Windows Xp

I’ve come to the conclusion that upgrading to Windows Vista would be a horrible decision; allow me to explain why. Cost: The main reason behind doing or not doing most things with PCs is cost. An upgrade to Windows Vista Ultimate will set you back $200 or more dollars. But that’s just the start! Chances are the hardware that runs at speed or soars with Windows XP will run dreadfully slow with Windows Vista. So not only are you looking at the cost of the operating system but you need cutting edge technology to run that operating system. Why in the world would you want to buy new hardware for your operating system? I could understand an application or series of applications (for video editing as an example) pushing you to buy new hardware but not the operating system. The only reason I see in upgrading now would be to learn the new OS and be on the cutting edge. ...

After having issues with a Western Digital 200 GB hard drive and Windows XP I thought it would be beneficial to put my notes into some sort of guide for other people that might have a problem with Windows and drives that are bigger than 137 GB (128 GB binary). Windows XP Service Pack 1 eliminates the 137 GB (128 GB binary) barrier (Windows XP SP1 includes 48-bit LBA support for ATAPI disk drives). The Microsoft Knowledge Base Article: How to Enable 48-bit Logical Block Addressing Support for ATAPI Disk Drives in Windows XP is something everyone should read if they are having the problem of a large hard drive not being completely recognized. This Knowledge Base Article could help you solve your problem quickly but if it doesn’t then continue reading. Do bare in mind that you MUST have Windows XP SP1 to use a hard disk that has a capacity that is greater than 137 GB. ...

Microsoft and its products and services are slowly destroying the Internet or at the very least changing the dynamics of the Internet. There are three main reasons for this rift in the Internet. The first reason is Microsoft’s standards. The second reason is the popularity of Microsoft software. The final reason is the security (or lack thereof) of Microsoft software. When you combine these three reasons together you get a potential Internet killer. ...

This will be the final article in the “Moving to Linux” series. The Moving to Linux plan had been going along as it should. My Western Digital 200 GB hard drive arrived and I was ready and waiting with a freshly burned copy of Red Hat 9. All the research I had previously done indicated that there shouldn’t be any major issues because of all the key components in my computer being compatible with Linux. ...

For the past year or so Microsoft has repeatedly said no to Open Source and more recently after numerous attempts to say no has opened up some of its source code to various businesses and governments. Imagine a world where Microsoft Windows and Office were totally open. That’s not likely; so let’s imagine a world where Microsoft made its products a little more open. What do you think would happen if Microsoft kept its kernel under wraps and released just its GUI out to the world as Open Source? Once the major code heads cleaned out all the crap, I imagine a Redhat or a Mandrake would quickly come out with its combo of Linux with the Windows GUI. Similar attempts have been made in the past to make a Windows-like GUI but now it seems that the Linux community is looking at Gnome and KDE to “bridge the gap” between Windows and Linux users. Why would Microsoft do this? Well, control of course. If the majority of users were using a Microsoft-based GUI then most of the people in world would feel more inclined to use these operating systems as opposed to learning a new one. Think about it, the power of Unix with the ease of Windows. Another thing is money. Microsoft could charge a small lump some for the GUI to individuals and corporations or (the more likely of the two) charge a small fee for every copy of the Windows GUIed operating system sold. This would take away from the freeness of Linux but I’d bet money IBM would jump all over it. Consumers would as well. But, if you made Linux and Unix as easy as Windows then the market share of Windows would begin to slip a little. Linux and Unix would still need a competitive productivity suite. ...