www.dead-donkey.com
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/

Windows 2003
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=2973		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  TaKYoN [ Thu Feb 19, 2004 1:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Windows 2003
DO you guys know if there is any security/stability benefits to running 2003? Also, you guys know of any compatability issues with software like firewall or AV?

I only ask cos I am getting bored and need a change LOL Linux is not an option for the time being as the family just like windows too much.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Thu Feb 19, 2004 4:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
Code:
do
  if (2003 == XP) {
    System.out.println ("Indeed, they are the same");
    Tackyon = realise;
  } else {
   System.out.println("I disagree my good fellow");
while (Tackyon != realise);
Author:  carlos66 [ Fri Feb 20, 2004 1:00 pm ]
Post subject: 
:lol:

some programs may refuse to install though

I read somewhere that in most cases if you force them to install they should work, but I did'n pay attention to it, simply replaced Kerio 2 with Winnroute and Norton Antivirus with Symantec Antivirus Corporate

as for stability/security: yeah, for home user it's pretty the same
Author:  TaKYoN [ Fri Feb 20, 2004 1:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
It's OK now, the urge to completely kill my system has passed again. I get these urges usually when I am bored, and 90% of the time it results in a system meltdown LOL Maybe I could install windows 3.1 again?
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
why not windows 1.0, who needs networking? :mrgreen:

Why not install SloungHorn? :lol:
Author:  TaKYoN [ Fri Feb 20, 2004 4:45 pm ]
Post subject: 
I assume you mean LongHorney Mr spud? Seems like it is still shit, altho being MS it will be shit when launched anyways. I aint really into alpha and beta releases much, shit I got is unstable enuff as it is without adding more unstable shit, damn my PC is about as stable as Mr S Husseins current political status.
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:40 pm ]
Post subject: 
the only thing really bad with it when i had it was the sidebar was broken, apart from that it was XP.

imo just install XP or a linux distro, everything else is pointless or sucks; hence why no one really uses them.
Author:  r3nton [ Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:19 pm ]
Post subject: 
spudthedestroyer wrote:
imo just install XP or a linux distro, everything else is pointless or sucks; hence why no one really uses them.


now why would u say something like that? :P i've been using win2k for years. there's no other windows that rock stable out there and will never be.

btw has anybody tryed using eMule on some of the windows emulators (wine etc) on linux?
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Thu Feb 26, 2004 1:04 am ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
i've been using win2k for years. there's no other windows that rock stable out there and will never be.


2k == winxp

The changes to the kernal are 100% insignificant, they are as stable as each other.
Author:  EagleEater [ Thu Feb 26, 2004 2:14 am ]
Post subject: 
TaKYoN wrote:
It's OK now, the urge to completely kill my system has passed again. I get these urges usually when I am bored, and 90% of the time it results in a system meltdown LOL Maybe I could install windows 3.1 again?


Maybe my talk of win ME has got yer juices flowing there Tak. :D
Author:  r3nton [ Thu Feb 26, 2004 4:20 am ]
Post subject: 
spudthedestroyer wrote:
2k == winxp

The changes to the kernal are 100% insignificant, they are as stable as each other.


yeah ok. winXP may be as stable as win2k but u cannot tinker ur XP to be as fast as 2k. no matter the hardware. and i like my system fast. just reinstalled my 2k. turned most of the services off, cleaned registry a lil etc etc and it's liiiiiiiightninfast :twisted:

if i could just let u have a peek at my rigs memory usage
Author:  r3nton [ Thu Feb 26, 2004 4:21 am ]
Post subject: 
win ME :-o :-o :-o :lol:
Author:  EagleEater [ Thu Feb 26, 2004 4:35 am ]
Post subject: 
You're in denial r3nton, you're in denial.

Who wins????

THE DOBERMAN IN THE DEERSTALKER SMOKING A PIPE?, or the chap eating a plug? :D

Win M E, LAH, LAH, LAH! Win M E, LAH, LAH, LAH!

LMFAO :lol:
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Thu Feb 26, 2004 10:45 am ]
Post subject: 
r3nton wrote:
spudthedestroyer wrote:
2k == winxp

The changes to the kernal are 100% insignificant, they are as stable as each other.


yeah ok. winXP may be as stable as win2k but u cannot tinker ur XP to be as fast as 2k. no matter the hardware. and i like my system fast. just reinstalled my 2k. turned most of the services off, cleaned registry a lil etc etc and it's liiiiiiiightninfast :twisted:

if i could just let u have a peek at my rigs memory usage


I'll call your bluff on that. XP has the system boot optimiser tool (although that maybe all NT 4.*) so it even boots faster than 2k ... ner..ner... :lol: Without explorer, optimised services (although some additional non-ms ones there too), my system will probably be alot faster, unless of course you have SCSI?

It may be ever so slightly faster during usage though if i were to reinstall 2k, I can't say for definite, but frankly, I perfer the very insignificant visualisation tweaks (the title bars don't look like ass! Hoorah :lol: ) and a bit of extra compatability here and there.

But 2k == XP when it boils down to it, where XP crashes, so too does 2k (if 2k has the 'feature' in question that is). I only used 2k for a while before switching to XP.

@ME wierdo-freak-boy, :o
Author:  EagleEater [ Thu Feb 26, 2004 1:43 pm ]
Post subject: 
Quote:
@ME wierdo-freak-boy,


ME is best. It's so stable that you could keep horses in it.

Tsk. I dunno. You're all as mad as a box of frogs, you guys. :)
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Thu Feb 26, 2004 8:42 pm ]
Post subject: 
hell even M$ disowned ME :lol:
Author:  EagleEater [ Thu Feb 26, 2004 8:57 pm ]
Post subject: 
spudthedestroyer wrote:
hell even M$ disowned ME :lol:


Only 'cos they knew they couldn't improve on perfection! :beerchug:
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
What's blood for, if not for shedding?