Impact of (possible) decline of gaming on Windows use?

[M0KUJ1N]

Linux...So if you don't know wtf you're doing it can be difficult to use, fagile, hard to keep updated and secure, has limited application availability and doesn't play games...

There, fixed

tbh tho the reasons I like linux are probably the reasons most Windows user's dislike it, and Im quite happy with it as a niche operating system which makes development more productive for people who actually know how to use it. I gave up with the L/OS community here because tbh I cant be bothered talking complete novices through performing fairly involved procedures such as setting up wireless networking on their (bleeding-edge and thus relatively poorly-supported) systems.

Also if Windows is so idiot-proof and robust, how come this forum has about 20 threads a day from people with relatively trivial problems that are either entirely due to their own negligence or that they could answer themselves by spending 10 minutes doing a bit of searching on google?

 

[Glaucus]

Also if Windows is so idiot-proof and robust, how come this forum has about 20 threads a day from people with relatively trivial problems that are either entirely due to their own negligence or that they could answer themselves by spending 10 minutes doing a bit of searching on google?

Most questions are what software to use for this or that. and other third party issues. But again that's the EU fault. Windows can't include all the software they want as its breaking the law .

In it's self windows is a very stable system which is easy to use.

 

[M0KUJ1N]

Most questions are what software to use for this or that. and other third party issues. But again that's the EU fault. Windows can't include all the software they want as its breaking the law .

Not entirely true- my understanding of the ruling was that if affected the inclusion of Media Player as standard with Windows (last I checked, it still comes bundled due to Microsoft appealing the ruling). Therefore this is still unenforced.

In it's self windows is a very stable system which is easy to use.

I'd agree that its a helluva lot more stable than people give it credit for and it's extremely rare for a single application to bring down the entire system with modern (NT-based) Windows OS'es such as XP. However it's still vulnerable to third-party applications and drivers. You could argue that it's a victim of it's own success in this respect.

 

[leezer3]

And this is why linux unless they change there approach will never become mainstream. Most people need a computer which is a doodle to set up and once it's set up is easy to use and stable. As much as people hate it. XP is very stable and you can run it for years with no problems. They don't really mind what it looks like as long as they can browse the web and open office and do some writing there happy.

Not really true
It is easy as anything to use, as long as you stay within the well estabilished GUI config apps. Its when you start manually editing config files and compiling the whole system from scratch that you run into the problems. Even then, someone with half a brain & some knowledge of thier hardware should be able to do most things without a major problem. I could almost voice the opinion that an intelligence test should be enforced to use a PC- The amount of people who have altered a working config & thus broken the system, yet have not kept a backup. You could easily compare tweaking Linux config files to messing in the Windows registry- Very easy to completely break stuff, yet so many good effects.

I'd agree that its a helluva lot more stable than people give it credit for and it's extremely rare for a single application to bring down the entire system with modern (NT-based) Windows OS'es such as XP. However it's still vulnerable to third-party applications and drivers. You could argue that it's a victim of it's own success in this respect.

Rot. WTF do you call a third party application other than an application? I've come across all sorts of stuff, both drivers & applications that'll completely break Windows. Drivers, again they can kill off the whole OS, and this is a significant problem with the whole OS design. Vista tried to rectify this by moving a lot of drivers out of kernel mode & into user mode, but drivers can still kill Vista at the drop of a hat. (The supplied Nvidia driver?- BSOD after standby?!) In Linux, if a driver fails, it'll normally either have no effect on the system as a whole or drop you back to the console, where you can edit it out of the config & reboot. Windows, if it's bad enough is quite often going to end up in a repair install or a full reinstall.

-Leezer-

 

[zetec452]

I suppose I'm almost in a unique position here - I've used both Windows, Linux & OSX exensively. My thoughts on OSX & the MacBook Pro are in this thread: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17645888

Windows- Only reason it's still here is for playing games properly. Unstable heap of junk, and requires far too many third-party apps to get it to what I consider to be a usable state (ObjectBar, RocketDock & various small theme & explorer patches) Even then the OS is a total pain & I'd very much like to get rid of it entirely, but thats not on the cards sadly.

OSX- Fanboy heaven. Very nicely integrated, but its OSX's way, or not at all. Probably too biased through 9 years of Linux usage & customisation, but see the thread I linked to above for the full ramble.

Linux- IMHO where its at. Yes, very easy to break the whole system with a single typo, and can be a pain to update a hugely customised system, but thats half the fun of it
I really couldn't do without the customisation that comes with Linux, and the ability to do things my own way. If it only played games.....

-Leezer-

You're a funny guy. So windows is only about due to gaming? Let see, what about Widnows Server 2003, Active Directory, SBS, SharePoint, Exchange, MS SQL just to name a few windows products. These aren't games. Where's the competition? Linux will run a bit of mail but nothing like exchange, it will also act as a file. The next thing near MS for mail and business services is Novell with Groupwise.

