Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 137 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Arris: Application & Utility Forum? #51249

    Icons are a good idea, but they won’t work in case the topic covers more than one OS (eg. “Vista vs Win7” or “XP vs WS2003”). Besides, I think that most people will automatically mention the OS in the topic title anyway if there’s possibility for ambiguity. A simple mention of this in the rules topic (or subforum description) should suffice.

    The structure you proposed looks good to me, except I believe it’s more common to have the Misc subforum last. Although, looking at the existing forums, the reverse has also worked out just fine. Thought I’d mention it just the same, though.

    in reply to: Arris: Application & Utility Forum? #51248

    Looking through the soon-to-be-merged subforums, I see only two topics that don’t explicitly state the OS in the title, and one of those isn’t OS-specific anyway, so this shouldn’t be a problem.

    in reply to: Why Server 2008 [R2] over Windows Vista/7? #50473

    I’ve mostly been using flash drives for storage (and the occasional OS install), so I haven’t really cared about read/write speeds that much, just capacity. I just benchmarked my 4 GB Cruzer and it averages at 24 MB/s, which sounds good enough. I’ll try it out on an older XP machine with 1 GB RAM and see how it goes.

    in reply to: Why Server 2008 [R2] over Windows Vista/7? #50471

    @halladayrules wrote:

    Your results will vary depending on the type of drive you have. I have a 2GB drive that reads at 20,000 KB/sec while my cousin has one that only reads at half that speed. He has R2 installed on his machine and his boot times didn’t go down nearly as well as mine did, but thats to be expected since I have a faster access flash drive. Even if your boot time doesn’t go down tremendously you will definitely notice a difference in application responsiveness.

    What flash drive are you using for eBoostr? I’ve been thinking of trying it out on a couple of older XP machines that could use the performance boost.

    in reply to: Windows Embedded Standard 7 #50863

    Then I guess you’re out of luck. As far as the iPad is concerned, at least. Android can run on the x86 architecture, so if you can find a tablet with an x86 CPU, it might be able to run WE7.

    Going over the list of current and future Android tablets, most use a Snapdragon, Rockchip, Tegra or other ARM-based CPU, but there’s at least one that’s sporting an Intel Atom. Generally, though, x86 CPUs are currently too energy-inefficient to really become a viable option in the tablet/MID market.

    in reply to: Why Server 2008 [R2] over Windows Vista/7? #50466

    [s:kn7ps9fi]Hhu? Tosp wtah?

    Ho eomc no. Tjus ebuacse uyo ntdemuissdoor ym iionetstnn ni eht ethro pcito soend’t mena uoy dloush taek gevytrnhei I spot sa a elornpas atcatk gsnatia oyu. Ro ear uyo llryae atth imtaermu dan pialcbean fo gisnee tpas a eimlps msgnrnieutsnaddi?[/s:kn7ps9fi]

    in reply to: Why Server 2008 [R2] over Windows Vista/7? #50464

    Interesting… Out of pure interest, which applications are BSOD-ing your machine? I’m only asking because I’m into audio recording/production myself, and have considered upgrading my current XP-based setup to Win7, so I’m interested in any potential compatibility issues.

    Re audio pops/dropouts, in my experience those are usually caused by underpowered hardware or suboptimal drivers, but then you’ve probably researched this issue thoroughly already. Did you attempt to pin the problem to any specific component of Windows 7 (eg. by disabling potential suspects, to have Win7’s list of running processes/services/etc. match that of Windows Server)?

    in reply to: Arris: Application & Utility Forum? #51244

    @hoak wrote:

    It should be clear who the topic post was directed at; in case you missed it let me retype it here so you can see it more clearly: Arris: Application & Utility Forum? Nowhere is there any “RFD” or solicitation for discussion explicit or implicit.

    In that case you should have contacted Arris directly via PM, email or other private channel. When you post a message on a public forum, an invitation for discussion is implied.

    But I see you’re really taking it into heart that someone dared challenge your opinion. I’m still confused as to why you would totally fly off the handle like that for what really was a sincere question (and not at all rhetorical, as you claim), but since I’ve no desire to partake further in this nonsense, I’ll be happy to oblige your request to, as you so eloquently put it, “flake off”.

    Arris: thanks for chiming in. I agree, merging the non-2008/R2 forums into one general Windows forum is a good idea, it reduces clutter on the forum main page. Of those, the Windows 7 forum is the only one that sees any significant activity anyway. The Apps&Utils subforum will also make more sense there, for reasons already explained. I’ll be interested in seeing how the new structure works out.

    in reply to: Arris: Application & Utility Forum? #51240

    Heh, relax there, buddy. No need to get all agitated. I was asking a simple question – “Why?” – since what you suggested struck me as, well, redundant. But I guess you were not looking for constructive criticism after all. Sorry about that.

    @hoak wrote:

    I’d say your hostility

    Au contraire, my good man. The only one giving off hostile vibes here is you.

    @hoak wrote:

    apparent desire troll the forum to a stand still

    Appearances can be deceiving. My desire is to initiate discussion, not to troll. I’m not sure why you’re so mistaken about my intentions. Maybe you’re unclear on the meaning of the phrase “playing devil’s advocate”? If so, I’m sure a quick visit to your search engine of choice will clear it up, after which we can hopefully resume civilised discussion.

