# What Operating System do you use?



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

I'm just curious what OS people here tend to use?


----------



## firephoto (Sep 12, 2002)

Linux version 2.6.6 ([email protected]) (gcc version 3.3.3 20040412 (Gentoo Linux 3.3.3-r3, ssp-3.3-7, pie-8.5.3)) #1 Mon May 10 15:45:00 PDT 2004

No crashes, lockups, etc since late summer '03 and I only reboot when testing or for a new kernel. Haven't booted into winXP for months, just no need really unless I need to program a radio or backup my phone data.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

Cool firephoto

PS, if you're running Windows 3.1, vote for MS-DOS since it runs on top of DOS (yeah, yeah, I know all the arguements on both sides - but its my poll and Win31 runs on DOS and Win95 doesn't if I want!)


----------



## Redster (Jan 14, 2004)

Keep this poll up,, I seem to switch between Linux Mandrake, W2K and XP about every 3 months,, depends on how bored I get.


----------



## mini1 (Jan 25, 2004)

what if I use two? one on each computer at my house?


----------



## Mark Lamutt (Mar 24, 2002)

Win XP Pro on my 3 computers, and Mac OS9 on my wife's IMAC.


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

Win XP at home

Mac OS10 (no idea which revision) on the brand new POS apple at work. I have no idea why Apple/Mac is still selling. I've had that computer crash more than when I had Windows 3.1 on my 386sx25!

See ya
Tony


----------



## RichW (Mar 29, 2002)

My three home computers have Win98, win2K, and winXP MCE.

At work, I use just about everything except Linux. I even have one instrument that still uses DOS. I also use IRIX on an SGI workstation, VMS, and MacOS X. I also run servers on WinNT 4.0, win2K, and Win 2003 server. Keeps me off the street!


----------



## Mark Holtz (Mar 23, 2002)

At home, I use XP. At work, my main workstation is a Win2K professional which I then use to telnet into several FreeBSD machines. To my right is a machine known as "Test Box", and there are drives that I swap out that have Win95, Win98SE, and for the past couple of days, XPSP2RC1.


----------



## JM Anthony (Nov 16, 2003)

Two laptops, two desktops, all running XP on the homefront. And I know this is the kiss of death, we've had zero problems with any of them.


----------



## Mike123abc (Jul 19, 2002)

WinXP Pro is what I use on the 3 computers I have at my desk. I do think that when I do the next upgrade round (I upgrade the main and shift the parts down the line) I will do a 4th box with Linux on it. I did a ton of programming on UNIX of all flavors, but have not had a chance to work with linux much. It will be fun to have a "UNIX" like box again to play with.


----------



## leestoo (Mar 23, 2002)

WinXP Pro at home and various OS's at work including HP-UX, TRU64, Solaris and an old system, OpenVMS.


----------



## CoriBright (May 30, 2002)

Xp Pro on the desktops (2 of them) and the notebook, XP Tablet on the tablet, Windows 2003 Server Standard edition on the Server.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

WINNT. At school Windows 2000 Pro, at home mostly XP Pro, but on my three computers here's the rundown 

PC#1- IBM Aptiva Pentium 100MHz, Windows 95 
PC#2- Compaq Presario Pentium 3 700Mhz, triple boot system with Windows ME, Windows 2000 Pro and Windows 2000 Advanced Server
PC#3- Compaq Presario Pentium 4 HT 3.20GHz, Windows XP Professional, I love this machine!

Hey Rich by XP MCE, do you mean Media Center Edition? How do you like the Media Center PC?


----------



## Chris Freeland (Mar 24, 2002)

WinXP Home at home on 2 laptops and my desktop.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

" I have no idea why Apple/Mac is still selling. I've had that computer crash more than when I had Windows 3.1 on my 386sx25!
"

Tony, MacOS X is extremely stable. It's based on FreeBSD and is rock solid, are you actually having the system crash or just certain applications? If it's just certain applications, which ones? If it's the system, do you have the latest software updates? What software is running when it crashes. MacOS X (like Windows NT series and most other Unix variants) almost never crashes. Something is wrong on your system. That is NOT normal behaviour for the Mac. In fact, one of the selling points is just how solid the system is.

"what if I use two? one on each computer at my house?"

Whichever computer you're posting from. For example, I voted MacOS X since I'm posting from my iBook, buy eMachines T3265 desktop runs WinXP.


----------



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

Windows XP Pro @ Home

Windows XP Pro, Linux 2.4.x kernel, HP-UX, Tru64, Windows 2000 & Windows 2003 @ work.


