The RC1 (Release Candidate 1) of Windows .NET Server 2003 has been released and can be downloaded for free. Yes, you may not want to spend a week downloading, but at least it is a free _legal_ version.

Oh, and if you guys don't know who I am, which you probably don't unless you have been on IRC, but I am me. I am 15 and I code primarily in C++ and run a:

.: Pentium III 1.0 Ghz
.: 256 Mb RAM
.: 60 Gb Hdd
.: 64 Mb ATI Radeon 7000
.: Windows XP Home

I am pretty knowledgable, so I can probably answer some of your questions when it comes to Windows. And you may wonder why I don't use Linux. I have. Apparently X doesn't like me, I have installed Mandrake 8.1, Red Hat 7.0, and Desktop/LX (Redmond Linux) and FreeBSD 4.6.2, and only on Desktop/LX did X run for me. I don't have any clue what they hell is up with that, but I don't really care. (Although I wish I could get FreeBSD up.)

Anyways, just thought I would poke my head in the messageboards, but it seems they are dying.

_____
ophline - are you?

I know why you dont use Linux, It lollipops compared to Windows.
(-:
/me puts on fire protective cloths

well, afaik he uses linux
[addsig]

Linux: better than the Good ship lollipop!

KaGeZ: Yeah, I couldn't fscking get any version of linux to work on my computer, I will hopefully get Desktop/LX again, but right now I DO NOT use LINUX.

And all OSes lollipop.

"Every OS sux!
Windows sux, and blows!"
I love that song

ophline:
Also cool if you run windows. for that game thingie I could need some windows support too, since it should also run on windows
[addsig]

You're running XP on a P3 processor? Is it slow? [addsig]

It must be. Maybe I should try it. I am stuck in the 9x ages, if you didn't know. [addsig]

XP on our PIII 450Mhz ran pretty fast. I even ran it on my old P 166Mhz, not fast, but it ran. [addsig]

Really? I have a P3 with 450 Mhz. I should really consider XP. [addsig]

well, some seem to be dislike by linux, some seem to be dislike by windows. Here are my 2 cent about windowsXP. First, me machine specs:
Athlon Thunderbird 1G (100MHZ FSB x 10)
512MB PC100 CL2 SDRAM
60GB HDD, ATA100, 7200RPM, Seekt. 8,5, DMA
GeForce2 MX/100
SoundBlaster Live! 5.1 X-Gamer

first, when I installed WindowsXP it seemed quite nice and colorful. When it booted up for the first time, I was impressed by the boot time. It was only like 4 or 5 secs and I had my desktop. Feeled quite odd, but those fast startup times died after I installed the first driver: I installed the official "stable" WQHL Drivers (it was WHQL, right, that MS qualifying labs stuff) for my NVidia card. Boot time jumped up to the double or more. I could still live with that, since that's the usual boot-up time for a OS. Next I installed some software like VC++, WinACE, ACDSee and some other things. Now it was over with speed and performance. Booting took like 2 or 3 minutes. It was impossible to keep the machine running for longer than 48hours to me. Either the RAM was completely filled up by flaws in Windows (or other progs, no idea, I just know it was filled up) or windows showed me a bluescreen.
OK, I was using it as a server _and_ desktop PC, but linux does way better in this: the average uptime of my linux system is now like 25-35 days. I reboot it once in a while so I can clean the PC inside, since my room is pretty dusty and all the dust in my PC doesn't feel good
Anyways, after using windowsXP for like 2 or 3 weeks I trashed it and never installed it again. If you like a windows which is more stable than win98, then you should use 98SE or 2k. 2k has a good balance of speed and look. Stil, my max uptime in windows was only 1 - 1 1/2 week. Still not desireable results, but way better than XP.
therefore I don't recommend windowsXP to anybody. If you really need to use windows, then go with 2k or 98SE. 98SE isn't as good looking as 2k, but is quite fast.

just my experiences with XP. I hope it helps at least a bit further
[addsig]

It seems like KaGeZ was badlucky with XP but his opinion is one of the very few objectively negative opinion I've ever read about XP. I suggest you try it. It might work, or maybe it won't... Most people say it's the best version of Windows yet.

I do share his opinion about W2K though. I had used it a lot until I installed a new HD and IDE PCI card which the installer did not support Since then I run Windows.NET 2003. I could probably get big uptime out of it if I did not leave every 2 weekends

98SE was plain awful to me and I would not recommend it to anyone. Its average uptime never went beyond 2 days and I think I exceptionnaly reached 4 days once It crashed all the time.

Note that I have had as much problems with Linux than I had with 98SE. X Window kept locking up every 2 or 3 days. Linux works just wonderfully in my other computer... [addsig]

first, thank you about that "objectively negative opinion about windows XP".

As you said, Win98SE isn't very stable, but I recommended it for it's speed. There is no other OS (no, not even linux) that beats the boot times of windows. Also, if you keep it maintained properly you might get it run faster that linux even. So, I wanted to suggest Win98SE more for the desktop use, and not as a server OS. (not even for a personal server)

And, as you also said, windows2k has the driver drawback, yes. Windows 2k probably has the worst driver database after WinNT4. But, if you don't have some exotic hardware or very _very_ __VERY__ old stuff it'll work. (most of the times anyways )

so, this was just a small addition to my last post.
Thx to Neu for pointing some things out again

Windows isn't _all_ that bad. I'm just having problems with a few things: On my hardware (NOTE: I'M TALKING ABOUT _MY_ HARDWARE) windows doesn't run very fast or stable. Even if it would, I'd still use linux because I can work faster with it and it serves me with what I need - for free. Another problem for me is tat I don't really like to support monopolys. This may indeed sound stupid, but I'm like that: if somehting booms I'm not caring about it. The comparsion may not be too apropirate, but it hopefully shows that I think for myself and don't get affected by my surroundings too much
My last - and probably biggest problem - is that windows is dangerous. OK, not windows itself, but viruses. If you catch a virus in windows you catch it. Also, there are more viruses for windows that for all other OSs, which makes the risk of catching one in windows higher. And, I can't affort to always buy the latest virus scanners, so I'd have to run without scanners. I don't feel like loosing all my data bacause I just opened the wrong file
Ofcourse windows has it's good sides too, but good things are always easier to find than bad ones, since only good things are put into the foreground
[addsig]

Well, I don't know if your first line is positive or negative. by "objectively negative opinion" I just meant that your opinion on Windows XP is generally negative but stated objectively It's different than the usual "XP lollipops/Linux Rules" deal. [addsig]

the first line was meant positive indeed. Why should it be negative?
And, my opinion towards WinXP isn't generally negative. I just explained the things I thought it lacks or which could be improved. As I stated above, the good things are mostly easy to see, so I don't talk about them.
[addsig]

I love Win98SE I'm not sure what it is about my computer, but I almost _never_ have lockups [addsig]

I loved WinXP, until it ate my hard drive.

Ate your hard drive? [addsig]

im not a fan of any ms windows, but XP is by far better than 95 [never really used 98se].
my biggest complaint [aside from the obvious] is that it runs a chdsk or soemthign everytime it starts up and scan the whole harddrive, effectivly adding another 5-10 minutes to start up time.

Well, that's easy enough to fix in 98:
Edit your msdos.sys file and set AutoScan (or something like that) to 0. The file is read-only, so you'll have to fix that first. [addsig]

that never happens to my XP :/
maybe you did something wrong during the installation?
[addsig]

I don't think they did that in XP. Too many gripes, I bet [addsig]

there is a scandisk thingy even for XP... just press your reset button while you;re running windows
[addsig]

Really? How unrealistic....
[addsig]

Well, unfortunately, I wasn't the one who installed XP...it came pre-installed with NO installation disk. And they partitioned the HD funky, like making the main partition NT but another partition Fat32...
And, I think the programme it runs at startup it "chkdsk". It didnt do this when I first [like 2 years ago] got the comp, just like in the last 6 monthes or so.