|
|
#12
11-01-2005, 04:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Who says you need explorer.exe to post on 2+2?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] You can get a free beta from MS. FREE! And yes windows 2003 R2 beta is way better than XP. [/ QUOTE ] It is not better than XP for the home user. And ooh a free beta, what do you suggest these users you are telling to get it will do when it expires? [/ QUOTE ] Get a free copy of another beta? What is with the attitude, something happened? My new avatar disturbing you? 
|
|
#13
11-01-2005, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who says you need explorer.exe to post on 2+2?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] You can get a free beta from MS. FREE! And yes windows 2003 R2 beta is way better than XP. [/ QUOTE ] It is not better than XP for the home user. And ooh a free beta, what do you suggest these users you are telling to get it will do when it expires? [/ QUOTE ] Get a free copy of another beta? What is with the attitude, something happened? My new avatar disturbing you? [/ QUOTE ] There is not always a beta available. Users running R2 would not be able to upgrade to LH client beta (no server >> client upgrade path ever exists). For a tech savy person that is ok multi booting or just wants to use the newest stuff / doesn't care about clean installing and losing all their installed programs etc testing/playing around with a beta is fine. Reccomending one for home use to casual users is not a responsible thing to do. Not only are you telling people to run a server sku that may or may not support all their current programs and will expire at some point you are recomending a beta for stability over an OS that has already gone through two service pack releases. As far as the avatar goes yes it does disturb me [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].
|
|
#14
11-01-2005, 04:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who says you need explorer.exe to post on 2+2?
[ QUOTE ]
WTF, I'm still trying to find where someone said you DID need explorer.exe to post on 2+2??? [/ QUOTE ] A lot of people think explorer.exe = iexplore.exe
|
|
#15
11-01-2005, 05:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who says you need explorer.exe to post on 2+2?
Acutally win 2003 server is not all that diffrent in looks and such than xp. And everything works fine, so good infact I will install it instead of my win 2000 witch is the best I ever had so far. Btw I am not that person always wanting the latest, if so I would not hang on to my w2k [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]
Here is where you can get windows 2003 RC2: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...l/default.mspx Btw, it realy is SP1 (final) with an upgrade, so you can actually skip upgrading it to RC2 and use a final version of the os for free for 6 months. Not too bad. And one thing is for certian, SP1 final IS very very stable. *edit: gonna try a diffrent avatar, have not realy decided where to go yet* These are the ones I consider:   
|
|
#16
11-01-2005, 05:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who says you need explorer.exe to post on 2+2?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] WTF, I'm still trying to find where someone said you DID need explorer.exe to post on 2+2??? [/ QUOTE ] A lot of people think explorer.exe = iexplore.exe [/ QUOTE ] over your head, sorry... (for the record, I think OP realizes the difference) at any rate, in response to 2k/xp/2k3 posts, here's my take. both of my laptops tri-boot win2k, XP and whatever the latest OS I want to tinker around with is (currently Suse 10 on one and the latest Mandrake (which is getting unistalled soon) on the other). I find that I use 2k most of the time, but it's definately falling behind. It has problems handling my multiple monitors and there is something goofy with the way it's provessing video on my one computer. I watch a lot of TV shows and DVD's on my one laptop, it's hooked up to my TV, and windows 2k doesn't cut it, for some reason when the TV is enabled, it just kills the processor, have no idea why.
|
|
#17
11-01-2005, 05:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Who says you need explorer.exe to post on 2+2?
It's an upgrade that isn't even completed yet! I agree that W2k3 Sp1 is rock solid but it is still a server OS not a workstation OS. It's also RTM which R2 isn't.
 As you can see i've used it too. And while i like it there's no way i'm telling users to beta R2 over XP SP2. As far as avatars go i'm not the best one to give a further opinion as to what is best. I've never used one [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] (ok i did for about 4 hours one day, but that's it).
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
