Message Board
Register

Re: I half-agree with you ...

Posted by jesusjanitor on .
Ah I see. I was assuing it was a system that wouldn't be able to run run a new version of Windows. Newer versions are a lot more system intensive than XP, the size of the hard-disk being the least of your worries.. Make sure you have a powerful enough CPU and enough RAM at least, and a decent video card. I've also heard Windows 8.1 actually runs better than 7 on equivilant machines.

I've had very little problems running windows programs on Ubuntu. I actually use the WIN version of pcsx-r because for some reason it seems to run better on Ubunutu than it does on Windows.

In reply to: Re: I half-agree with you ... posted by Tricob on .
Well, I'm going to be installing Windows 7 on the bigger harddisk. The smaller harddisk will be running on a hand-me-down Dell machine.

Having tried Ubuntu, it runs most of what I need ... expect a compiler that makes Windows-based EXEs, and a Midi composer that's simple enough. I've avoided Ubuntu variations at this point simply because not as many programs support it. I remember running KUbuntu, and it had but a fraction of what Ubuntu offered.

Windows XP still has a considerable portion of users at this point in time, but it's not the majority anymore; Windows 7 is. Win7 has about twice as many users, and I'd expect that OS to be the target of most hacker attempts.

From what I can tell, MS has done very little over the years to improve the security of the WinXP system itself, or any OS, for that matter. Instead, they tack on additional programs and have the OS run them. I can see how MS would find this easier to do, as communication is extremely poor on how the OS is written. It's easier to write a standalone program the OS runs than it is to make massive changes to the system itself.

- Tricob.


Replies:
Re: I half-agree with you ...
Tricob -- 10/22/2014 8:04 pm UTC