PureBasic Forums - English

hehe i was "tweaking" windows with a program and i found a intresting tweak.
i just read the description for you

Windows includes a "feature" (?) that lets you blue-screen (crash) the OS simply by holding the right CTRL key and pressing the "Scroll Lock" key twice.

After activating this option, reboot your system. Then hold the right CTRL key and press the "Scroll Lock" key twice.

Windows will react with a nice MANUALLY_INITIATED_CRASH (0xE2) blue-screen...

Enjoy!

intresting find no?

> After activating this option, reboot your system. Then hold the right CTRL
> key and press the "Scroll Lock" key twice.

How do you activate it? Pressing right CTRL and Scroll Lock x 2 doesn't do
anything on W2K Pro for me... I guess it needs activation?

the program i useing can enable it it proably some reg key
get the program here http://www.majorgeeks.com/download4083.html[/url]

I don't need this 'feature'. Windows does not give me the chance to press these buttons - it crashes before.

`When you say "I wrote a program that crashed Windows", people just stare at
you blankly and say "Hey, I got those with the system, *for free*".'
(By Linus Torvalds)

`When you say "I wrote a program that crashed Windows", people just stare at
you blankly and say "Hey, I got those with the system, *for free*".'
(By Linus Torvalds)

Interesting.

Windows users give Linux a chance, but not the other way round.

For me, Windows NT 5.x (2k and XP) are uncrashable. I'm unable to crash it. Why do Linux fanboys insist that it's so easy to crash? Inability to use it? I imagine so.

I try Linux every six months or so, and in my opinion (which I'm entitled to), Linux is still the fragmented piece of crap it was ten years ago.

hehe.

* Hands out the asbestos suits *

That quote by Torvalds is very old actually. Long before Win2k and stuff were
there.

Win2k and Xp are good products, i don't say anything against that.
But you have to admit, that the Win9x systems were crap, when it comes
to security and system stability.

About linux: Here i think, it is the other way around. It was always strong in
the stability/security part, but it was kind of a *geekish* system.
But this has also changed over the years. It makes a good, easy to use
desktop OS nowadays.

Timo

in 15 ot 20 years Linux might be a problem for MS but until they fix some Major issues :

1. The Desktop what desktop to run KDE, CDE, Gnome, Black box and what ever other desktop is out probably about 50 of them they need to decide on 1 desktop and develop for that.
2. As far as there GPL license I think it’s crap and I am not alone Corel corp. thinks this way too that’s why the dropped all there Linux stuff such as Corel Linux and Word perfect for Linux because there is no money in Linux why put thousands of man hours into making good software when Linux people won’t use it because there is about 50 other version that can be downloaded for free. That’s why I wont make any Linux software because it’s a WASTE OF MY TIME… and other developers think the same thing…
3. They need to make a desktop that is easy to use for end users there are not many end users that will waste 5hours setting up a printer to print a picture of their kids, and further more 10hours trying to get there digital camera or scanner working not worth the trouble, lets not talk about setting up networking.
4. Here’s my favorite if you download Linux the I386 distribution it is actually slower than any version of windows, until you recompile the kernel. Ok that’s fine if you’re a computer Guru but the 99.9 percent of us don’t want to recompile a kernel and then to try and get help from a Linux board and be called nasty names from other Linux gurus doesn’t make want to use this OS and leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I have never had anyone in the Windows world call me an Idiot because I asked a OS question about Windows.
I try Linux ever 6-8 months and find the same problems every time I install it. Until they fix these issues Linux poses no threat to MS or any other OS in the world. And while MS keeps improving Linux remains the same, before you know it people will be saying Linux Who? If you have any pull with the Linux Developer you might want to bring up some or all of these points especially the open source BS cause there will never be great programs for Linux if developers are told they don’t own there software they wrote
And if you look at the GTK read me that’s what they say in so many words

Flame if you want
I would expect that from a Linux User
Sean

omg you may of just started a war...
presonlly some points in there were true, others were just just opinion

Personally, I have never had any problems installing and using both Windows 2000, XP and many of the Linux distributions out there and I am a rank amateur when it comes to Linux so that speaks volumes for how easy I found it to install 'out of the box' as it were.

However, as someone who has generally played around with computers and programmed code for over 30 years, I know that both systems can be crashed (and have been) with impunity if you know how (and remember later).

To the other gentleman who said that he is unable to crash his windows system and puts down "linux fanboys inability to use it", the linux people who know how to configure a linux system properly generally get to know their hardware and software so well they know how to crash anything.

