Windows 7

[AF]

There are versions of windows 7 that do not have IE preinstalled, but in the US and UK they arent sold as its considered silly by microsoft.

[KaiserJ]

yes pendro, your ubuntu is borky, mine only uses about 200 megs of ram.

so about his free vista upgrade to 7, how does one go about doing that?

[Jazcash]

yes pendro, your ubuntu is borky, mine only uses about 200 megs of ram.

so about his free vista upgrade to 7, how does one go about doing that?

https://windows7upgradeoption.com/Landing.aspx

You should have recieved the product key with your newish PC.
They'll send it to ya via post so you can feel your moist hands around the physical sex of Windows 7.

[aegis]

Code: Select all

PID  USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
6490 marts     20   0 1899m 100m  28m S    8  6.6  48:59.20 IEXPLORE.EXE

yeah. ubuntu choking on memory is totally its fault.

[Pendrokar]

%MEM
6.6

yeah. ubuntu choking on memory is totally its fault.

1500 * 0.066 = 99 Mb
OH MY GOD!!!


There is also other the applications which sum up to 500 Mb.
Although I checked that the top command shows very different stats than that of the system monitor. System monitor says I have 700 Mb so minus those applications it might be 200 Mb for Ubuntu itself.

Still don't know why it loads lengthy and crashes sometimes.

[BrainDamage]

%MEM
6.6

yeah. ubuntu choking on memory is totally its fault.

1500 * 0.066 = 99 Mb
OH MY GOD!!! .

I suggest you to actually look what that number means instead ...

and when you actually did and possibly felt a bit shamed, look at this:
VIRT
1899m

[Pendrokar]

So is that how much IE actually wants, but can only get 6.6% of the total memory?

[BrainDamage]

n: %MEM -- Memory usage (RES)
A task's currently used share of available physical memory.

o: VIRT -- Virtual Image (kb)
The total amount of virtual memory used by the task. It
includes all code, data and shared libraries plus pages that
have been swapped out.

VIRT = SWAP + RES.

p: SWAP -- Swapped size (kb)
The swapped out portion of a task's total virtual memory image.

q: RES -- Resident size (kb)
The non-swapped physical memory a task has used.

r: CODE -- Code size (kb)
The amount of virtual memory devoted to executable code, also
known as the 'text resident set' size or TRS.
s: DATA -- Data+Stack size (kb)
The amount of virtual memory devoted to other than executable
code, also known as the 'data resident set' size or DRS.

t: SHR -- Shared Mem size (kb)
The amount of shared memory used by a task. It simply reflects
memory that could be potentially shared with other processes.

the 6.6% MEM is only physical ram usage, VIRT includes everything, in your case explorer probably swapped badly

[Forboding Angel]

@ FA : I must have missed that point, but this isnt about deletion of the IE. Its about the integration of it into the system. MS still does not comply with EU anti-trust laws. (where the problem was with integration and default distribution of the IE).

It isn't integrated anymore. You can completely remove it, and in the EU it is sold without IE, however, it's stupid to remove it because so many 3rd party software companies rely on the IE rendering engine that those programs fail. Long time ago I uninstalled IE just for the hell of it, 20 minutes later I realized that I had tons of programs that were out and out broken because they rely on the IE Rendering Engine. As a result, it was reinstalled post haste.

IE is microsoft's produce, so is windows, if MS wants to bundle IE that is their business and the EU has no business sticking their fat faces in it.

[==Troy==]

@ FA : I must have missed that point, but this isnt about deletion of the IE. Its about the integration of it into the system. MS still does not comply with EU anti-trust laws. (where the problem was with integration and default distribution of the IE).

It isn't integrated anymore. You can completely remove it, and in the EU it is sold without IE, however, it's stupid to remove it because so many 3rd party software companies rely on the IE rendering engine that those programs fail. Long time ago I uninstalled IE just for the hell of it, 20 minutes later I realized that I had tons of programs that were out and out broken because they rely on the IE Rendering Engine. As a result, it was reinstalled post haste.

IE is microsoft's produce, so is windows, if MS wants to bundle IE that is their business and the EU has no business sticking their fat faces in it.

Exactly my point : tonns of programs relying on IE rengering, MEANS that if there is a bug in IE rendering, ALL of those programs are likely to be affected.

This is what deeply integrated means, not that you cannot uninstall it, or that it is bundled with Win or not.

There are also many other examples of similar politics from MS and the shortcomings of it.

