then use linux :p

i would, but some games cant be run on it.

..and work your ass to make things work, if things you need can work at all

sorry, but trading my time is the same with trading money for a solid commercial OS.
i'll let you guess which option is easier..

That might be true in some cases, you make it sound like linux is broken and nobody is working on it.

sadly more work is put into a gazillion distros with a gazillion forks with a gazillion solutions for even the simplest of things such as a text editor

Linux = chaos and no company can put up with this to actually support its hardware or software products on such a fragmented and unfocused platform..

Lunix = pipe-dream wrapped in the fallacy of choice

could not agree more, I find linux is great OS for research purpose in computer science but when it comes to having fun at the end of the working day strict NO to linux, it often takes ridiculous time of head banging to make very simple things to work.

wow i haven't seen such trolling in quite some time, well if you don't count the relatively new linuxhater site. Also that diagram is outdated and misleading. And multiple distributions doesn't break things. practicly 100% of the bugs fixed in distros get's sent upstream and fixed in the next cycle for all distros to use. I dont understand how you have gotten to such extremities :)

Also that diagram is outdated and misleading. And multiple distributions doesn't break things.

here's an update: http://www.linuxfoundation.org/images/0/09/Audiostack.png

practicly 100% of the bugs fixed in distros get's sent upstream and fixed in the next cycle for all distros to use.

i wasn't referring to only bugs.. different kernel, gcc, libstdc++, coreutils are crapping the platform for no reason.

"Please please please tell me why Ubuntu needs to ship a new toolchain every 6 months? Is there some luser grandma out there asking why she doesn't have gcc 4.1.2 instead of 4.1.1? What does this possibly accomplish except fragment everything out there? Microsoft ships a new compiler like every 3 years, and things work just fine. Even Apple (who isn't so great about backwards compatibility either) ships a new toolchain maybe once a year or so."
- quoted for truth

I dont understand how you have gotten to such extremities :)

wasted a lot of time trying all major Linux distros, each with a lot of empty promises. i have something to give back now :D

don't get me wrong.. i want by all means Linux to succeed for the desktop, but it will NOT in the current developing paradigm.

how are they crapping the plattform? also to shatter another argument '"Please please please tell me why Ubuntu needs to ship a new toolchain every 6 months? ' Well they are shipping new releases every 6 months, but you get support for them for at _least_ 3 years and LTS releases 5 years. you dont _have_ to upgrade.

http://linuxhaters.blogspot.com/2008/08/one-b...m-all.html

enjoy :D

pretty enjoying

tinyxp?

bitches dont know bout my window xp fundamentals

Also try the Server editions - Server 2003 in particular is $$$.

Is server 2003 really good for gaming? I have access to it, but still running Win XP.

I haven't personally tried games on it myself, but I have a friend running it full time who will vouch for its stability and reliability for games. For everything else though, it's the most stable OS I've ever used, and IMO is the epitome of XP striped down-ness.

See the following relevant links:
http://www.techsupportforum.com/microsoft-sup...aming.html
http://win2k3.msfn.org/

And if you want to try the same for Server 2008 (Vista backend), then you're probably going to want this site as well:
http://www.win2008workstation.com/wordpress/

Wouldn't that just be similar to windows embedded? You can remove parts of the OS that you don't want in that version.

not really much use tweaking your system to the point you get annoyed with default configurations when it really matters at a big competition

i have installed xp fundamentals now. i got good hardware so i cant say the diffrence is big compared to a regular xp install. i think it has less processes and uses less ram by default thou.

nothing that you would want is missing. im going to stick to this for a while.

So you have this high end gaming system which is running an 8 year old OS and you think removing a few things is going to make any difference?

If anything you risk removing a component you might need later on.

Just set XP the best performance setting in CP/SYSTEM/ADVANCED
and leave it at that.

But if you sit behind your pc 12 hrs a day and are stupid enough to care about shaving off 2 seconds to your boot up time and 0.5% of your ram usage then by all means go ahead.

My brother does this stuff all the time, every six months he moans XP is missing a certain file and he has to re-install because he has no idea WTF he's changing or any concept of how gremilns can come when you start potching.

Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs is a Microsoft product.

thank you for information !

imo there is a need for a standard fast and compatible operating system for tournaments. for home too ofc.
its like impulse said, and the switch to vista would be "stupid" too.
maybe fundamentals or another smaller and faster windows xp
version is the real solution in future for progaming.

ive tried around 30 different linux versions too and other os, im a very neutral analyser. but windows xp is better overall to configure and less complicated. performance is alittle bit better of course in some very small linux versions but it can really cost time to get all things working on different hardware for example.
and tournaments should not have everytime other setups.
not in hardware not in software.