I have seen both Linux and windows systems crash from poorly written code, bad drivers and ailing hardware. It is sad that there is so much arrogance from both camps, such blindness towards the merits of each system that instead of each helping each other, we have to constantly take a huge, nasty and extremely egotistical swipe at the other to make ourselves feel better.

Patience, learning and upgrading our skillset on each platform will give us a true perspective on what WE are missing out on, not constant whining that "the other is bad" etc etc etc.

ANy system is good. You working on it makes it better. Be tolerant and fill in the gaps instead of waiting for others to make it betetr for you.

Regards.
An old fang

P-J wrote:

..snip...
I try Linux every six months or so, and in my opinion (which I'm entitled to), Linux is still the fragmented piece of crap it was ten years ago.

Well Im the same been using Windows since version 3.0 and tbh in those days it was a really nasty badly hacked cludge of and OS and linux (although a real swine to get your head around was infinately better).

Windows 2003 server for me is rock solid, its still a little bit of a pain to use but the key issue for me and my company is price, man we know were being shafted, cause we all walk like we have been ridding a horse for a week straight!

Linux has improved dramatically, I can now boot Mandrake 10 RC1, and instantly have all my hardware recognised, including my optical sound connections, my HT P4 my SATA and all the obscure kit I use (firewire...). I can fire up straight into a graphical UI which is supper fast (believe it or not more responsive than XP!) that uses all my card features. I have out of the box a workstation, or a server with fully qualified world beating software (Apache, MySQL et al), I can chose to configure these graphically if I want now... and I can expect bugs to be fixed within weeks if I find any and improvements such as adopting standards every month or so. I can burn CD's DVD's, view Xvid, DivX MPEG out of the box... Need to share windows 2003 server drives...not a problem fire up smb4k and type in my domain password and yep Im fully connected. Want a quick development environment that I may need to trash, fire up a virtual linux box on the same machine and login hey presto I have a PureBasic development machine, didnt cost me more than 20 minutes config time...Did I mention that I havent rebooted this machine since install? That was over 2 months ago.

Kernel 2.6 also now allows me to scale the same OS from a PDA to a massively parrallel mainframe, I dont have to buy and license Windows CE or Windows Enterprise Server infact it costs me exactly the same amount, £0.00.

Linux is now a creadible OS for the non super geek, its fire and forget install and fully support for modern (even cutting edge kit) is as good as XP and better than 2003 server imho.

BTW did I talk about the cost...it cost me 3 hours of download and 3 CD's.

Seriously Windows should feel threatened by Linux, and if MS keep making me walk like a cowboy, they will lose their grip on the market. Its not just me and my boss who have noticed the costs associated with running MS, the world has. By that I mean there are practiacally no 3rd world users of Windows, Most seconds tier countries use Linux, slowly a lot of First world countries are moving to linux for key applications (Web servers, email etc..especially in schools and universities) and before you know it more than 50% of the worlds PC workstation and server users will know linux MWWWHHHAAA>..

BTW it may feel like all Linux users sneer at MS users, they probably are its difficult not too when all you can see is MS users as people who pay MS taxes to keep the MS empire in power. Especially when the Linux world would replace MS quicker if you hopped into the crazy Linux world

Phew...now for some work.

IRIA

In my home network (3 machines) there are two machines still running Win98SE and one running Mandrake 9.2. Okay, okay. Mandrake is really SLOW (loading a web page can take up to 30 seconds with a DSL connection). But in past days i also had Win98SE installed on that machine and it crashed every 3-5 minutes without any reasons.... For me Linux is sometimes a bit slow but i didn't manage to crash it so far... Not so for Windows. But well i think both OS ARE crashable, there is no doubt about it.

For another: Since MS was founded it released, lets say about 20-30 OSes and everytime MS brought out another OS the whole world had to buy it again and again. IE win 3.1 say twelve years ago... I don't know how much it did cost but at least 50 Euros... And then Win95... again at least 50 Euros, WinNT, Win98, WinME, Win98SE, WinXP... Sorry, but i don't understand how people can tolerate buying every OS just as Microsoft dictates...

If you buy Linux (btw. there is no need to buy it you can buy but you don't have to, not so for Win you must pay for it or get it illegally) you buy it ONCE in your lifetime and then your done with your OS.

But okay, we can discuss and pretend things to be the way they are not and so on... That won't change anything. The war between MS and the OpenSource Community will countinue... No matter what we might think about it....

Regards and keep flaming!

Iria wrote:

P-J wrote:

..snip...
I try Linux every six months or so, and in my opinion (which I'm entitled to), Linux is still the fragmented piece of crap it was ten years ago.

