Otherwise, on a normal keyboard with just standard keys, which key would you use for that? I realize Architecturally, win2k and winxp are almost identical.
They differ only in version number of components, plus some minor addons in winxp. These means most things are pre-configured, or they have to be configured via wizards. Together with the stupid animations and quirks here and there, it make winxp extremely kindergatenish. Many people argue that the n00bish stuff can be disabled, but why go through the trouble turning off the unwanted cruft one by one while win2k have that by default?
As win2k is already aged, win2k3 is a better successor as a workstation OS than winxp. Usig this method you can have it boot up for the first time with all the dross, games, useless utilities and brightly-coloured themes uninstalled and disabled so it comes up looking like Win2K and having used vastly less space as they never get installed in the first place. From that point its far quicker to set up an XP box than a Win one. XP loads faster, is faster, can take advantage of new technology better, is more stable, has better multimedia, has better security, and actually makes multiuser possible.
The last one was the deal breaker for me. At home, I like to have multiple accounts; one admin, and at least one regular user. I use the regular user the vast majority of time.
While run as exists, it is extremely limited in what it supports. Back when I had Windows , I had to close everything, lose my entire workspace, log in as admin, do some administratrive tasks, and then log in again as a regular user. This got annoying very quick. Now that I am using XP, it is just a matter of switching users and doing my work.
Anyways, after turning of all the graphical stuff and making Windows use classic mode, Windows XP is superior to in every way. Instead of Windows 9x, Windows Pro is reliable and compatible. Only when I want to buy a piece of hardware I have to ask if it works on Windows Mostly it was not a problem.
Windows includes every feature with W98 also has except the crashes. Even you can play games on Windows This is for me a big miracle. It is just going from crash to crash. It took me a long time to move to XP from I think was a very good OS. Because MS have started cutting away at 2k — you cannot stay with it. That is I feel the truth. Starting with the browser, but not limited to it, MS have begun the process of cutting away and leaving end users exposed. More and more reason to move to XP.
Because the MS system IS one where you dance to their tune, You can take seperate steps to refrain from this. But these are steps like running firewalls, or different applications, or avoiding security problems with other methods, and working round new function being denied in 2k.
But on the other hand, at some stage you will find it suitable to move from 2k. In terms of UI, you can shut off the new shell enhancements and go back to a 2k shell in XP. But I myself see that in truth XP is where new additional function has been applied.
Examples would be better wireless support in SP2 — better security to some degree, better handling of USB2, better browser security. But beyond that, other areas like sysprep were much improved. I liked 2k, and I still do, but its carrying more baggage and issues — which is a shame. Its just no longer viable to do it for me. I could blame MS for that, but they provide XP — and our corp lic allows free upgrade, so what am I bitching about?
They provide the fix to the issue… until next time. But this is a bit moot now. XP is on SP2, and longhorn is on the way. MS is still releasing bugfixes for IE to Windows And when all support for windows is stopped then XP will follow shortly after, having almost the same age.
Windows has the same functionality in this area. You ought to know that — if you have used Win2K that is :p. This is an extra peace of technology that have no value to me, and that potentially can make my system unusable if something goes wrong.
It is also bad for long term data security. Win2k had some advantages like USB support, but really nothing that made the upgrade worth the cost in a business setting.
As Longhorn is around the corner it would probably be a good idea to wait for that, or you would soon find you self in the same situation when XP turns unsupported. Another alternative would be to start planning a switch to Linux, by replacing as many applications as possible on your current windows desktop with ones that are cross platform, E. That way, it will be easy to avoid the MS tax and get in control of your IT environment by switching to Linux at a later date by switching to Linux when it gets more mature.
The information for method 3 of this workaround was taken from a Newsgroup post by Gilles Pion on November 14, Anyone who has used Windows XP Home on a network will immediately notice that it is severely impaired when it comes to file sharing.
This is what Microsoft likes to call Simple File Sharing. Windows XP Pro allows simple file sharing to be turned off through an option under Folder options, but this option does not appear in the Home edition. In addition, XP Home does not allow you to share the Program Files folder, the Documents and Settings folder, or the WINNT folder, which can be extremely annoying if you wish to share all your programs with other computers on the network.
Of course, you can still share each directory under Program Files and Documents and Settings individually, but this is a waste of time. The following are some ways to access the Windows style security that is still intrinsically built into XP Home. While this method will work, it is not recommended since any security changes made in Normal mode will overwrite the changes that have been made in safe mode. EXE utility. Search the Internet for more information on using this control-line utility.
This is the method of choice for setting user security permission in Windows XP Home. It is very easy to install and will bring back the Security tab in Normal mode. It is worth considering alternatives.
And I do. But people in this regard HAVE to realise there is a reality out there that does not reside in tech enviroments and discussions — and its real. Alternatives have to both be better and easier to use, with support that matches what is already in place. You can plan as you wish.
