Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Open discussion about any topic, as long as you abide by the rules of course!
User avatar
Transient
Posts: 11357
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Transient »

dzjepp wrote:First thing I'm gonna do after warezing Longhorn is disable the themes service and all that other bs, I'm gonna make it look like Win98, just like I have XP Pro running now.
That's exactly what I did, and plan to do.
Tormentius
Posts: 4108
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:00 am

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by Tormentius »

Geebs wrote:
bloat bloat BLOAT
IMO its not bloat, its a progression of technology. wtf is the point of having a $300-$700 video card and having your environment which you work in or play in a lot of the time look plain and dull. Its kinda like stripping your car down too the frame just so it'll go faster. Sure, it works but it makes driving a pretty unenjoyable experience. Personally, I'm looking forward to the new interface.
^misantropia^
Posts: 4022
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 6:24 pm

Post by ^misantropia^ »

Gnome's wobbly windows > Longhorn's eye candy.
rep
Posts: 2910
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 7:00 am

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by rep »

Tormentius wrote:
Geebs wrote:
bloat bloat BLOAT
IMO its not bloat, its a progression of technology. wtf is the point of having a $300-$700 video card and having your environment which you work in or play in a lot of the time look plain and dull. Its kinda like stripping your car down too the frame just so it'll go faster. Sure, it works but it makes driving a pretty unenjoyable experience. Personally, I'm looking forward to the new interface.
News flash: Original tests of Windows XP skinned vs. classic = skinned runs the same.

News flash: Avalon enhanced graphics under Longhorn use under 1% CPU resources.

News flash: When things work easily for people and are presented in an enjoyable manner they get more involved. Ten years after the big home PC revolution most people still don't know the difference between a file attachment and a virus. "I don't open any attachments because it could be a virus DOOOOOOOD." If the computer is stripped of clutter and made beautiful while also adding a wow factor people are refreshed and enjoy the experience.

Why should you spend hours organizing files when with Longhorn you'll be able to throw every file you have on a 1GB drive, totally unsorted and it'll do the organization for you?
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
User avatar
Transient
Posts: 11357
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 8:00 am

Post by Transient »

^misantropia^ wrote:Gnome's wobbly windows > Longhorn's eye candy.
That would bug the piss out of me. :icon13:
Tormentius
Posts: 4108
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:00 am

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by Tormentius »

rep wrote: News flash: Original tests of Windows XP skinned vs. classic = skinned runs the same.

News flash: Avalon enhanced graphics under Longhorn use under 1% CPU resources.

News flash: When things work easily for people and are presented in an enjoyable manner they get more involved. Ten years after the big home PC revolution most people still don't know the difference between a file attachment and a virus. "I don't open any attachments because it could be a virus DOOOOOOOD." If the computer is stripped of clutter and made beautiful while also adding a wow factor people are refreshed and enjoy the experience.

Why should you spend hours organizing files when with Longhorn you'll be able to throw every file you have on a 1GB drive, totally unsorted and it'll do the organization for you?
:icon27: Re-read my post...I was agreeing with you for once dumbass.
User avatar
Transient
Posts: 11357
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 8:00 am

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by Transient »

rep wrote:Why should you spend hours organizing files when with Longhorn you'll be able to throw every file you have on a 1GB drive, totally unsorted and it'll do the organization for you?
Because I like sorting my files the way I want them.
rep
Posts: 2910
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 7:00 am

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by rep »

Tormentius wrote:
rep wrote: News flash: Original tests of Windows XP skinned vs. classic = skinned runs the same.

News flash: Avalon enhanced graphics under Longhorn use under 1% CPU resources.

News flash: When things work easily for people and are presented in an enjoyable manner they get more involved. Ten years after the big home PC revolution most people still don't know the difference between a file attachment and a virus. "I don't open any attachments because it could be a virus DOOOOOOOD." If the computer is stripped of clutter and made beautiful while also adding a wow factor people are refreshed and enjoy the experience.