Well Im the same been using Windows since version 3.0 and tbh in those days it was a really nasty badly hacked cludge of and OS and linux (although a real swine to get your head around was infinately better).

Windows 2003 server for me is rock solid, its still a little bit of a pain to use but the key issue for me and my company is price, man we know were being shafted, cause we all walk like we have been ridding a horse for a week straight!

Linux has improved dramatically, I can now boot Mandrake 10 RC1, and instantly have all my hardware recognised, including my optical sound connections, my HT P4 my SATA and all the obscure kit I use (firewire...). I can fire up straight into a graphical UI which is supper fast (believe it or not more responsive than XP!) that uses all my card features. I have out of the box a workstation, or a server with fully qualified world beating software (Apache, MySQL et al), I can chose to configure these graphically if I want now... and I can expect bugs to be fixed within weeks if I find any and improvements such as adopting standards every month or so. I can burn CD's DVD's, view Xvid, DivX MPEG out of the box... Need to share windows 2003 server drives...not a problem fire up smb4k and type in my domain password and yep Im fully connected. Want a quick development environment that I may need to trash, fire up a virtual linux box on the same machine and login hey presto I have a PureBasic development machine, didnt cost me more than 20 minutes config time...Did I mention that I havent rebooted this machine since install? That was over 2 months ago.

Kernel 2.6 also now allows me to scale the same OS from a PDA to a massively parrallel mainframe, I dont have to buy and license Windows CE or Windows Enterprise Server infact it costs me exactly the same amount, £0.00.

Linux is now a creadible OS for the non super geek, its fire and forget install and fully support for modern (even cutting edge kit) is as good as XP and better than 2003 server imho.

BTW did I talk about the cost...it cost me 3 hours of download and 3 CD's.

Seriously Windows should feel threatened by Linux, and if MS keep making me walk like a cowboy, they will lose their grip on the market. Its not just me and my boss who have noticed the costs associated with running MS, the world has. By that I mean there are practiacally no 3rd world users of Windows, Most seconds tier countries use Linux, slowly a lot of First world countries are moving to linux for key applications (Web servers, email etc..especially in schools and universities) and before you know it more than 50% of the worlds PC workstation and server users will know linux MWWWHHHAAA>..

BTW it may feel like all Linux users sneer at MS users, they probably are its difficult not too when all you can see is MS users as people who pay MS taxes to keep the MS empire in power. Especially when the Linux world would replace MS quicker if you hopped into the crazy Linux world

Phew...now for some work.

IRIA

if you think linux is free your are baddly mislead, Linux is not free to a corp. enviorment it is more money than MS and if you run Linux and don't pay for it dont think for a second that redhad or mandrake or who ever you use will say ooo thats ok, because they will sue you, Linux is not FREE for corp. use you better look this up befor you say somthing that might make them look at you comp. and put them out of business

Sean

Between 17% to 22% of people believe they are fact driven, and that they make their decisions based on fact.

The percentage on this board is probably higher, given the nature of the board.

The real fact is that 100% of people make decisions on an emotional basis and use facts to rationalise their decisions. For the experts, selling is merely a matter of wrapping the sales and marketing in expert talk. Ask BMW and Mercedes, who successful market into that area using emotional pull in screeds of detail.

One of the biggest setbacks for linux/unix was a strong elitist culture that defined the advocates as a cut above the rest (The sneering as P-J mentioned) and the OS as difficult, requiring expert skills.

The perception is now quite entrenched. This is what linux has to overcome. Nobody wants to hang around a put-down artist, and people fear the unknown, avoid getting outside of their comfort zone, avoid inviting failure. These are primal fears.

So regardless of which is best OS, the battle will be won in marketing (emotional).

Fortunately the linux/unix "cult" is maturing and becoming less elitist. Fortunately they are attempting to create user-friendly interfaces, so that highly intelligent people in non-computer arenas can use the OS without having to be computer scientests as well (which is defocussing, a distraction from their main thrust - these people were also among the people the linux/unix camp sneered at, go figure).

And I think the MS/windows "cult" is more and more looking for alternatives, not because the OS is bad, but because they want choices and competition, and less MS dominance.

Maybe the competition to windows (in SOHO/Personal area) will come from linux. Maybe the Mac, where the perception is "friendly OS". Which may be why Mac has second largest (albeit tiny) share of SOHO/Personal market.

So which is best? Well, depends on how you were brainwashed as to how you answer that. Because you and I were brainwashed, or at least patterned.