----------



## marko (Jan 9, 2003)

win xp pro at home

win 2000, win xp, Linux ( various 390/ppc/i386 versions), AIX, Solaris, HPUX at work


----------



## BobMurdoch (Apr 24, 2002)

Win XP Pro at home, but Win ME on my office computer (yeah, I know it's lame..... but the original Carmageddon game still works on it, while it won't run on XP. We have a couple of Death Race 2000 like matches after hours at the office here... Whenever we upgrade, we'll have to break out the Carmageddon 2 discs, but we only have 3 and the original only needed one disc to run 6 players)


----------



## narnia777 (Mar 28, 2003)

I have an old box that I turned into a linux routerserver running Clark Connect (based on redhat 7.2). Another computer runs Xwindows workstation on Redhat 8.0. My main computer runs MS Windows Server 2003 (patched to think it's Windows XP) as a Worksation (disabled all the server stuff).

Jim


----------



## sampatterson (Aug 27, 2002)

I am running longhorn (next version of Windows XP)


----------



## Charles Oliva (Apr 22, 2002)

Home: WinXP
Work: Main systems Win2000, Network on dual boot Win2000/MS-DOS(the program we use was created in the 80's and everyone here is so use to it that it's never been replaced/upgraded).


----------



## Chris Freeland (Mar 24, 2002)

sampatterson said:


> I am running longhorn (next version of Windows XP)


How is it working so far?


----------



## Neutron (Oct 2, 2003)

sampatterson said:


> I am running longhorn (next version of Windows XP)


Where did you get a copy of Longhorn?


----------



## CoriBright (May 30, 2002)

Neutron said:


> Where did you get a copy of Longhorn?


Probably via an MSDN subscription. 
www.microsoft.com.msdn


----------



## invaliduser88 (Apr 23, 2002)

CoriBright said:


> Probably via an MSDN subscription.
> www.microsoft.com.msdn


NAH IRC Download !danger:


----------



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

As far as I know the "Longhorn" builds out there are more XP than what Microsoft's promised for Longhorn. Of course, the same was said about the early XP builds relative to 2000 - and XP ended up being little more than 2000 with a few new applications and a prettier UI. And Microsoft's already backed down on some of the more extreme Longhorn promises...


----------



## bills976 (Jun 30, 2002)

I'm dual-booting XP and Mandrake 10 (kernel v. 2.6) on my IBM T30.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

XP Home/XP Home/XP Pro


----------



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

Wow, DBSTalk is almost 90% Microsoft - to the six who defy the monopoly, congrats! To the six using Windows 9x - I feel sorry for you. The surprise? That there's nobody using BeOS (yeah, I know it's discontinued - but so is Windows 98)


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

MarkA said:


> and XP ended up being little more than 2000 with a few new applications and a prettier UI.


That is a very inaccurate statement. While XP is built upon the NT kernel, just as Win2000, it is a significant advance upon that concept. The advancements made in XP over Win2000 are very significant and far more extensive than "a few new applications and a prettier UI".


----------



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

Name a few of them, then, please. I'm not aware of anything truly major or revolutionary (as Microsoft promised). If there is something I would truly be interested.


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

MarkA said:


> Name a few of them, then, please. I'm not aware of anything truly major or revolutionary (as Microsoft promised). If there is something I would truly be interested.


For one thing, the memory management was completely redesigned from the ground up, resulting in far better multitasking and less chances for misbehaving programs to run away with resources. It also allows for much more support and stability for older programs by using redesigned emulation and virtual machine subsystems. Device driver design and implementation changes also result in better stability and functionality over the older methods. The "prettier UI" changes also result in improvements in functionality and integration, as well as stability.

I ran NT4 and Win2000 Pro for quite a while. XP Pro is a significant improvement on both. If your current needs are being met by Win2000 and it would be costly for you to upgrade and you have no need for the benefits that XP might offer, then there is no real point in upgrading. But to say that XP has no significant improvement over Win2000 would be very inaccurate. I saw much improved multitasking abilities and better utilization of system resources under XP than I did with Win2000.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

What do you mean by 'prettier UI'? Personally I've always found the XP user interface annoying. I have my start menu set to classic, I use the classic windows theme, and I've disabled the Welcome screen for when I boot up so auto logins and shut downs look just like the WIN2K screens. I love Windows XP, but the default user interface is too cartoony or something for me. In general, I don’t care much for skins but I hope Longhorn has the same options when it comes to appearance.