OS X, yes it has the fanboy stigma attached to it, however its a much more usable OS than Linux IMO and is making good ground with more IT orientated people who want some mixed functionality from MS and Linux. However, if it weren't for MacOffice and programs such as dreamweaver and other adobe applications I doubt it would be as popular with the wider audience.

Linux has its place, its not on the desktop computer for most. I've implemented a number Linux servers which have worked perfectly and always will be ahead of Microsoft for these purposes. Linux at personal computer level is a good few years behind XP, however I will acknowledge that it is gaining ground nicely.

For somebody who has used each Operating system extensively you have a rather blind and limited view. You can certainly tell if somebody has experience with operating systems and products by the way they post. To me you sound like a Linux fan boy who can't see the wider picture or the positive and negative sides of operating systems.

Me waits for NathenE (if he can be bothered) to enlighten a few people. .

 

[M0KUJ1N]

Rot. WTF do you call a third party application other than an application? I've come across all sorts of stuff, both drivers & applications that'll completely break Windows. Drivers, again they can kill off the whole OS, and this is a significant problem with the whole OS design. Vista tried to rectify this by moving a lot of drivers out of kernel mode & into user mode, but drivers can still kill Vista at the drop of a hat. (The supplied Nvidia driver?- BSOD after standby?!) In Linux, if a driver fails, it'll normally either have no effect on the system as a whole or drop you back to the console, where you can edit it out of the config & reboot. Windows, if it's bad enough is quite often going to end up in a repair install or a full reinstall.

-Leezer-

Don't quite get what you're on about here. You dismiss my (correct) point as "rot", and then proceed to go into a detailed paragraph agreeing with it!

 

[zetec452]

I'm going to leave this thread now since there's no point trying to have a discussion about merits and differences of various operating systems with someone who insists that for anything to be usable it has to work exactly the same as Windows. Malware not a problem on Windows? I suppose AIDS isn't a problem in Africa either? If OS X offered nothing that Windows can't do, then why the hell do people get themselves locked into a single hardware vendor by using it?

You left your dummy behind mate. Want me to post it to you?

 

[VaderDSL]

For me the only reason I boot camp windows xp is to play eve-online, if I did notplay this game or if there was an os x version I would solely use OS X

 

[FishThrower]

some of the linux fanboy stuff here is hilarious

how can someone say that Linux is far more superior, Linux has got a long, long way to go for it to become mainstream, give it 20 years? nah needs a lot longer than that. How can you say that the Windows GUI is unusable if people have been using it since Windows 95?

 

[NathanE]

That worries me to be honest I disagree with them (and you?)...

I can't say that it worries me, but yeah I do wonder what they're going to come up with. Judging by their new Office '07 "Ribbon" style interface, I think Microsoft is quite on-the-ball recently with GUI. In the past they've been a bit hit and miss (think, "Personalized Menus"!). Even if they keep the same concept of the taskbar but add new intuitive features it would be at least a change. It's shocking to think that the only features the taskbar has gained since windows 95 is precisely: "Lock Taskbar" and the horrible "Grouping" function.

Malware not a problem on Windows

Malware is a problem for certain Windows users, it's not a problem for everyone. Mac OSX is often credited as having the same level of security as regular Unix based OSes but this isn't the case. Apple punched some gigantic holes in the traditional Unix security in order to deliver their lush user experience on time. So much so that Mac OSX is easily the least secure mainstream desktop operating system - excluding Windows 9x (of course ) The reason people rabbit on for days saying OSX is secure is because it is a smaller target than even Linux. Remember when people said the same thing about the Firefox web browser? Well look at it now, now that it's got a large chunk of market share - it's practically swiss cheese in relative comparison to what people were making it out to be just a couple years ago.

Only reason it's still here is for playing games properly

Not really. Games on Windows is just a bonus. The fact of the matter is, and putting Windows' technical advantages aside, Windows has a massive ecosystem (thousands of times larger than all the alternative operating system's put together) for businesses to make money from. That's why it has succeeded and that's why it's still here and will continue to be here for the forseeable future.

Rot. WTF do you call a third party application other than an application? I've come across all sorts of stuff, both drivers & applications that'll completely break Windows. Drivers, again they can kill off the whole OS, and this is a significant problem with the whole OS design. Vista tried to rectify this by moving a lot of drivers out of kernel mode & into user mode, but drivers can still kill Vista at the drop of a hat. (The supplied Nvidia driver?- BSOD after standby?!) In Linux, if a driver fails, it'll normally either have no effect on the system as a whole or drop you back to the console, where you can edit it out of the config & reboot. Windows, if it's bad enough is quite often going to end up in a repair install or a full reinstall.

It's technically impossible for a user-mode application to cause a crash. Unless that user-mode application is coupled with its own custom kernel driver that it makes calls into.

Kernel drivers are the only software on Windows that can cause a BSOD. That's why Microsoft has taken the hard decision in Vista to provide a user-mode driver framework for developers. A user-mode driver has all the same restrictions as any other user-mode application so it cannot cause a BSOD. The worse that can happen is the driver crashes and gets automatically restarted by the UMWDF management process. Not really a big deal. Unfortunately some drivers do of course have to remain in kernel for specific performance reasons - such as I/O and graphics related drivers. This is not a problem though because 90% of these drivers are written and maintained by Microsoft themselves, or their close partners (e.g. Intel, Nvidia or ATi). The Vista drivers may be unstable at the moment but the product has not launched yet so you can't blame them (Nvidia especially) for being a bit slow.

And no, Linux doesn't have drivers. It's not that advanced, jeez. It has "kernel modules". Bits of code that literally get merged into the kernel and then compiled. It's quite retro. Very 1980's. Unfortunately, if something with this merging goes wrong, or with the execution of the code, the whole kernel throws a segmentation fault (in a similar way Windows' throws a BSOD) to protect data integrity. It most certainly does not just auto-magically recover. That's impossible. When a driver crashes it's difficult for the kernel to know at the time if it was a software or hardware error - that's why it must throw a segfault/BSOD to protect data integrity. If this was not the case then what do you think would happen if the PC was being used for, let's say, a billing system? Oh dear... customers get overcharged or maybe even undercharged? Or not charged at all!? When the kernel of any respectable OS is uncertain of its "state", the default action is to stop further execution.

 

[dirtydog]

I can't say that it worries me, but yeah I do wonder what they're going to come up with. Judging by their new Office '07 "Ribbon" style interface, I think Microsoft is quite on-the-ball recently with GUI. In the past they've been a bit hit and miss (think, "Personalized Menus"!). Even if they keep the same concept of the taskbar but add new intuitive features it would be at least a change. It's shocking to think that the only features the taskbar has gained since windows 95 is precisely: "Lock Taskbar" and the horrible "Grouping" function.

It gained quick launch in Windows 98 And the option to hide certain system tray icons. I don't use the latter or the grouped windows thingy either but quick launch is invaluable, all your most commonly-used apps plus an easy way to quickly show the desktop - something else OS X can't do (and exposé isn't the same of course). I never find myself wanting the taskbar to be any different, or to do any more than it does, so I'm wondering what MS think needs fixing?

 

[Caged]

an easy way to quickly show the desktop - something else OS X can't do (and exposé isn't the same of course)

What's F11 do then?

Oh, and NathanE, you can write as much as you like about OS X being the least secure desktop OS, although you are the first to say it. It doesn't look that way from here. You can say it's down to popularity all you like, but from where I'm sitting as the end user, I don't give a damn why I don't have to bother with a virus scanner, I just know that I don't.

Edit: Malware isn't a problem for clued up individuals and business who have clued up individuals to run things for them. That's a tiny percentage of Windows users. For the rest it is a very real issue. I know because I've had to deal with them.

 

[NathanE]

Neither do I bother with a virus scanner

 

[Caged]

I thought we were talking about the "normal user" here? The one that has only ever used Windows and therefore requires everything to be like that?

Would you suggest that they don't use a virus scanner?

 

[Glaucus]

I thought we were talking about the "normal user" here? The one that has only ever used Windows and therefore requires everything to be like that?

Would you suggest that they don't use a virus scanner?

Everyone should use a virus scanner on every operating system. Just because there's not many about. There will be some for every operating system. However safe you think that OS is. It's like copyright protection. doesn't matter how secure they make it. Some people will always be able to bypass it. Same with ios security.

 

[NathanE]

I thought we were talking about the "normal user" here? The one that has only ever used Windows and therefore requires everything to be like that?

Would you suggest that they don't use a virus scanner?

Windows users have two choices... enable automatic updates for free protection from malware. Or pay Symantec/McAfee or whoever to remove the malware once the damage has already been done.

I prefer and recommend the former as it is proactive security as opposed to reactive. Of course, having both is a plus but not really required.

It's wrong to blame Windows just because it is the mass target of attack. If everyone thought like this then everyone would have deserted England to go to places they perceived the grass to be greener during WW1/2

 

[Caged]

I was under the impression that Windows Defender offered no protection from viruses though, just internet based "spyware". Windows Security Center seems to think they are different, anyway.

Edit: Why is it wrong to blame Windows? Certainly there are some viruses which would have happened anyway, but you can't take the position that it has nothing to do with design decisions that the Windows team made. Executable code in picture files? Open RPC service ports?

 

[NathanE]

Viruses? Do they still exist?

Never used Defender, but I think you're right - it's just anti-spyware.

 

[Caged]

Viruses? Do they still exist?

Microsoft seem to think so . Judging by the need for Security Center to remind you if you don't have a scanner installed (yes I know you can disable it).

You do make a good point though, most things these days are either worms (Blaster) or more recently "spyware". Routers at home, firewalls enabled by default, and things like Defender are probably all you need now.

 

[NathanE]

I think virus development is quite dormant. Even spyware is on the decline. Instant messaging malware is hotting up