[Gota]

Micro$oft.

[Peet]

Lots of programs rely on the OS's behaviour for its handling of malloc() but nobody seems to complain about their inability to uninstall that....

[Gertkane]

@ FA : I must have missed that point, but this isnt about deletion of the IE. Its about the integration of it into the system. MS still does not comply with EU anti-trust laws. (where the problem was with integration and default distribution of the IE).

It isn't integrated anymore. You can completely remove it, and in the EU it is sold without IE, however, it's stupid to remove it because so many 3rd party software companies rely on the IE rendering engine that those programs fail. Long time ago I uninstalled IE just for the hell of it, 20 minutes later I realized that I had tons of programs that were out and out broken because they rely on the IE Rendering Engine. As a result, it was reinstalled post haste.

IE is microsoft's produce, so is windows, if MS wants to bundle IE that is their business and the EU has no business sticking their fat faces in it.

Exactly my point : tonns of programs relying on IE rengering, MEANS that if there is a bug in IE rendering, ALL of those programs are likely to be affected.

This is what deeply integrated means, not that you cannot uninstall it, or that it is bundled with Win or not.

There are also many other examples of similar politics from MS and the shortcomings of it.

I don't get the point of your argument. If you have a need to use 3rd party software that DEPENDS on IE mechanics then how can you avoid that by running lunix, osx or whatever? Spock would say: This is most illogical.

[==Troy==]

I don't get the point of your argument. If you have a need to use 3rd party software that DEPENDS on IE mechanics then how can you avoid that by running lunix, osx or whatever? Spock would say: This is most illogical.

Use alternatives? And I am EDIT : NOT trying to argue that you can really avoid it. My argument is that MS has given a bad habit to the programmers to write programs based on it's implementations, and it is well known what it led to. Win7 is no exception, but at least now, they are trying to implement things which have been in linux for ages :)

(actually, I am not a linux fanboi, neither am I windows one, I am atm on ubuntu karmic, but at least 40% of my time is spent on Win7 and WinXP machines, and even a bit of MACs, there are tonns of problems with all of those, but the statement is that Win7 is more secure is laughable, yes, it is more secure, from its user)

[Forboding Angel]

Win7 is more secure is laughable, yes, it is more secure, from its user)

More secure than what? XP? In that case that statement makes you a delusional idiot. More secure than linux or mac? I don't think anyone ever made those claims, however, linux and macs are more susceptible to tampering because they do not have the years and years of hardcore security testing that MS has painfully learned from.

If all virus makers and hackers to to today turn their sights on mac and linux (in this example, ubuntu) and the user being an average know nothing computer user (like a grandmother using windows), I think that mac and linux would crumple much faster than a vista/win7 machine would. Of course that is highly debatable, however, linux in particular does not have all the "common" safeguards that windows machines have. No OS is unhackable, no piece of software is unhackable, that is simply a fact of the game.

[Gota]

I think Forb is getting payed to advertise win 7.
Micro$oft.

[==Troy==]

Win7 is more secure is laughable, yes, it is more secure, from its user)

More secure than what? XP? In that case that statement makes you a delusional idiot. More secure than linux or mac? I don't think anyone ever made those claims, however, linux and macs are more susceptible to tampering because they do not have the years and years of hardcore security testing that MS has painfully learned from.

If all virus makers and hackers to to today turn their sights on mac and linux (in this example, ubuntu) and the user being an average know nothing computer user (like a grandmother using windows), I think that mac and linux would crumple much faster than a vista/win7 machine would. Of course that is highly debatable, however, linux in particular does not have all the "common" safeguards that windows machines have. No OS is unhackable, no piece of software is unhackable, that is simply a fact of the game.

You should certainly read the "myths of linux" pages on the internet. One of them addresses your plainly blind statement about hackers "not targetting" linux. I withdraw from this discussion until the next time when someone makes another incorrect statement about windows or linux :)

[AF]

You should certainly read the "myths of linux" pages on the internet. One of them addresses your plainly blind statement about hackers "not targetting" linux. I withdraw from this discussion until the next time when someone makes another incorrect statement about windows or linux :)

Absolutist illogical trolling is absolutist

[Forboding Angel]

I withdraw from this discussion until the next time when someone makes another incorrect statement about windows or linux :)

That would be a good idea, because in this case, you're arguing from a place of weakness.

[Muzic]

I was about to install it today but then I couldn't access my external hard drive to backup files..sucks...