Why should you spend hours organizing files when with Longhorn you'll be able to throw every file you have on a 1GB drive, totally unsorted and it'll do the organization for you?
:icon27: Re-read my post...I was agreeing with you for once dumbass.
Just because I quoted you doesn't mean I was directly addressing you, dumbass. Notice how Geebs was the direction of our combined point.
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
rep
Posts: 2910
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 7:00 am

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by rep »

Transient wrote:
rep wrote:Why should you spend hours organizing files when with Longhorn you'll be able to throw every file you have on a 1GB drive, totally unsorted and it'll do the organization for you?
Because I like sorting my files the way I want them.

:lol: So what happens when Virtual Folders work so well that they get rid of regular folders, and use Virtual Folders except when burning to permanent media which then they become "Frozen Virtual Folders?" :lol:
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
Kills On Site
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2003 7:00 am

Post by Kills On Site »

Well my guess Transient is that you don't have to use the dynamic folders, they are just there for use. I doubt Windows requires you use it.

I would definatly use it for videos and music, but I would still organize my photos in standard photos. My only reserve is can you somehow keep certain folders from being searched for the dynamic folders, IE porn folders, ect
[size=92][color=#0000FF]Hugh Hefner for President[/color][/size]
Geebs
Posts: 3849
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:56 pm

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by Geebs »

Tormentius wrote:
Geebs wrote:
bloat bloat BLOAT
IMO its not bloat, its a progression of technology. wtf is the point of having a $300-$700 video card and having your environment which you work in or play in a lot of the time look plain and dull. Its kinda like stripping your car down too the frame just so it'll go faster. Sure, it works but it makes driving a pretty unenjoyable experience. Personally, I'm looking forward to the new interface.
Mate, I was just joking. You might have noticed that I've been using an operating system which puts ridiculously heavy burdens on the hardware for about, what, 5 years? I just think it's funny the way nerds use "bloat" as a way of criticizing pretty much any piece of software.

Plus rep is an asshat who gets upset at allocating 2.5% of his RAM.
User avatar
Transient
Posts: 11357
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2001 8:00 am

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by Transient »

rep wrote:
Transient wrote:
rep wrote:Why should you spend hours organizing files when with Longhorn you'll be able to throw every file you have on a 1GB drive, totally unsorted and it'll do the organization for you?
Because I like sorting my files the way I want them.

:lol: So what happens when Virtual Folders work so well that they get rid of regular folders, and use Virtual Folders except when burning to permanent media which then they become "Frozen Virtual Folders?" :lol:
They won't do that. There are still many uses for regular folders.
rep
Posts: 2910
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 7:00 am

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by rep »

Geebs wrote:Plus rep is an asshat who gets upset at allocating 2.5% of his RAM.
That's a problem when the computer is trying to use more than 97.5% and believe it or not it often happens. When I work in Photoshop I've always liked all the work to remain fairly dynamic so I end up with over 200 layers sometimes. That can kill a nice system real quick.
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
Tormentius
Posts: 4108
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 8:00 am

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by Tormentius »

Geebs wrote:

Mate, I was just joking. You might have noticed that I've been using an operating system which puts ridiculously heavy burdens on the hardware for about, what, 5 years? I just think it's funny the way nerds use "bloat" as a way of criticizing pretty much any piece of software.

Plus rep is an asshat who gets upset at allocating 2.5% of his RAM.
:o!

Note to self: Bring sarcasm detector in for a tuneup over the weekend.
Geebs
Posts: 3849
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:56 pm

Re: Hey so uhh, Longhorn...

Post by Geebs »

rep wrote:
Geebs wrote:Plus rep is an asshat who gets upset at allocating 2.5% of his RAM.
That's a problem when the computer is trying to use more than 97.5% and believe it or not it often happens. When I work in Photoshop I've always liked all the work to remain fairly dynamic so I end up with over 200 layers sometimes. That can kill a nice system real quick.
A gig of RAM costs absolutely bugger all.
rep
Posts: 2910
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 7:00 am

Post by rep »

I've got 2 as clearly noted in this thread.
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
rep
Posts: 2910
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2002 7:00 am

Post by rep »

You wouldn't, unless you're running a 64-bit OS. :lol:
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
4g3nt_Smith
Posts: 711
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:00 am

Post by 4g3nt_Smith »

Except that Panther could address 8 gigs of RAM, and it was 32-bit, as can most 32-bit Linux distros.
Post Reply