best OS for games?

[Kenny]

2000/xp

 

[nw909]

Windows 3.1.1

j/k

WinXP is my fav.

 

[the_prodigy]

Windows XP is the way to go. Sure, there are a few problems. Like the refresh rate problem (refresh rate capped at 60Hz for some openGL games) and the mouse problem (the mouse behaves weird in games, in CS for example, it's almost as if X and Y axes have different sensitivities). However, you can get the fixes for these anomalies, as I have done. Man it's worth it. I should have switched to WinXP much earlier.

* For the refresh rate problem you can download a utility called 'Reforce'.

* For the mouse problem there is this 5mb patch. Forgot what it's called. This 5 mb patch removes all the weirdness of the mouse (be sure to uncheck "Enable pointer precision", that is, mouse acceleration after you install it). There are also registry fixes for this mouse problem, but they didn't work too well for me.

I had also run Quake III timedemos on demo "four" in Win98, WinME and WinXP at 1024x768x32, full details. The performance was the same. Even in other benchmarks like 3Dmark etc. it was the same. So all the people who say, "Oooh ! WinXP sucks for gaming ! Win98SE all the way !". Well, they can just shove it.

Bottom line: WinXP owns. You know your gonna upgrade from Win98SE some day, might as well do it now.

 

[simmo]

Anyone tried Windows 2003 yet ?, you can get a trial from Microsoft for free ...problem I heards is that its only for servers....BUT!!, I know this guy who said its a thousand times faster than XP pro

 

[nw909]

I dunno, I'll be waiting for "Blackcomb" in 2004.

 

[Logic]

What ever happened to "Longhorn"?

 

[Vino]

Originally posted by SirMcNugget
I also happen to think people who use Linux simply to spite Microsoft are stupid. ... I also dont think that communism or being a "hippy" are related to linux.

I don't want to start another OS war, I just want to comment on this.

Yes, Linux has become sort of an underground fad. People use it instead of Windows to assert their internet status quo. Great...lets move on.

I happen to have a seething hate for Microsoft. There's no doubt that theyre an evil corporation...they've proven it multiple times. Windows as a result is not superior because it is well-written, portable, powerful, fast, scaleable, stable, secure, or any thing like that. Listen up kids, Windows is popular because Microsoft knows how to run a monopoly.

Okay, don't miss my point. I'm not saying that Windows is better or worse, I'm saying that it's not where it is because of how good it is. Now, with that point made, I'm going to add the point that Linux beats Windows out of the box on each of the categories I mentioned.

Notice I didn't mention useful. Most software is written for Windows, and therefore a user can be more productive, when his/her software works. The one thing Windows has going for it is that everybody uses it. So, what happens if any good percentage of the populus starts using Linux? I think the point I'm trying to get across is evident.

However, that hasn't happened yet, and most software is still Windows-based. Fine. But Microsoft doesn't write everything for windows... in my seething hate for Microsoft, I'm systematically replacing every peice of software I can for Windows with an open-source equivalent. MSIE has gone for Mozilla Firebird, Explorer has gone for WinBB, and I've even replaced the notepad.exe executable with an open-source version with more functionality. I've also shut down about twenty services on my box that I don't use.

Since I've made these changes, my box has run ten times smoother. I can download and run open-source software without fear of spyware, malware, or adware. I can know that there is a team of people ready and able to put out patches for any issues that may arise at any time. Since the source is open, the software is trusted, simple as that. I do not fear the Big Brother with Open Source.

Essentially, getting around to the communism thing, that's what Microsoft is all about, playing Big Brother. I feel with the Linux "hippies" on this, because as far as metaphors go, Windows == oppression && Linux == freedom. Close the source, and you come under the fear of not knowing what is in your software. Why does MSIE take so long to open? You don't know. It's probably doing things you don't want/care about. However, you can be assured for now and evermore that there is no Open Source bloat/spy/ad/mal ware. And were Linux to have all the bad qualities of Windows and none of the good, you would still trust it more then Windows, that is the benefit of Linux.

Thus, you have the pluses and minuses of computer software for the new millenium.

 

[theGreenBunny]

I fully agree with you Vino, that's exactly what I'm thinking.

I personally use 98SE, I have it running quite stable and it isn't as much of a resource hog as XP.

 

[nilbus]

Way to go, vino. I couldn't have said it better myself.

I personally run linux because it is well-written, portable, powerful, fast, scaleable, stable, and secure. A lot of people don't, because the things they do don't have a linux-port. Half-life for example. wine emulation just isn't good enough. My point is, Linux is better, but until it is a mainstreen operating system, it's not an option for a lot of people.

I guess the next best thing is exactly what you did Vino. props man

 

[Anthraxxx]

Originally posted by nw909
Windows 3.1.1

j/k

WinXP is my fav.

[nostalgia]
Windows 3.1.1 Oh the memories....
[/nostalgia]

Originally posted by Logic
What ever happened to "Longhorn"?

Not out yet. I think.