Staredit Network

Staredit Network -> Serious Discussion -> Next Version Of Windows Set For 2006
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Shmeeps on 2004-08-30 at 19:03:45
QUOTE
Damn I can't find the link... 

Aston?
http://www.astonshell.com
I believe.
BTW: Congrats on the Mod position biggrin.gif
Report, edit, etc...Posted by BeeR_KeG on 2004-08-30 at 19:07:28
Thanks on both occations shmeeps.

You were first to notice on mod position(I think)
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Shmeeps on 2004-08-30 at 19:40:10
QUOTE
Thanks on both occations shmeeps.

You were first to notice on mod position(I think)

Hehe, I looked at general gaming and say Beer_keg.
I went
"..... That's new"
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Andy on 2004-08-30 at 23:00:13
If someone wants to be a help, email me the key for aston, because I dont like the nag screen.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2004-08-31 at 16:23:59
A new OS? They make enough of them and they still can't get it right.

That's the problem that surfaces when a company has a monopoly.
Here's a little lesson in economics:

Company has a monopoly =
No competition for customers =
Prices rise and product quality stagnates.

Many (strong) companies in one market =
Intense competition for customers =
Prices fall and product quality increases.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by mobomojo on 2004-09-01 at 15:13:53
yknow, rather than complain that windows xp sucks, you should look in another direction; if you dont have enough memory to even run that, you should consider uprading your comp in the near future. like 5 years ago 64mb ram was considered high. nowadays 256mb is the standard, with 516mb and one gig of ram being high.

xp may suck a bit, but you gotta go with the times.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CheeZe on 2004-09-01 at 20:08:43
Aston = After about 4 days still unregistered..it still says "30 days left" intersting...

mobomojo - xp sucks because it requires more memory, just because we get more doesn't mean we can use it like that.

windows 98 = less memory, more stability

windows xp = more memory, less stability

now tell me which one is better?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Shmeeps on 2004-09-02 at 21:36:14
QUOTE
Aston = After about 4 days still unregistered..it still says "30 days left" intersting...


Really, mines propmting for my key right now, I had it for three days...

QUOTE
yknow, rather than complain that windows xp sucks, you should look in another direction; if you dont have enough memory to even run that, you should consider uprading your comp in the near future. like 5 years ago 64mb ram was considered high. nowadays 256mb is the standard, with 516mb and one gig of ram being high.

xp may suck a bit, but you gotta go with the times.

You mean 512, right?
Also, yeah, you need lots of RAM, incase anyone hasn't read my other post, Microsoft recommends that you have at least 128MB of RAM to run XP
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DJ_Dan on 2004-09-04 at 22:59:07
Maybe by the time that windows comes out, people will be using Linux or something else... who knows
Report, edit, etc...Posted by T.s.u.k.a.s.a on 2004-09-16 at 17:39:07
I hate the Windows XP storage method. Max shared files is retarted because if you delete 1 thing, 10 other things won't work properly. Manually deleting larger programs is a major pain. You have to check every file to make sure other programs don't use or need it. I hope they add better search. Can't stand those off topic sites. I will STRANGLE chair.gif them if they don't change the method by 2010. I got 512 MB of RAM. I'm gonna get another 512 soon. Just biggrin.gif $15 more. smile.gif
Next Page (2)