Just because YOU have a small issue with Windows Explorer doesn't mean Vista is better than 7.
FelipeInside
ok i run chkdsk and found out i have 578kb in bad sectors can this be why windows explorer stop work But of course. Run a chkdsk /R (it will ask you to restart). i did that is there a way to to get windows files out of that part of my disk
[QUOTE="tcf457073"][QUOTE="LPG13"] the second edition of windows 98 was rock solid, before that, was like 95. windows 2000 and nt4.0 were really solid too. windows xp sp3 aswell. but none of them compare to windows 7, and thats saying a lot. and, believe it or not, but windows me performed really well on me.FelipeInside
windows 7 i hate cas it keeps saying windows explorer has stopped working and this is what bugs the hell out of me
Just because YOU have a small issue with Windows Explorer doesn't mean Vista is better than 7.
ok i run chkdsk and found out i have 578kb in bad sectors can this be why windows explorer stop work
[QUOTE="DanielDust"]Gave up on them in 2004, till then I installed XP over 10 times, didn't really make a difference :P, even if I'd get no virus, it would still become slower after 3-4 months of patches. The SPs did make it a little better every time, but it was too little too late. SP 2 I believe lasted an entire year, before I had to format again 'cause of the speed, till then having XP for an entire year was a dream.FelipeInside
I rarely install patches, I just wait for a big Service Pack. With XP I rarely installed patches and it worked great. It had issues with no service pack or sometimes with SP1.... but after installing SP2 or SP3 and no more, it was as stable as 7. 7 will work fine but like to windows explorer has stopped working
I don't think many people would agree with you there.
LPG13
Take it up another level, to nobody. Vista might be great, but it's more XP than it should, gets terrible the longer you keep it, 7 on the other hand is the first great OS since 98.
Can't wait to see how 8 performs, the preview ran pretty great and it's technically, a mess.
the second edition of windows 98 was rock solid, before that, was like 95. windows 2000 and nt4.0 were really solid too. windows xp sp3 aswell. but none of them compare to windows 7, and thats saying a lot. and, believe it or not, but windows me performed really well on me. windows 7 i hate cas it keeps saying windows explorer has stopped working and this is what bugs the hell out of me
[QUOTE="LPG13"]linux is a solid platform, yes, im studying to be a system engineer, and we got to look at some linux platforms and do some stuff with em, and i must say, only if you want to host a server is better. a regular pc user would be better of using windows. and gamers too. its free, yes, but that doesnt mean is better. im a windows guy myself, dont care what linux fanboys might have to say, but software support is the main reason i use windows, that, and the fact that windows 7 is the most stable, solid and fast Microsoft OS i used in the last 20 years. no windows vista is more stable then 7
It seems pretty much all the best games run smoothly using Wine or have some sort of very very good rip-off (FreeCiv for example is a free version of Civilisation). AND IT'S FREE! Not only does the OS ubuntu look fantastic but it seems to perform in the same way as Windows 7 or Mac's strange OS (the name escapes me). HOWEVER, I have never actually played on a Linux system and really wondered if it was just a load of rubbish. Obviously I am talking about PC gaming not PS3 (Linux is runable on PS3). Opinions?
Maximus_Fett
window vista is the best for games as it never legs
Log in to comment