Topic: No, I will not fix your computer. (Read 69015 times)

Royal☭ · « **Reply #80 on:** April 03, 2009, 08:05:52 AM »

Like I said, the only reason to splurge on a new case is because A) You can and B) Removeable hard drive bays are the way of the future.

Also, I forgot to mention it but if you're current HDs are IDE then you'll need convertors to SATA which are anywhere from $10-20.

Mongrel · « **Reply #81 on:** April 03, 2009, 08:15:28 AM »

Reagrding the Windows posts, I generally tend to stay one or sometimes two generations behind when it comes to OSes, out of an overabundance of caution. Also, I truly hate bloat and baggage in an OS and no matter how stable, each new iteration of Windows seems to become ever-more massive.

I generally upgrade after support begins to truly fall off (i.e. more new programs would be incompatible than not) or if I am getting new hardware and my old OS is incapable of properly supporting the hardware. XP's RAM limitaitons are mildly annoying, but not enough to push me over that edge.

I've heard okay things about Windows 7, but I'll probably wait for the dust to settle before looking at that angle.

I'd also need to do more research on how severe the DRM is getting these days. If there is one thing that absolutely will have me spitting fire, it's software that tells me what I can and can't do with my own files on my own goddamned computer.

Classic · « **Reply #82 on:** April 03, 2009, 10:09:40 AM »

Quote from: Iron_Mongrel on April 03, 2009, 08:15:28 AM

XP's RAM limitaitons are mildly annoying,

Well, he did recommend the 64 bit version of XP for that reason. Have you heard poor things about its 64 bit version as compared to the standard 32 bit?

Mongrel · « **Reply #83 on:** April 03, 2009, 10:13:09 AM »

Actually, that's something to look into. I vaguely recall some mention of bugginess, but it's nothing that can't be worked around.

To be honest, I'll probably just go with what I have right now out of laziness and then start looking at 7 if I want a performance bump.

MadMAxJr · « **Reply #84 on:** April 03, 2009, 10:46:07 AM »

I haven't had to buy a new OS in a while. You can't buy retail copies of XP anymore, but you can still get OEM installs, right?

Royal☭ · « **Reply #85 on:** April 03, 2009, 11:07:46 AM »

TigerDirect sells both OEM and regular versions.

Rico · « **Reply #86 on:** April 03, 2009, 11:22:25 AM »

The 9800GT is remarkably similar to the 8800GT, which had enough horsepower for me to comfortably play Hellgate London of all things at very high settings in DX10, which leads me to believe that any upcoming game which at least had someone pretend to optimize it will run just fine. My point with Vista, though, was more: Reinstalling an operating system after you've got all your shit moved in and your ass-groove is firmly in the couch is one of the most pain-in-the-ass things you can do involving computers, so why not just shoot for Vista 64 now, ESPECIALLY if you were considering XP 64 and playing games on it.

With hilarious regards to the X-box, why the flying fuck would you buy or use a previously existing X-box if you had anything resembling a modern PC? Even keeping the settings down you'll still outperform one, you won't have the near-100% RROD rate, the controls are better, and all this at a slight delay in product release.

Do really suggest getting a new hard drive(s) instead of reusing old ones, especially since you're keeping legacy DVD drives. The performance increase of having everything on SATA is noticable and these days, inexpensive.

patito · « **Reply #87 on:** April 03, 2009, 01:50:12 PM »

Oh man, XP64, that's basically the reason I got Vista and stuck with it despite what people say of it.

Also, I was pretty excited about Windows 7, but then I started hearing bad things about DRM with it and that just totally ruined it for me.

Brentai · « **Reply #88 on:** April 03, 2009, 02:23:00 PM »

Okay yes I didn't consider the point that now is the time to buy Vista if you don't want to be faced with potentially having to upgrade in a couple months.

James Edward Smith · « **Reply #89 on:** April 03, 2009, 02:56:07 PM »

I just think it should be clear that multicore processors are not a gimmick. Some of my more computer-geeky friends laughed at me quite a bit when I originally got my quadcore around this time last year. I thought they were being retarded THEN and it's become abundantly clear they were NOW.

I just don't understand why they couldn't see that a heavy move towards supporting them was about as imminent as anything can get. If intel starts peddling about 100 different flavours of a technology, you're being pretty stupid to suggest it's not gonna be common place in about one quarter.

This is of course, not even getting into the fact that it just makes general computer usage a noticably smoother experience.

