Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18
You know I noticed something about windoze XP and windows operating system in general. This is just my personal setup(so nothing is being proved here). I usually don't shutdown my ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    0

    The Ultimate Irony?


    You know I noticed something about windoze XP and windows operating system in general. This is just my personal setup(so nothing is being proved here). I usually don't shutdown my computers. This way when I wake up everythings waiting for me. This is what I get out Windows XP.

    XP + modern laptop = ****
    I'm lucky if windows can stay running for 10 minutes, let alone an hour.


    XP + desktop = tolerable

    If I don't do anything special, and have a truckload of ram. I have a system that is decent for running games and ...(I'll think of what else I can do with windows later) . Windows file system still is'nt the best for storing information. I guess after dowloading the whole internet, then erasing, then downloading again I guess fragmentation starts to happen. Oh well. Basically after a few days, my performance starts to go downhill.

    XP + nearly decade old computer(233mhz underclocked to 175mhz and 64 megs of ram.) yes its actually possible.

    I'm a little bit hesitant to run anything big on this. So far notepad looks good. And believe it or not Quake 2 is almost playable. Lol!

    Total uptime with XP + piece of 'crap' old computer

    aprox 3 days and still going


    hmmmm

    I wonder how long this masochistic experiment will run?

    I'm not saying that XP neccessarily runs better on slower computers, but it sure seems to stay up longer. This is interesting for window's 'cutting edge' software.

  2. #2
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    97
    XP + nearly decade old computer(233mhz underclocked to 175mhz and 64 megs of ram.) yes its actually possible.
    You win the patience prize.

  3. #3
    Linux Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Luton, England, UK, Earth
    Posts
    639
    I was thinking the same thing

  4. #4
    Linux User cayalee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    england
    Posts
    389
    good god man! have you nothing better to with your time than wait for a week for that resource hog to boot up on a 233????
    i get annoyed waiting for dam small linux (50mb big) to boot on my 233
    You know, aliens are going to come to earth in 50 years and kill the hell out of us for DDoSing their networks with this SETI crap
    registered linux user #388463

  5. #5
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    85
    yea, it certainly is your personal experience.

    because linux WILL run for a longer period of time than windoze. Hell, windoze even has a clock in it that goes up to like...67 days? Than you need to restart.

    Im pretty certain a light-weight distro would run a helluva lot better on that old machine than XP could.

  6. #6
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    41
    Damn. Well, I hope that you get some time although I would have to say that if you get anything above 5 days I'll be shocked. Linux has been on for like 12 days with me before I started messing with GRUB and had to reboot to test it. Other than that, I basically forget about it and then the power kicks out or something and it reboots. And do yourself a favor with an older setup like that and get Feather or Damn Small or something similar

  7. #7
    Linux Guru bigtomrodney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    6,133
    Well it needs to be said that XP by default has an asynchronous login, meaning unstarted services won't keep the system from appearing to be up and running. It will probably appear to come up as quick as a modern PC, then spend another 10 minutes finishing the job. Also noticeable is that NT takes the same time to boot on a PII 200MHz as it does on a 2.8GHz P4.

  8. #8
    Linux Engineer
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Farnborough, UK
    Posts
    1,305
    Quote Originally Posted by bigtomrodney
    It will probably appear to come up as quick as a modern PC, then spend another 10 minutes finishing the job.
    Witnessed!!!!

    And the first click on the 'Start' button will send it into another rectal spasm.
    Lansbury's Lido

    thekiadriver on #linuxforums - fleetingly

  9. #9
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    forums.gentoo.org
    Posts
    1,817
    Can anyone comment on this thread? If I understand correctly, XP is designed to kill bootloaders other than MS's. If that's the case, it is indefensible.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpaceSquad
    Hell, windoze even has a clock in it that goes up to like...67 days? Than you need to restart.
    Is that true?
    /IMHO
    //got nothin'
    ///this use to look better

  10. #10
    Linux Guru budman7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Knee deep in Grand Rapids, Michigan
    Posts
    3,242
    Quote Originally Posted by drakebasher
    Can anyone comment on this thread? If I understand correctly, XP is designed to kill bootloaders other than MS's. If that's the case, it is indefensible.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpaceSquad
    Hell, windoze even has a clock in it that goes up to like...67 days? Than you need to restart.
    Is that true?
    No, XP will not continue to kill other bootloaders.
    A virus could kill a bootloader, but Windows will not, unless you continue to reinstall or run fixmbr.
    How to know if you are a geek.
    when you respond to "get a life!" with "what's the URL?"
    - Birger

    New users read The FAQ

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •