10 Reasons why Windows still sucks

English Open Chat
#1

If it’s sunny warm day expect a failure or was that cloudy and chilly?

Not that Linux or Mac are perfect but Windows desktop just isn’t cut out for 24x7 operations. Godbid you automatic updates then the you’ll have shutdown the system and restart. By the way that happens to also be the way to fix Windows errors. My most recent headache caused by unknown reasons was the sudden seizure of one of my wireless driver components that opened every port on the interface to run the cpu at 100%. Yep, no virus found, restore last good restore points lasted ½ a day before 100% cpu usage again.

That’s reason #2. The dreaded REGISTRY file!!!
It was an acceptable tracking system for DOS until about Windows 3.1. Microsoft should have gotten rid of the Registry files for Windows 3.11 and beyond. I’m not sure what the Registry does for Windows 7. I do think it adds to the number of overall files tracked by the Master File Table, which when filled causes constant defragmenting by the new semi-automatic Windows 7 background defrag. Same when the MFT is too small for the number of files on the system. One day I find out how to enlarge the MFT table to handle more files.

So, I’m editing the Registry Current User or Current Hardware? **
Or will I kill my PC forever by removing this entry? The best anyone can do I think is to backup the entire registry. Then backup the registry item about to be changed or deleted. Windows doesn’t help but you’re lucky you’re making a change you’ve found on the Microsoft Support.
**
The ever helpful search for a solution
Of course Microsoft please search for a solution. Has anyone ever received a worthwhile solution? After a few minutes I’ve canceled I have nothing.

Wait a minute. Here’s a solution I always love.
I can’t get to the Internet through the my wireless. The solution actually tells me to go online for more solutions. Give me break.

 **Then there's the Events.  ** 
 I'm going to give Microsoft a break.  Events can be helpful because even if you can't debug the message Events at least points to an area you can investigate.   Otherwise whatever error 00348992 means is between you and your machine.  Originally, Microsoft did provide replies to these errors when you sent them.  That's righ, pre-Dr. Watson if you were lucky you really did get a reply from Microsoft for the error code you submitted.  Not too many users back then I guess.

But it’s still DOS
A far as I’m concerned Windows still runs on top of DOS. That and the Registry file are the reasons why with every Windows OS version release your memory, cpu and hardware requirements increase. Seriously Windows 7 Home Premium on 1 meg?
**
Then why am I still using Windows?**
Well, because it’s been around for so long and has that huge customer base along with hardware vendors support for APIs, ActiveX, DirectX and stuff. So, if you want Netflix you have to use Windows, Mac or probably IOS. Stuff on the Internet you’d think was open to all OS’es is proprietary just for the Windows OS.
**
That **ed Registry again.
Turns out that quite a number of programs and applications use the Registry file. Some of those programs won’t run if because the Registry file ties these into the Windows OS. So many other programs are tied to the Windows OS. Seriously!! This doesn’t isolate programs from other programs that fail or crashes the system. Doesn’t make it a secure system to me. All above because Windows has a large base of users and vendors.

Finally it runs 3D Games across the installed base
Embarrassed to say that Windows 7 runs 3D games. I know that Linux has 3D games but those are not the quality or quantity available to Windows. Mass Effect 2, Halo Reach, Call of Duty: Black Ops, StarCraft 2, World of WarCraft, etc. Yes I know Wine, not the same. Here’s is where I think there’s opportunity for vendors to charge for their proprietary applications. In other words could Bungee, BioWare, Electronic Arts, etc. make money off native Linux Editions without breaking their licenses or copyrights. I’m comfortable with the open source versions of Windows software that’s available for the desktop like LibreOffice, Gimp, MySQL, etc. but great 3D and 3D online gaming aren’t available in native Linux.

#2

High praise to Windows (tongue in cheek mode):

1: It is bloated, and full of eye candy. So it requires lots of memory and processor cycles to run. This pushes innovation in the chip designers and forces down the prices of hardware. The result - I can buy a relatively inexpensive box for unix with lots of memory and lots of processor power.

2: It guarantees full employment for competent computer scientists for many years into the future.

#3

On 06/12/2011 02:06 AM, tararpharazon wrote:
>
> But it’s still DOS

mid-1990’s definition:

Windows 95: n. 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit
patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit
microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that can’t stand 1 bit of
competition. <http://monster-island.org/tinashumor/humor/win2bit.html
and many other places…originating author?>

to get to 16 years later (today) not much is changed:

Windows 7: n. 64 bit rehash of 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell
for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4
bit microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that can’t stand 1 bit
of competition.

–
dd CAVEAT: http://is.gd/bpoMD
via NNTP openSUSE 11.4 [2.6.37.6-0.5] + KDE 4.6.0 + Thunderbird 3.1.10
Acer Aspire One D255, 1.66 GHz Atom, 1 GB RAM, Intel Pineview graphics

  • When your gecko is broken you have a reptile dysfunction! *
#4

A great definition of Windows! I’ll keep it handy.

#5

I have started Windooze 2 days ago again, after… hmm?.. 2 or 3 months or so. Now the wireless didn´t work anymore. As I shut it down 3 months ago, everything was fine… after fiddeling with it for half an hour, I found out that the system has set the encryption from WPA2 to WPA… but why???

This is the 11th reason why windows sucks. Settings change on their own. You can not trust it to do the stuff like you want it to do.

#6

C’mon guys, Windows is much better than Linux (any flavor). Why? A simple reboot usually solves the problem.

#7

But it’s still DOS

I am not an expert when it comes to Windows, but isn’t that utterly wrong? As far as I know, the DOS-subsystem of Windows is running independently from the rest of the actual system since at least Win XP (edit: it does so since NT). Meanwhile it gets harder and harder to run DOS-apps within current versions of Windows.

Also I do not quite understand the point of this thread.

#8

There is no point. >:)

#9

Well they could, but they won’t.

I don’t think it has anything to do with licenses or copyrights. Linux just simply does not matter in that field.
Linux is also not present in the demo competition field for other reasons. But that doesn’t say anything about an OS anyway.

#10

gropiuskalle wrote:

>
>> But it’s still DOS
>
> I am not an expert when it comes to Windows, but isn’t that utterly
> wrong? As far as I know, the DOS-subsystem of Windows is running
> independently from the rest of the actual system since at least Win XP
> (edit: it does so since NT). Meanwhile it gets harder and harder to
> run DOS-apps within current versions of Windows.
>
> Also I do not quite understand the point of this thread.
>
DOS is in fact no integrated part of windows since Windows NT was introduced
(which I had the pleasure to use as main programming platform in my job from
1995 on). The only way from that moment on to run a DOS application (beside
using Win 95) was to use the 16bit emulation which came with the system
(maybe some people still remember error messages like “your 16bit subsystem
has encountered an error” then running some no longer supported application
which used native DOS calls which violated the protection mode of 32 bit
windows).

Since also the consumer versions of windows are since Win 2000 (so it
applies to XP/Vista/7) based on the NT core (ignoring Win ME which was the
last one which was different) there is nothing like a DOS in all that
windows versions but the command shell (cmd.exe) which is not more than a
shell which executes commands which are named after the old DOS commands but
has absolutely nothing in common with the originals beside the syntax.

I also do not get the point from the OP about the registry which did not
exist (contrary to the claim made in the first post) in DOS or windows
before NT.

It may be funny to post a “Windows sucks” thread in a linux forum, but I
think it should be technically correct (even in chit caht). Otherwise it is
just bashing.

So I also do not understand the point of the thread.

–
PC: oS 11.3 64 bit | Intel Core2 Quad Q8300@2.50GHz | KDE 4.6.3 | GeForce
9600 GT | 4GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.6.3 | nVidia
ION | 3GB Ram

#11

While I agree with your last two comments, I must say: If we WERE still using DOS, programs might still actually work and we might be more productive. For the most part, I miss the times when computers were simpler. At least back then, people took their time and were forced to write cleaner code. Now everyone just copies and pastes resulting in a lot of fluff that doesn’t need to be there. Just because we have loads of space and power, doesn’t mean we need to write bloated programs.

#12

I’m one of those programmers who does not want to go back to the stone age. If we were still using DOS, my average production of code would be something like 20 lines per day. These days I don’t (example) have to write code to generate barcodes, I just release the input and “barcode” does the rest, returning a nice png that I can embed. And, think of something like “multi-user” without having to lock each record before read/write, stuff like that.

#13

On 3/19/2012 1:46 PM, royleerecords wrote:
>
> While I agree with your last two comments, I must say: If we WERE still
> using DOS, programs might still actually work and we might be more
> productive. For the most part, I miss the times when computers were
> simpler. At least back then, people took their time and were forced to
> write cleaner code. Now everyone just copies and pastes resulting in a
> lot of fluff that doesn’t need to be there. Just because we have loads
> of space and power, doesn’t mean we need to write bloated programs.
>
>

I always wonder why topics like this are still there.
You can always argue that Windows is a cancer, but at the same time
Linux does not take off as a desktop operating system.
There are countless arguments that are made, but the fact stays that on
the desktop Windows rules.

I do share the thought though. If i remember my old days with the amiga,
it was just simpler. Well, ok there was no multi user interface but
multitasking. And it took Apple a long time to have multitasking with
their expensive machines.

I remember using a bbs program called AmiXpress (/X) that consisted of
icons. You basically were doing everything via icons. This was pretty
cool and easy.

Well, what i miss if i think of DOS days is the Ansi arts and
representation. Todays OS’s are much more powerful and enable to do much
more at the same time. With Dos its just not as convenient or possible.

But unlike most of the people here, i am not a programmer and do less
and less these days with a computer.

–
ACCESS DENIED…
Linux Counter: 548299 https://linuxcounter.net/

/_/
/ o o
/~ =ø= /
(______)__m_m) el cato

#14

Amazing, 20+ years after first release- windows still sucks, kinda of like the 'Dodge" of computer OSes.

#15

Does it really matter if Windows sucks? From a Mac perspective, Linux sucks. It’s all a game,really. What I would like to see is a system which is sold with a minimal hypervisor installed, which then allows any OS to run as a VM, so that the customer picks and chooses an OS like I choose a sandwich from a deli cart. Why don’t we have this? Why am I only allowed only three choices from off-the-shelf hardware cart? Windows, Mac, or Ubuntu? There are many other OS’s out there - Solaris, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Netware, etc. Why limit oneself to only Linux?

#16

Because a lot of linux users are not aware that they’re still suffering from a winduist attitude. When they ran Windows, linux was for nerds. Now that they run linux, BSD is for nerds, Windows for the feebleminded. IMHO they miss one point, and that is where the “F” and “O” stand for in FOSS.

#17

I love my Windows. Especially when it shows me that beautiful blue screen. :slight_smile:

#18

On 2013-10-09 04:46, Genkakuzai wrote:
>
> I love my Windows. Especially when it shows me that beautiful blue
> screen. :slight_smile:

I have not seen it in a decade.

–
Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4, with Evergreen, x86_64 “Celadon” (Minas Tirith))

#19

On 2013-10-08, BSDuser <BSDuser@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
>
> Does it really matter if Windows sucks? From a Mac perspective, Linux
> sucks. It’s all a game,really. What I would like to see is a system
> which is sold with a minimal hypervisor installed, which then allows any
> OS to run as a VM, so that the customer picks and chooses an OS like I
> choose a sandwich from a deli cart. Why don’t we have this?

Do you seriously think that all OEM installations should routinely run operating systems within a VM?

> Why am I
> only allowed only three choices from off-the-shelf hardware cart?
> Windows, Mac, or Ubuntu?

Do you seriously think it’s realistic for vendors to provide after-sales support for dozens of different operating
systems.

> There are many other OS’s out there - Solaris,
> FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Netware, etc. Why limit oneself to only Linux?

Do you seriously think that choosing `Linux’ imposes a dramatic limitation on one’s choice of operating system compared
to say Apple’s MacOS?

If the answer to any of these questions is `yes’, then you have truly enlightened our understanding …

> From a Mac perspective

#20

Obviously you can run many different systems if you have the tenacity to play with multiboot or use of a VM program on top of Windows or Linux. And obviously Windows or OS/X is the path of least resistance for most people.
But if I reformat my system openSUSE, and go play on my laptop in Small World here in Princeton, sitting next to someone who is using his Win. 7 laptop, should I in any way feel 'superior" to him or “smarter”?
Do I want people passing by to see my GNOME Desktop? It’s like the guy riding down the street playing his radio way too loud - he wants to be noticed, right? It is certainly not the music he likes, its the act. Thus I think that it is the act of using Linux which appeals to many people, more so that the actual OS. Because they think it is “better.” And it probably is better, especially for browsing, for obvious security reasons, but if they can’t print their Word doc
before the big meeting or class, then trust me, they will be cussing Linux faster than Mr. Wilson cussed at Dennis.

It seems to me that hardware is evolving too rapidly for developers of open systems to keep up with their stable alternatives, so I think the solution is some middleware OS and the user could plug in any OS he liked.
Then the OS developers can focus on a more stable environment, producing a more flexible computing experience for everyone.

But I guess my ideal wont sell, since hardware makers make more money selling new hardware specifically for a particular OS. Ever wonder why System76 costs more than a Dell? I do.