Does SEIV run on XP????

[Raging Deadstar]

Originally posted by Will:
For those who do not like the WinXP cartoon-y Fisher Price Interface, and don't want to spend all the time tracking down the options to switch the interface to something resembling intelligence...

Perhaps you should look into replacing Explorer (the Windows shell shipped with Windows) with GeoShell or LiteStep. Can be as bare-bones or fully featured as you want with various plugins, and there are many, many pre-made themes which combine the plugins with a useful interface.

I'm currently using LiteStep with the Austerity theme, slightly modified to have four virtual desktops, among other things.

I agree, currently i'm using a program called Windowsblinds and have a very nice gold Lord of the Ringstheme on xp, very pretty

[Ragnarok]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
2000 is just as stable as, if not more stable than, XP, because there is less bloat.

I disagree there. I have never had an XP Pro machine lock up and give me the BSOD, or any other form of crashing. With W2K I had it happen at least every couple months if not more, and this was with all the latest drivers and not running any programs that would cause such an event.

[Magnum357]

Yo Atrocities, its been a while. I've hardly had time too come too the SEIV message Boards, been very busy.

Anyway, I'm seriously going too look into this Linspire program. I think it has potential.

[Fyron]

Originally posted by Ragnarok:
I disagree there. I have never had an XP Pro machine lock up and give me the BSOD, or any other form of crashing. With W2K I had it happen at least every couple months if not more, and this was with all the latest drivers and not running any programs that would cause such an event.

You were unlucky then. I have had XP crash more times than 2000... Also, the BSOD does NOT appear in XP, because they designed the OS to do a reset instead of display the error screen, as a crappy marketing ploy. I believe there is a way to fix this crappy behavior so that you can know what the cause of the crash was, but it is a pain...

Originally posted by JayBdey:
What areas can you not change back to normal on XP? You can change most everything in XP, some things are not easy to change, but they still can be changed.

I don't recall all of them, but there are a lot of things that require hacking the OS to change, such as the loading screens, the logging off screens, the user control panel screens, and some others that I do not recall... the "Classic" interface only goes so far...

I agree, currently i'm using a program called Windowsblinds and have a very nice gold Lord of the Ringstheme on xp, very pretty

You can use such things on win 2000 as well... as well as the explorer shell replacements Will mentioned.

[ May 17, 2004, 17:41: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Mephisto]

I have run both W2k and XP Pro and XP. XP is just better equipped for its time as could be expected since W2k is the older one. From the point of gaming I never had any significant problems with both OS so XP is somewhat better at handling DOS. Are you sure that XP does not display BSOD?

[Fyron]

If you look closely, you will see it appear for half a second or so, however long it takes the OS to decide to reboot to hide the BSOD. But, you should never see an unmodified install of XP just display a BSOD and stop. It should always reboot, rather than show you the error so that you can have a chance to correct the problem. Marketing ploy, nothing more.

The few devices that the 2000 CD does not have drivers for can be gotten from the internet in seconds, minutes if you do not have broadband. The advantage of being newer is null.

[ May 17, 2004, 22:02: Message edited by: Imperator Fyron ]

[Renegade 13]

XP has never restarted on me instead of giving me the BSOD. Also, I'd never thought about it, but I've never seen the BSOD at all in XP. Personally, I don't think the UI is so bad, but then again, I'm not a programmer, or have a massive knowledge of computers, so....that might have something to do with it.

[JayBdey]

Imperator, an XP programmer could look at some of those error Messages and scratch his head in confusion, they don't help anyone. Rebooting is better. And I've never heard anyone 'market' that setting of XP.

Login screens are easily changed, boot up screens are easily changed, and several screens in XP have no real equivalent in 2000 so how else would they look? You have no argument there.

[Fyron]

Hacking the operating system or shelling out money to leech companies is not what I would qualify as "easily changed".

All of the screens I referenced _do_ have a 2000 equivalent... what new screens are you refering to, exactly? Other than the "fast user switching" interface, which could very easily have been made to look like the "classic" windows interface when using it, but was not, what screens are you refering to exactly?

About the BSOD and crashing... I never said that all error Messages were intrinsically helpful. But, you can write it down and look on the net to see if there is something you can do to prevent that crash in the future. No info at all is no good. And yes, not showing the BSOD was a marketing ploy, part of the stability of XP. BSOD was something windows critics often complained of, so they hid it. Marketing ploys are not always things directly advertised... marketing is far more complex than just bluntly claiming things.

I indeed have an argument, which you have failed to inhibit in any way.

[Mephisto]

Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
I indeed have an argument, which you have failed to inhibit in any way.

Oh no! Stop right there everyone! This will not become another "them against IF" thread. Some people like XP, others don't, we will all live with it, ok?