Vista SP1

[AtW]

If you ignore DRM crap, drivers issue (better now than year ago though), and incompatibilities, then the striking thing is why the heck they use so much more RAM? It is just recently when memory prices/OS requirements became good so that I use 2 GB in my box and XP runs very very nicely, and suddenly Vista appears and requires a lot more for no reason - it's not a major change in OS ffs - they could stick their shiny 3D GUI where sun does not shine.

[ace00]

I won't ever move to Vista on a production / development PC. So far Linux is doing about 90% of what I need with the last 10% coming soon. I'll keep an XP PC around for nostalgia but the full move away for MS is almost there.

Tell me about it. I bought a new laptop the other day. Dual core, 633 Mhz bus straight through, 1 Gb Ram, etc. Goodie I thought as I started it up this is going to burn it up. Jeez it's slower than my old XP no-name, made in China CPU laptop I run now. Memory red-lining, CPU loading 50% average, 30Gb of disk space gone. And that's out the box, nothing installed. Except Vista. How do they do that? It's like X-windows circa 1998, except much, much worse.
I'm gonna get one of those little RAM only laptops with Linux.

[Cliphead]

Well, unless an HDD is damaged by powercut I expect OS to boot at least in safe mode - a sudden loss of power should only affect cached in memory data that was not written to disk, and OS boot structured should never be affected.

I had lots of time Windows XP box had power shutdown - it can boot up back just fine, so I am afraid I am not impressed with Linux.

The other issue is that it was not me who installed it, and all related to Linux apart from simple command lines is just way too painful to me - it is alien thing and I don't want to spend time trying to learn obvious thing that are just way too fking hard there. So, no, for me cost of Windows is well paid for the easy of use it provides and I can focus on either posting drivel here or doing something useful. Right now I am going to do something useful

To be honest with numerous power cuts where I live (and no UPS), I haven't yet had any issues with the Linux boxes running at the time booting back up normally, I guess you just got unlucky.

As for learning Linux, I've been involved almost from the start so know it very well and no other OS comes close in terms of reliability and functionality both server and desktop. I'm not pushing one OS over another, it's all down to what you're comfortable with.

[AtW]

Kernel panic's are rare, a power cut on any running OS is asking for trouble. A re-install would likely do the job but a UPS is a much better solution.

Well, unless an HDD is damaged by powercut I expect OS to boot at least in safe mode - a sudden loss of power should only affect cached in memory data that was not written to disk, and OS boot structured should never be affected.

I had lots of time Windows XP box had power shutdown - it can boot up back just fine, so I am afraid I am not impressed with Linux.

The other issue is that it was not me who installed it, and all related to Linux apart from simple command lines is just way too painful to me - it is alien thing and I don't want to spend time trying to learn obvious thing that are just way too fking hard there. So, no, for me cost of Windows is well paid for the easy of use it provides and I can focus on either posting drivel here or doing something useful. Right now I am going to do something useful

[Cliphead]

SKA client does work on it thanks to Mono, but I would not run production .NET server on it - memory management in .NET is much better than in Mono right now, this was worked around in the client, but hard to deal with in server, so it's cheaper to run on "desktop" Windows version: Action Pack allows up to 10 of those, so that's maybe £20 per year, that's not a lot and I don't have to deal with the weirdness of Linux.

I had Linux router on a PC, but after one powercut it won't boot - just says Kernel Panic and that's it - very helpful, NOT!

Kernel panic's are rare, a power cut on any running OS is asking for trouble. A re-install would likely do the job but a UPS is a much better solution.

[AtW]

SKA on Linux?

SKA client does work on it thanks to Mono, but I would not run production .NET server on it - memory management in .NET is much better than in Mono right now, this was worked around in the client, but hard to deal with in server, so it's cheaper to run on "desktop" Windows version: Action Pack allows up to 10 of those, so that's maybe £20 per year, that's not a lot and I don't have to deal with the weirdness of Linux.

I had Linux router on a PC, but after one powercut it won't boot - just says Kernel Panic and that's it - very helpful, NOT!

[Cliphead]

I would not use Microsoft "server" OS at all - it's just too expensive. I use Windows XP Pro 64-bit, which happens to be effectively a cut down build of Windows Server 2003, but the price is very cheap: I'd say Windows XP on my dev box is worth the money because of all backwards compatibility, but if I use server for fairly new apps I don't need all that so server markup is suddenly very expensive, if anything server versions should have been cheaper than desktop builds.

The numerous servers I have at home and maintain elsewhere are exclusively Linux (RH, CentOS), very cost effective & stable. SKA on Linux?

[AtW]

I won't ever move to Vista on a production / development PC.

I would not use Microsoft "server" OS at all - it's just too expensive. I use Windows XP Pro 64-bit, which happens to be effectively a cut down build of Windows Server 2003, but the price is very cheap: I'd say Windows XP on my dev box is worth the money because of all backwards compatibility, but if I use server for fairly new apps I don't need all that so server markup is suddenly very expensive, if anything server versions should have been cheaper than desktop builds.

[Cliphead]

I plan to use XP for the next 2-3 years.

I won't ever move to Vista on a production / development PC. So far Linux is doing about 90% of what I need with the last 10% coming soon. I'll keep an XP PC around for nostalgia but the full move away from MS is almost there.

[AtW]

No point in slagging something off without getting first hand experience.

I used Longhorn beta that was turned into RC. It was actually not bad, but it had issue with NTFS formatted disk that was seen just fine by XPs, this alone put it me big time. Why the ***k would a Windows XP NTFS formatted disk would work fine in other XP machines but not be visible in Longhorn? I had to do some moves that made me edgy in order to make it visible in there.

And that in Longhorn without all the bloat of Vista, DRM crap etc - why the heck would I want to upgrade my dev PC with slower OS that gives me absolutely nothing new? Direct X 10 was the only thing that was theoretically very tempting, however they royally screwed that up too.

I plan to use XP for the next 2-3 years.

[Cliphead]

I would not use Vista even if it was free. Which it is to me thanks to Action Pack, but I ain't using it.

DOS 4.0 -> Windows ME -> Vista : a chain of crap interation of key products by Microsoft.

Agreed. I set up a test PC with Vista Ultimate more or less out of curiosity. So far critical applications that I need simply don't work, I've downloaded SP1 but can't be arsed installing it yet, maybe tomorrow.

No point in slagging something off without getting first hand experience.

[AtW]

I would not use Vista even if it was free. Which it is to me thanks to Action Pack, but I ain't using it.

DOS 4.0 -> Windows ME -> Vista : a chain of crap interation of key products by Microsoft.

[Cliphead]

will stop my alledged time hack from working?

Along with everything else Allegedly.

[scooby]

will stop my alledged time hack from working?

[Cliphead]

Anybody bothered?