hard drive. will put a couple of velociraptors on it at the end of testing and try to hold on to the mouse when i fire it up.

pwilly

PWilly:

As a comp repair tech, with 7 or 8 different kinds of personal machines and the need to know about different o s's for customers i say it depends on the hardware your runnin'. if you have high perf. lastest tech stuff Vista is good, but a little bloated. if you are running something that does not have the horsepower, vista is a drag. I have loaded vista on ten year old stuff, it just wasnt designed for it; but it still works. The only o s i havent tried yet is 64 bit vista. I just purchased a machine that should run it fine. If you have a windows experience index of less than 3.0, you are more likely to not like the vista o s. in the last year i've worked on many vista machines, hard drive defects, corrupted o s's, viruses, spyware, bloated start folders, and excessive registry entries and bad drivers/ program installs are still the main culprits of problems no matter what o s your runnin'. Personally I like vista, its easy to load and update. If you machine is 2 years or older XP may be better for you.

    Dont put a 500 hp engine in a volkswagon, youll die right after reaching escape velocity. Same goes for computers, If it wasn't designed for it, dont expect to be very happy with it.

my latest endeavor is below- this post is on the machine below-so far its fast, flawless, highly experimental.

qx9700 3.2 quad--xfx 790i mb--4gig( 2x2 ) ocz ddr3 1333 cas 6--2 xfx 9600gt 700mhz sli--zalmon9700 adj hsf + 52' ceiling fan ( LOL , but true )--twin 450 watt logisys power--running 30 day test vista ultimate 32 on temp laptop drive on test bed not installed in case yet.  A 5.9 windows experience index on all but the test hard drive. will put a couple of velociraptors on it at the end of testing and try to hold on to the mouse when i fire it up.

pwilly

I agree. Look at tracer76 chart it took three years for people to  start liking xp over win 2000 

I was born with a Macintosh Plus. I grew up with Windows 95 and ME (ewww) as well as Mac OS 8, 9, and 10 at school, matured with XP, and now own Vista. I liked XP a lot-- but I agree, it seems to have a few hiccups once in a while. I don't know why people hate Vista so much. It's been the best system I've had thus far-- definitely rocks Mac OS X. I definitely aggree that you shouldn't run Vista without some good hardware, though. If you have even moderate specs, Vista will probably be a nightmare for you.

I've been experimenting with Ubuntu 8.04. Works alright and I like it, but I can't do as much with it as Vista. But I'm still a noob when it comes to Linux.

Oh, PS-- as Reiner mentioned-- Vista is very annoying what with its constant nagging of "Can I do this? Can I do that? Are you sure? Are you sure I can do that? Wait-- are you sure?" (AKA "user account control" or "allow or deny"). You can turn this off. Makes the Vista experience much better assuming you have good hardware. It's somewhere in the control panel for those of you who haven't figured it out yet... Microsoft doesn't want you to find it and turn it off, so they make it really hard to find. I can't remember the labrynth you have to go through to get to it, and I'm using XP right now. :P But you can find it. I believe in you. :)

XP, YES , XP is the best OS ever but now i move to Windows Vista. to be honest, i really like the bells and whistles of vista. vista is so beautiful. do i have to choose one? if not so, i will chose both of them.

i have bad things to say about all of them... but to me i like vista cause of the diresct x 10 and the look of it... i dont like it... cause it is very hard to change things in game files... and it dosnt let you cheat in any games... like crysis for example.. it wont let you cheat by changing the files... and it wont let you cheat by using the game console.