Hmmm....My experience is not quite the same...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| dinotrac Sep 26, 2005 5:00 PM EDT |
Sounds like a nightmare, Tom. Better you than me. I was lucky enough to get my DSL before SBC swallowed Ameritech. Back then, everybody told me Windows, but once I convinced the scripted lady on the other end that I really didn't care about support for my PC, I had no trouble. Of course, back then, they would send you little do-it-yourself kits that didn't require a technician on-site. As to XP, the XP-Professional on my wife's laptop is the first version of Windows that I can sort-of kind of live with. After living with a fairly sluggish Windows 2000 on a much faster notebook provided by a client, I was surprised at how snappy XP is on the old Dell PIII. I must have lucked out on the install, because I didn't have anywhere near the trouble you did. Except, of course, the built-in install problem: Once you've got Windows installed, you still can't do crap. Unlike Linux distributions, Windows comes with diddly squat for applications. It's been fairly trouble-free, but I'm sure we don't do anything as fancy as you. Hooking into our network over wi-fi is about as far in the fancy direction as we go. Internet Explorer sucks big red ones, however. I recently set my wife up with SugarCRM, and she complained about its performance. When I went to check it out, I thought it was pretty good, especially for an internet application. Turns out the difference was the browser. In side-by-side tests, Firefox rendered Sugar 3-4 times faster than IE. Amazing. I have no desire to put XP on any of our other machines, but if you need to run something that doesn't run on Linux (my wife's problem), it seems acceptable. |
| phsolide Sep 26, 2005 5:21 PM EDT |
Quoting: Turns out the difference was the browser. In side-by-side tests, Firefox rendered Sugar 3-4 times faster than IE. Amazing. Yeah, I have to wonder if IE doesn't do some things slowly on purpose. I worked for a startup-like company in 2000-2002, and at first, I had IE 5.x on Windows 2000, a Dell 933 MHz. I used Mozilla on a 50-MHz SPARCStation 10 next to the Windows 2000 box. I swear that IE 5.x would do some things slower than Mozilla on an old, old SPARC. I also swear that IE 5.x would semi-crash, and put up the 404 page. The very frequent 404s that Mozilla never saw went away when I instaled IE 6.0, but then it seemed that IIS sites just worked faster than non-IIS sites. Yeah. IE's failure-to-connect page seems to put the blame on everything other than IE itself, too. IE's weasel-worded badmouthing of the network, the network administrator, the DNS system, and the server on the other end quickly became tiresome. |
| dinotrac Sep 26, 2005 5:36 PM EDT |
phsolide -- I wonder if it takes time to run through all that innovation? |
| tadelste Sep 26, 2005 6:25 PM EDT |
I had SBC DSL when it first came out and it was very simple - here's the router, here's the DNS servers and we don't have static IP. Then I got cable and that was nice until I wanted a static IP: sorry. As far as XP - I had XP Pro when it first came out and it seemed like the first decent version of Windows I had ever seen. That lasted around 90 days and it sort of fell apart. It started doing the same stuff - freezing, etc. I still don't think Windows is ready for the desktop. They need to have virtual consoles, multiple workspaces, etc. I think they should start using X, unencumber the kernel, use samba, etc. Let's face it, as it is, it's junk. |
| dinotrac Sep 26, 2005 8:09 PM EDT |
Tom - It may be junk for you and I don't much like it, but it seems to work ok for a lot of people. I'm guessing lots of folks don't demand enough from their desktops to make it creak and wheeze to much... Except... I've know several folks whose systems have been brought to their knees by viri. XP systems that is, not Linux. Don't know a single one of those. Hope I never do. Funny thing is, each of those folks has a lot more anti-virus software than I do. |
| tadelste Sep 26, 2005 8:32 PM EDT |
Dino: I think you did a "yes, but." |
| ralph Sep 27, 2005 1:16 AM EDT |
When I activated my DSL account, you had to use Windows to setup your account. I am glad to hear there is a way around that now. It was pretty annoying. The process installed IE6 on the machine, which meant I had to reformat the machine and reinstall Windows 2000 again. I certainly was not going to leave IE6 on any machine of mine. I agree that many users seem to think that Windows XP is just fine. But, then again many people enjoy using crack cocaine. The problem is that one you understand either, you see how harmful they are in the long run. I often tell people "Friends don't let friends run Windows XP" I actually feel kind of dirty whenever I have to use it. Windows 2000 is OK, but with support for it waning, Linux seems like the only rational choice. |
| mvermeer Sep 27, 2005 6:19 AM EDT |
> I actually feel kind of dirty whenever I have to use it Ah, you too? I wonder how widespread this is. |
| dinotrac Sep 27, 2005 7:08 AM EDT |
Tom - That sounds about right. |
| phsolide Sep 27, 2005 9:26 AM EDT |
I have had Qwest DSL since 1997, at 3 different addresses. At first, they (at the time US West) just didn't care what you hooked up. Later, they claimed you needed Windows, but never actually checked. Now, unless you swear that you're using Windows XP, they won't go through the support scripts with you. That's OK, I just lie to them. I say something like, "I swear and affirm that I'm using Windows XP home edition, but I've already opened a telnet session to my Cisco 675, so the wiring and IP networking is up and running." That gets me past about 5 pages of tedious script. A few CBOS commands and I can usually convince them it's on their end, and not just powering on the Cisco Another hint: for Qwest DSL, at least, if you call after the usual working hours (after 6pm Pacific Time, say), support goes to the on-call DSL tech, not the customer service rep in Chennai with a script. I've had much better luck calling after hours. The on-call DSL techs are usually FreeBSD people, too, so if you slip up and say something like "Dag Gum those Convicted Monopolists!" or you actually reveal some knwledge, they seem to appreciate it. |
| salparadise Sep 28, 2005 10:54 AM EDT |
> I actually feel kind of dirty whenever I have to use it Ah, you too? I'm really glad you said that. I thought I was alone. |
| Tsela Sep 28, 2005 10:39 PM EDT |
> I actually feel kind of dirty whenever I have to use it Count me in as well. By the looks of it, it might be more widespread than I thought ;) . |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!