----------



## dfergie (Feb 28, 2003)

I should have answered Commodore 64/128 basic  I still have them, just have not fired them up in years. Seriously I had 98 , 98 se, millinium(lets not go there)xp and xp pro. Xp pro rarely crashes and I mess with video apps and often have several windows going at the same time.


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> What do you mean by 'prettier UI'? Personally I've always found the XP user interface annoying. I have my start menu set to classic, I use the classic windows theme, and I've disabled the Welcome screen for when I boot up so auto logins and shut downs look just like the WIN2K screens. I love Windows XP, but the default user interface is too cartoony or something for me. In general, I don't care much for skins but I hope Longhorn has the same options when it comes to appearance.


However, when you revert to "classic" mode, you lose some functionality. With the new interface, you can selectively enable/disable individual attributes, or even all of the "whizbang" graphics yet still have the benefit of the newer look. With addon software like the Microsoft approved WindowBlinds by Stardock, you can even change the interface to appear as many other things, even other operating systems. There are "skins" which mimic the older Mac as well as the new Mac OSX, various Linux interfaces, Win3.x, Sun Solaris, OS/2, etc. These can also provide increased functionality, proving far more than just "cartoonish". 
Is the new UI perfect? No, but it is a significant advance over previous versions.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

What functionality do I give up by taking everything back to how it looked in WIN9X and 2000? There is nothing about the default XP interface I remotely like, if there was no classic skin I’d live with it, but the first thing I did with the computer after plugging it in was taking the start menu back to classic, changed the Windows theme to classic and after a few days of playing around I learned about the User Accounts control panel, disabled the Welcome screen and went into the Passwords control panel and disabled the password. And I’ve never been back to the XP UI since.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

"For one thing, the memory management was completely redesigned from the ground up, resulting in far better multitasking and less chances for misbehaving programs to run away with resources."

No, it's identical to the Windows NT kernel used in Windows 2000. At least, as far as I can tell and everything else I've heard. If anything, 2000 runs a little BETTER because it needs less resources itself - on slower computers anyways.

"It also allows for much more support and stability for older programs by using redesigned emulation and virtual machine subsystems."

Microsoft SAYS. And even then, not redesigned, just upgraded. But to tell ya the truth I don't believe it - I haven't seen one program that doesn't run on 2000 but will run on XP.

"Device driver design and implementation changes also result in better stability and functionality over the older methods."

What? It uses the same WDM drivers used in 2000, minor changes have been made at best.

"The "prettier UI" changes also result in improvements in functionality and integration, as well as stability."

Very true, at least for functionality and integration. Again, if anything I think XP is a touch less stable. Both are very solid.

"But to say that XP has no significant improvement over Win2000 would be very inaccurate. I saw much improved multitasking abilities and better utilization of system resources under XP than I did with Win2000."

Well, that's great - but I wouldn't say that's a typical experience. If anything, I've found XP to be a little worse (but worth it for the UI), brought about back to where 2000 was with SP1. Let's see what SP2 brings, maybe then my experience will match yours. I am glad you've had a good experience though!

"What do you mean by 'prettier UI'? Personally I've always found the XP user interface annoying.What do you mean by 'prettier UI'? Personally I've always found the XP user interface annoying."

Again, it's all a matter of opinion. I think it's easier on your eyes. Much easier. Plus - you gotta love that it's the first Windows to have TRUE font anti-aliasing (ClearType). And darn good anti-aliasing at that. It makes my Mac look somewhat soft (thorough about size 14 - then ClearType falls apart and MacOS X looks superior - let's get the best of both worlds guys!)

"What functionality do I give up by taking everything back to how it looked in WIN9X and 2000?"

I'm not aware of anything.

"and went into the Passwords control panel and disabled the password."

NOT a good idea, for security all accounts (or at least all admin accounts) on your computer should have a password!


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> What functionality do I give up by taking everything back to how it looked in WIN9X and 2000? There is nothing about the default XP interface I remotely like, if there was no classic skin I'd live with it, but the first thing I did with the computer after plugging it in was taking the start menu back to classic, changed the Windows theme to classic and after a few days of playing around I learned about the User Accounts control panel, disabled the Welcome screen and went into the Passwords control panel and disabled the password. And I've never been back to the XP UI since.


So in other words, you've never actually used the new UI to any degree to learn whether it is better or not.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

No I haven't, but tell me what I'm missing by using classic over XP style, maybe I'll check it out.

