What makes you think that dual booting on a Mac computer is illegal? As long as you buy the rights to the Windows software, that computer is simply hardware. Although, it's kinda stupid to do that, since Mac hardware is ridiculously expensive.


Windows XP is not that bad, it can run what you need it to, and runs it on much less memory than Vista or 7, IMO, 7 is a major upgrade and has really enhanced things, Vista simply added a few minor, and in most cases unnecessary, features, and made everything more rounded, it looks nice, but it's not necessary to run almost anything, and it hogs more RAM. Only reason I see to get Vista over XP is its ability to use multiple cores better, which, while it's an improvement, it's usually not necessary, I'd rather wait for 7.


Not to beat a dead horse, but honestly, as long as you're not using your computer in a way that you're open to viruses, you don't really need any, however, even if you feel you do, free virus protection, like AVG, is probably all you really NEED.

If you really wanted to, you could download the rtm version of Windows 7 now, install the version you would buy, and use it in the key-less trial mode until it is possible to buy a key so you can activate it -- in theory, this should work. Make sure it matches the SHA1 hashes listed in the downloads on TechNet or MSDN (you have to log in with a Windows Live ID to get to the list). I think I've heard that you can still extend the trial period 3 times with the "slmgr -rearm" command from an admin command prompt just like in Vista. That would give you about 120 days total if you only use the command every 30 days -- plenty of time to get a key before the trial expires, because I think the Windows 7 release date is pretty much set in stone now.

The Master OEM key for Windows 7 Ultimate was already cracked, so if you don't mind being a pirate, you can already have a permanent activation.

I'm talking about that you can install Windows 7 now and convert it to a legitimate, fully licensed install when Windows 7 becomes available in stores. The people who would use what you mentioned probably are already using Windows 7 anyway.

By the way, I read that Microsoft is going to be blacklisting that key, so it is only really a "permanent activation" if you use your computer exclusively offline.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Aug 16 2009, 7:21 pm by ShadowFlare.

Or HOSTS block all the Microsoft servers from connecting to your computer.

The only dependable way of blocking it would be to block it in your router configuration. This depends on your router being one that lets you block outbound connections to certain IP addresses and/or block or override certain hosts. Not all have such a feature; many can only block incoming connections. Other than external blocks, Microsoft could make it override software-level blocks preventing access if they really wanted to.

Vista blows. It manages to suck up excessive memory AND clog up my computer use with redundant security windows every time I try to as much as copy and paste a file. Thanks Windows! Thank you Microsoft!

The condescending intonations from people who use Windows are ridiculous: If you're so goddamn "pro" at computers, code your own OS and make sure it isn't full of retarded security holes.

Why, exactly, would you need to block outbound connection?


You have obviously never used Vista SP1. Please, refrain from judging an OS unless you have actually used it. XP SP0 was much worse than Vista SP0.

It is certainly not going to be an inbound connection, considering they would first need to know that your computer even exists. They would also not depend on receiving an inbound connection request on the computer, considering that many people have their computers connected through routers (often whether they know it or not) and that routers by nature cannot know which computer unsolicited packets should be forwarded to unless you tell it in the configuration.

Your suggestion to redirect the host to something else (essentially blocking it) would not work if the remote server is accessed directly by its IP address instead of referencing a host name.

Your point is probably basically irrelevant anyway, considering that many people probably won't want to risk running it with old vulnerabilities left unpatched. Microsoft occasionally has updates that are required before getting additional updates; the blacklist could easily be added there.

Quite simple, windows fails. It has only one advantage, its market share. No time to elaborate now.

So true!

I would recommend Ubuntu Linux. If you know Python, or know how to copy and paste Python code that works, Linux would be the best for you!

Above: People who hate Windows because they think it's the cool thing to do.

Ah, you saw right through us. So you're hip right? For sticking with a shitty OS?

My EUDs don't work on OSX. I can't run crysis on linux. I don't know how to right click a png image and compress it in OSX. There's a lot more small reasons I use windows, all of which I've grown accustomed to. There's no reason to call windows shitty, especially when it's the best at what it does, which is provide a stable and secure operating system for home and business PCs. It sucks as a server, no doubt.

I'm not calling Windows shitty, I was referring to Vista. I've heard great things about Windows 7.

7 is just Vista with a new interface. Stop drinking the kool-aid.

It's supposed to use all available memory. It preloads your most used programs so that you don't have to wait as long to open them up. And if you don't use the program that Windows guessed you would or another programs needs more memory, then it dumps the cache. What's the harm? Best case scenario a program loads faster. Worst case nothing happens. Your computer doesn't slow down because your using 75% of your RAM instead of 25%.

The condescending intonation from people who use Windows Linux OS X are ridiculous.
Condescending assholes use all operating systems.

please read this
http://www.tweakguides.com/VA_1.html

Most people who say Windows 7 is good and Windows Vista is bad probably have not used both or either. When I say people who have used it, I mean extensively, not just a couple times and didn't really ever give it a chance.

Is this supposed to prove to me that Vista is terrible? There were only two real unsolvable issues, and they were both fairly minor. The rest were explained to be features or "annoyances" that you actually shouldn't get rid of.

I use Windows 7.


It really isn't. I've used both for months, and though Vista is a decent improvement of XP, 7 is leaps and bounds ahead, especially in the speed and networking area.


I agree.