    @hoak wrote:

    regard for the kind of people posting here as no different then any other Windows Users

    Is it not the whole purpose of this forum to reduce the difference between Windows 7/Vista and Server 2008 R1/R2 Workstation to nothing more but semantics? For all intents and purposes, everyone here is a Windows user (Server-specific compatibility issues notwithstanding, of course).

    I do hope you’re not somehow basing your self-worth on your choice of OS. I’m only asking because your posts leave the impression that you think this is some sort of exclusive club where “run-of-the-mill Windows Users” (whatever that means) are derisively looked down upon by those select few who have been blessed with both the knowledge and the resources required to run this particular piece of software. Because guess what? It isn’t.

    @hoak wrote:

    this isn’t the thread you’re looking for

    Your Jedi mind tricks won’t work on me πŸ˜›

    in reply to: Arris: Application & Utility Forum? #51238

    @hoak wrote:

    Not for the ‘Server as Workstation‘ platform and audience.

    And how is that audience different from the general ‘buy Windows 7 and use that‘ audience? Compatibility issues are pretty much the only things that set us apart and, like I said, the forum has those covered already.

    @hoak wrote:

    Of couse if everyone is satisfied with the static state of things — you’re absolutely right; why go for interesting discussion and post count that’s above what you’d see on a comments section of an abandoned web page…

    Hmm… that seems a pretty cynical view of things πŸ˜›

    in reply to: Arris: Application & Utility Forum? #51236

    Aren’t there already plenty of sites that do just what you described? Why duplicate that effort, especially in a relatively small community like this? Application compatibility, sure (and we already have a subforum for that), but general reviews, recommendations etc. aren’t specific to R2 at all – you could go to any Windows 7 forum and the same things that are discussed there would apply here as well.

    Just playing devil’s advocate…

    in reply to: Running as Administrator #51175

    @halladayrules wrote:

    Yes you are right. I do a lot of torrenting and sometimes I like to find cracks (not illegal) for stupid games that I use (trainers, cheats, etc) for the fun of it and almost every time its done downloading my AV picks it up as a trojan and quarantines it. I find it much more convenient to just manually scan everything I download to the skip the annoyance of the nagging false positives all the time. But your right most AVs now a days have some real-time scanner included that will scan the file before you even attempt to open it. The only thing I don’t like that about is no AV is perfect and if you suspect the file to be a virus you can always do an online malware scan (jotti for example) to be absolutely sure. Trusting your real-time scanner doesn’t always work 100% of the time. I’ve had AVG before and when i downloaded the file nothing happened and when I opened up the file nothing happened and I was like, “oh crap.” AVG picked up the virus after it was already infiltrated into my system. Strange how some AVs work that way? Why does it all of a sudden decide to pick it up after its infected the machine. AVG would say it deleted the threat but it was missing a key system file that would regenerate the virus and every time I would reboot it would go in a endless loop of “infection found”. I had to manually remove it which took a little while.

    That sounds nasty…

    I do a fair amount of torrenting as well, and occasionally do a manual scan before opening/running something, but in all cases my antivirus has picked up potential threats automatically (as soon as that particular file finishes downloading), and manual scans come up clean. I can see the problem with regular false positives, though, and you make a good point about running an online scan with multiple AV engines on suspected files.

    in reply to: Running as Administrator #51169

    @halladayrules wrote:

    2) Scan every file you download before you open it

    I cannot stress this is enough to everyone. Almost every time I do a side job fixing computers (mostly removing spyware/malware) I teach them to scan before they open.

    Doesn’t pretty much every antivirus software scan any files in real-time as they’re written to the hard drive anyway? What additional benefit does manually re-scanning them afterwards bring?

    in reply to: Windows Embedded Standard 7 #50861

    I didn’t say it was great. It is, after all, 13 years old now. My point was that it’s (to the best of my knowledge, at least) the last version of Windows Embedded to run on ARM processors (edit: excepting Windows Mobile, of course).

    By the way, a quick search shows a few ways to turn an iPad into a thin client connecting to, and controlling, a remote installation of Windows 7. It’s not exactly what you’re asking for since you’re not actually installing Windows on the iPad, but they might be of interest to you nonetheless:

    in reply to: Why Server 2008 [R2] over Windows Vista/7? #50460

    @halladayrules wrote:

    As you can see, eBoostr is providing most of the punch when it comes to my boot time because caching from a flash device is faster than caching from your hard drive. It really doesn’t even make any sense for me to run Superfetch on 2008 it’ll just be eating up cpu and disk cycles, which would make that irratating grinding sound on the hard drive and drive me insane lol. Eboostr is nice and quiet. πŸ˜› I’d be willing to bet if you bought a readyboost enabled drive on your Windows 7 machine you would get reboot times within ~10 seconds close to mine Indrek.

    Perhaps. But like I explained before, reboot times aren’t important to me. Plus, I have a laptop, so carrying it around with a flash drive constantly plugged in isn’t a very good idea – too many opportunities for bumping it against something and damaging the motherboard.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 137 total)