"NOT a good idea, for security all accounts (or at least all admin accounts) on your computer should have a password!"

I have one account on all my NT based operating systems, Admin. I'm the only one that uses these computers.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

Password protect your accounts - and the new XP style is nicer, but that's it. The one thing you'll surely appreciate - turn on ClearType. I have no clue why it's off by default.


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> No I haven't, but tell me what I'm missing by using classic over XP style, maybe I'll check it out.
> 
> "NOT a good idea, for security all accounts (or at least all admin accounts) on your computer should have a password!"
> 
> I have one account on all my NT based operating systems, Admin. I'm the only one that uses these computers.


Are they connected to the internet? By running everything as admin you run a greater risk of a malicious program taking over. For security purposes, everyday use should be as a User, with only necessary functions done as Admin.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

Only my XP computer is connected to the internet, my modem drivers for the modem on my old computer aren’t WIN2K compatible and I haven't had a chance to download updated drivers yet. I'm on dial up, have the Windows firewall enabled, have all the latest security patches, whatever risks they're are, I'll take them. 

I have ClearType enabled, text on my LCD looks awful without it. But when talking about the actual XP skin, I can’t stand it, I'm just used to the old look and perfer it much more.


----------



## JerryLA (Dec 29, 2003)

Windows XP Pro at home and for general purpose at work. For graphics and artwork Mac OSX, 10.3.1


----------



## cdru (Dec 4, 2003)

2 XP Pro machines at home. 2000 Pro at work. 700 SCO Openserver machines across the country. I guess I could try to keep voting other for the 700 Unix boxes, but I don't have that much free time.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

" 700 SCO Openserver machines across the country."

Boo. SCO is suing end users and demanding license fees for code they claim in used in Linux but have yet to show anyone (they have shown samples of the accusing code, but not in context of their own prior art. Anybody can pull a few lines of code from an opensource OS and claim them as their own. But it means nothing unless they prove it, which SCO has made no attempt I'm aware of to do...)


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

A little update. Last night and this afternoon I've been playing with my old PC. The 700 MHz P3 Compaq. Currently I'm running nine operating Systems across eight partitions on two physical hard drives with a combined storage of 23.9 GB on one PC

C: Windows 2000 Professional & Windows 98 Second Edition
D: Windows XP Professional
E: <-DVD-ROM->
F: <-CD-R/RW->
G: Windows 2000 Advanced Server
H: Windows 2003 Enterprise Server
I: Windows XP Media Center
J: Windows 2000 Server
K: Windows XP Home 
L: Windows Millennium Edition

The computer is very sluggish as can be expected and I have no actual applications installed, I just wanted to see if I could get all these OS' installed without any conflicts and after a few tries I did it. Both drives will be reformatted and one will be partitioned and the other won't. 2000 Pro and XP Pro will be on the 13.7 GB drive and 2003 Enterprise Server will be on the 10.2 GB drive.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

I have Windows 98SE on my old computer that is about 4 years old and Windows XP Home on my Dell laptop that is less than one year old. 

I have a copy of Linux Mandrake that I downloaded last year but have not installed it yet but do not want to install it over windows and I want to be able to still access windows from same the same computer as Mandrake once installed.

How do you turn on ClearType?

Does the Mandrake Linux have a program within it that has dual boot mode which asks if you want to boot into Windows or Mandrake upon startup, does Windows recognize that automatically, or do you have to install another program that would allow you to do so?

Can you install another operating system on an external hard drive and boot from it?

There is even a Linux program called knoppix from knoppix.net that will allow you run the operating system from the cd. There is also a windows program that you can run from the cd but I do not know where to get that one at and forget what it is called. I seen all these on TechTv and they were all free.


----------



## SAEMike (May 29, 2004)

Windows XP Pro on all five computers. Never had a problem with it.


----------



## Redster (Jan 14, 2004)

Jacob S said:


> I have Windows 98SE on my old computer that is about 4 years old and Windows XP Home on my Dell laptop that is less than one year old.
> 
> I have a copy of Linux Mandrake that I downloaded last year but have not installed it yet but do not want to install it over windows and I want to be able to still access windows from same the same computer as Mandrake once installed.
> 
> ...


I have played around with Linux several times. It does have a boot loader that lets you choose which system . I will forwarn you though,, it doesnt always work. I have lost Windows on a couple of occasions because the Mandrake bootloader overwrote the boot partition. I would check with a couple Linux sites and see how others are doing it. As far as running it from the cd, at one time I did set up Mandrake so it would boot from a floppy, that way it didnt mess with Windows boot partition. It can be done with standard Mandrake, I didnt need a special program.