I plan in line with what the business accepts. Linux has begun to replace SUN workstations in our shop. It frankly has zero chance of replacing windows workstations. That is the reality. The end users, and management are centred round the microsoft products. They know them, they understand the enough to do their daily work. Firefox lacks enterprise tools, and support, and even if you do roll it, winthin a windows environment, what you do is create a situation where you double your support realities.
You have to support all the queries, problems, security failures and support issues on TWO browsers. Databases again, yes, you could do this. Open office has zero chance of replacing MS office in our shop. This is largely again, politically driven with more people being involved than just IT.
Open Office 2 is quite good, but so is MS office. While suggestions about where you could roll out changes and improve areas is always good at looking at, and if you run some small business where you can call the shots, then cool. These are painful and increase with size and complexity.
Business drives IT. IT does not drive the business. Linux advocates seem to not realise this in most of their postings. Linux software is not cheaper to run. Its not per se better for the organisation. Now this is very organisational dependant. You may be in a company where you have mostly techs who can cope with the change. But many businesses do not. In the environment I currently face — I can tell you the exact picture. I have converted on department to linux — and they were using SUN workstations, and still do, but to a lesser extent.
I have converted a few scientists, but the core reason they were happy to consider this was their number crunching software called R came in multiplatform packs ,and they found the windows version buggy.
I persuaded them to trial linux and they now use it. But get this, they went back to windows for their office, mail and general use. That was despite being shown what linux has, the browsers, Open Office II.. I mean that at the end of the day the IT manager or director has to sell the vision to the rest, and they have to pay for it, they have to switch their users to it, they have to pay for training, they have to absorb the difficulties in working round any shortfalls or failings. In addition, if have to say Linux is not free.
You can role it out free, thats not the argument. Support costs are heavy in linux, at least in an enterprise. Or someone else will. And there are a hell of a lot of MS akin dependencies now in business. The large efforts in Munich and at IBM to move wholly to Linux desktops is a realistic overview as to the very great difficulty in doing this. I like Linux. Its a good UNIX system.
Its a good system for adaptable techs and staffers. And its always improving. But it should only be used or advocated where suitable. And people have to be given a choice. Certainly at senior levels you have to sell this in a winning way and its got to be workable. I also happen to think that despite apple and MS being closed source or proprietry, that they too have things to offer. Vendor lock-in is as awkward in the unix and Linux world as anywhere else. Real support via Red Hat or others carries real costs, and open source is great for developers, and does give you control.
But only if you then take on the code yourself, and this is expensive in itself. Many will prefer MS do this. To a large degree this discussion could be vast, and almost unlimited in scope, but its better to try and hold it to a discussion related to your enviroment or mine, where you have some base to work off It can then be looked into wether its a good fit, and wether costings, support, and other issues mean its workable.
Basically Windows XP is to blame for bringing Ubuntu to my desktop. Trying to force me to activate my software kind of crossed a red line. Microsoft ran a series of television commercials claiming that Windows is reliable and that it can be left unattended for days at a time without human intervention.
Windows is in fact still less reliable and stable than the least reliable version of UNIX even the free ones , and will require a full time maintenance and administration staff, as well as at least a part time staff or independent consultants for recurring repair work. Microsoft has been running a series of television commercials claiming that Windows is secure and immune from hacker and virus attacks.
Windows is in fact still less secure than the least secure version of UNIX even the free ones , and the Windows family of operating systems including Windows is subject to the greatest number of viruses of any operating system family more than 10, as many viruses as the UNIX family of operating systems. Microsoft has been running a series of television commercials claiming that Windows can easily connect to other systems and that it is easy to merge operations on separate Windows systems.
Windows is in fact unable to connect to any other operating system unless the other operating system provides the connectivity UNIX , NetWare , and the Macintosh provide the ability to connect to Windows. Merging multiple Windows systems even just two Windows systems is a difficult and time consuming process subject to errors and loss of data.
Some businesses have been unable to get a new Windows system to correctly run their business, even after more than a year of direct Microsoft support. Click here for sources to purchase a copy of Windows Professional. Release Date: February 17, w Number of bits: 32 Professional and Server , partially 64 Advanced Server w POSIX: partially supported.
File Systems Supported:. Other Systems Emulated:. Graphics Engine:. User Interface graphic :. Graphic Command Shell: Explorer e Windows Professional may be long in the tooth, but it's still a good choice for older equipment. It does infinitely more things than DOS. It overcame the hardware limitations of NT Workstation.
It was way more stable than Windows 9x and could run almost all of the same software. It wasn't encumbered by the restrictions or the hardware overhead of Windows XP and Vista. With some added software and configuration changes, it's relatively secure. What about everything else Microsoft made?
What makes Windows Pro so great? Editor's Picks. The best programming languages to learn in Check for Log4j vulnerabilities with this simple-to-use script.
TasksBoard is the kanban interface for Google Tasks you've been waiting for. Paging Zefram Cochrane: Humans have figured out how to make a warp bubble. Show Comments. Hide Comments. My Profile Log out. Join Discussion.
0コメント