Anyone who has even a passing knowledge of how PCs really work and has any understanding of mathematics and scope should know that in the Intel and AMD dominated market that we live in right now, PCs are designed with retarded bottle necks. Most PCs that you all have and are running right now are like cars with 48 cylinder engines attached to the fuel injection system of my moped. But the processor companies know that no one knows that and so they just keep spitting out faster and faster processors while we all sit here with our thumbs up our asses waiting for the new part of our HL2 level to load.

Classic · « **Reply #90 on:** April 03, 2009, 03:51:30 PM »

I'm afraid you picked a poor example of the problem, because there's only so fast you can spin a plate, you know?

But Geo is ~~a wolf~~ completely right. Or, I'd say that if I knew enough about cars to make his statement make any sense to me. Why 48 cylinders? Why not a nice, power of 2? Like 64?

EDIT:
Also, I'm given the impression that the "big" advancement of multi-core processors is taking some of the big hits out of context switching between threads, but I don't know too much about them.

Thad · « **Reply #91 on:** April 04, 2009, 11:41:23 AM »

Quote from: Iron_Mongrel on April 03, 2009, 08:15:28 AM

Reagrding the Windows posts, I generally tend to stay one or sometimes two generations behind when it comes to OSes, out of an overabundance of caution. Also, I truly hate bloat and baggage in an OS and no matter how stable, each new iteration of Windows seems to become ever-more massive.

It's edifying to think of 7 as actually being 6.1, essentially a service pack fixing all the things that are horribly wrong with Vista.

The problem with XP at this point is that

Quote from: Happy To Meet You The High Classicists on April 03, 2009, 10:09:40 AM

Well, he did recommend the 64 bit version of XP for that reason. Have you heard poor things about its 64 bit version as compared to the standard 32 bit?

YES.

Driver support for XP64 is shit, and WILL NEVER GET BETTER. Want your hardware to work? Then don't use XP64.

So pretty much at this point you're stuck with getting XP32 and not being able to use the full power of your machine, getting XP64 and not being able to get hardware drivers, and Vista, which has its own host of problems. Or seeing if you can find a way to get the Win7 beta to work even though the signup period is past.

(Or if you're feeling adventurous you could try Linux or go the Hackintosh route.)

Royal☭ · « **Reply #92 on:** April 04, 2009, 12:17:24 PM »

The problem with Linux is that Mongrel wants to run both Adobe and Valve products.

Brentai · « **Reply #93 on:** April 04, 2009, 12:36:57 PM »

Quote from: Thad on April 04, 2009, 11:41:23 AM

Hackintosh

Royal☭ · « **Reply #94 on:** April 04, 2009, 12:43:49 PM »

Quote from: Constantine on April 04, 2009, 12:17:24 PM

Valve.

Thad · « **Reply #95 on:** April 04, 2009, 01:35:33 PM »

Nothing really to prevent a multiboot other than space and time.

I'm willing to bet Cedega's got decent support for the more popular Steam games but I haven't used it in years. It's one of those things on my "I would pay money for this again now that I have money, except now I no longer have time for gaming" list.

Tangentially related: I've decided that, if my contract job turns into a full-time position, I'm going to reward myself with a new monitor. (I'd thought about a new portable game system, either a PSP or a GP2X Wiz, but again, I don't fucking have time to play the games I already own; a computer monitor is something I would certainly stare at for several hours every day even if I didn't do much gaming on it.) From the studying I've done, Samsung seems like the best bang for your buck; I'm leaning toward one of their 24" displays in the $250-$350 range. If anyone else has any advice I'd be happy to hear it.

Mongrel · « **Reply #96 on:** April 04, 2009, 05:22:21 PM »

Nono, Samsung is a good choice. ViewSonic and Samsung are still my top recommendations.

Also, our current working theory is that I was beset by a very randomly coincidental string of minor problems. Best guess as to any real hardware issues is that the battery on my motherboard is dead, which isn't really too much of an issue and is easy enough to replace.

Büge · « **Reply #97 on:** April 05, 2009, 09:31:25 AM »

Quote from: Thad on April 04, 2009, 01:35:33 PM

Nothing really to prevent a multiboot other than space and time.

You could say the same thing about interstellar travel.

Zaratustra · « **Reply #98 on:** April 12, 2009, 08:53:20 AM »

Mother's computer is not booting from the HD or from the CD. It's partially my fault for having commandeered her CD drive for a while, leaving the slot open and allowing dust to collect en masse inside.

Now to try to put the HD on my machine, hope it detects and get the data out. And try not to scream incoherently during the process.

Thad · « **Reply #99 on:** April 13, 2009, 06:14:35 PM »

...could just as well go in the Slumberland thread, but...last night I was tortured by nightmares of sick dogs and fixing my grandparents' computers.

News:

Author Topic: No, I will not fix your computer. (Read 69015 times)