----------



## MarkA (Mar 23, 2002)

"How do you turn on ClearType?"

It's somewhere in display preferences. I'm not on a Windows box so I can't tell you exactly where right now.

"Does the Mandrake Linux have a program within it that has dual boot mode which asks if you want to boot into Windows or Mandrake upon startup, does Windows recognize that automatically, or do you have to install another program that would allow you to do so?"

Yes, Lilo does this (Linux Loader).


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

MarkA said:


> "How do you turn on ClearType?"
> 
> It's somewhere in display preferences. I'm not on a Windows box so I can't tell you exactly where right now.


In Display Properties, Appearance Tab, Effects button. There is a checkbox and dropdown list where you can choose the method of font smoothing. Generally, if you're using a CRT monitor, don't choose ClearType because it can have a negative effect on graphics performance in some instances. For an LCD monitor, though, it can make life a lot more pleasant than not having any smoothing or using the standard method. For my 19" LCD monitor, ClearType makes a very noticeable improvement in readability.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

I could stand having Clear Type enabled on my other computer with the CRT, on the LCD it cleans up text real well. On Microsoft’s website there a template for about 6 different Clear Type examples each one looking slightly different, you can download that setting, but I found for my eyes and my display, the default Windows one looks the best.


----------



## Jacob S (Apr 14, 2002)

I am now using ClearType. It has made a positive difference in the text.


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> I could stand having Clear Type enabled on my other computer with the CRT, on the LCD it cleans up text real well. On Microsoft's website there a template for about 6 different Clear Type examples each one looking slightly different, you can download that setting, but I found for my eyes and my display, the default Windows one looks the best.


Yep, the Microsoft site loads an ActivX utility which fine-tunes the ClearType engine for your particular tastes. Most people don't know about it. The default is usually OK for many, but for me, I chose one that was slightly better, in my view.


----------



## Steve Mehs (Mar 21, 2002)

For those interested, here's the Clear Type utility from MS, just follow the brief instructions.

http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/tuner/1.htm?fname=+&fsize=


----------



## HappyGoLucky (Jan 11, 2004)

Also, there has been some improvement to the ClearType engine in SP2. I'm running the RC2 of SP2 right now and so far I'm rather impressed with the fixes I've seen. The final should be out in August.


----------



## AnimeFan (Aug 4, 2004)

Windows 2000 Pro SP4


----------



## Dish 500 (Aug 15, 2004)

I use Windows XP. This operating system has better advantage of the features, like previous systems, plus a built-in firewall and remote connection. Haven't you heard of Service Pack 2? See this:

DBSTalk.Com - Windows XP Service Pack 2 comments thread

Dish Network 500


----------



## Dish 500 (Aug 15, 2004)

Steve Mehs said:


> For those interested, here's the Clear Type utility from MS, just follow the brief instructions.
> 
> http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/tuner/1.htm?fname=+&fsize=


I love it! ClearType is so neat! It looks like thin letters (I think)!

Dish Network 500


----------



## cdru (Dec 4, 2003)

MarkA said:


> " 700 SCO Openserver machines across the country."
> 
> Boo. SCO is suing end users and demanding license fees for code they claim in used in Linux but have yet to show anyone (they have shown samples of the accusing code, but not in context of their own prior art. Anybody can pull a few lines of code from an opensource OS and claim them as their own. But it means nothing unless they prove it, which SCO has made no attempt I'm aware of to do...)


Really? I had no idea. :sure:

Yeah I know about the lawsuit. I also know that my company has been OpenServer based since OpenServer came out and the non-evil OldSCO owned the company. You also don't just run out and upgrade 700 of your customers servers, handing them the bill along the way, with no reason other then "SCO is evil". My department, and the support for those 700 servers is being phased out over the next 5 years with no new site installations allowed.

I went to SCOForum at the begining of the month. While a good 1/2-2/3 of the conference was about their IP, I did learn about their products. It's unfortunate that they chose the route that they have taken. Win, loose, or draw, they are only going to get smaller. Companies will shy away from using them and use alternatives. If the loose, this will only speed up. If they win, they might see a slight repreive from the exodus, but once and "offending code" has been removed/modified/replaced, it will start back up. A settlement will be like a win or loose, depending on the terms.

Their products weren't cutting edge, but they have been quite reliable (with a few isolated exceptions) and stable for us.


----------

