Byeee SL

While it's cool to see you're finally merging sl with the www I'm sad that I won't be there anymore to be able to check it further.

I'm one of the people so oldfashioned that I am actually relying on my system's security and stability, so there's no way I'm going to swap from Windows 2000 to XP or Vista just to be able to go on running SL - I do other things with my PC as well, and all those run just nicely on Win2K, just as they should, without being hindered by artificial restrictions implemented in the newer Windows versions. The fact that, even though Vista is out for quite some time now, MS had to expand the support for win 2000 until at least 2010 should tell you something.

I'm not a lonely eccentric or a notorious MS-Hater - There is many prople like me for whom a stable and secure windows system is more important than, say, a windows that offers revolutionary happy-happy-joy-joy-colour-schemes for simpletons.

More or less the last thing that I still had fun doing in sl, meeting with some friends in Squeebee's theater and watch a nice old monster movie, I allready can't do anymore since the quicktime update you now require (which does not exist for windows 2000). Please tell me you went through the trouble and checked if this quacktime security leak was relevant for windows 2000 at all and not just another security leak only existing under xp and vista in the first place!

Somehow it seems quite sad that one has to explain to so many people why one doesn't want to "up"grade to XP or vista over and over again...

But I try it a last time and I make it very, very easy to understand:

Implementing a "security upgrade" that requires you to run XP or Vista instead of Windows 2000 on your machine is like making people wear seatbelts in their cars, but also douse them in gasoline and make them hold a lit match each time they want to drive their car.

So: Thanks for the fun I had over the last year - and bye.

Get used to it. Windows 2000 will no longer be supported by microsoft eventually. Not sure of the date, but it can't be far off.

not supported = no more updates (security or otherwise).

Understand where you are coming from. I'm planning on being an xp hold out for as long as possible.

http://download.opensuse.org

'nuff said.

Hey Lance - I need to run windows for a list of reasons, and while it would be possible to run a linux partition I simply don't feel like booting back and fro depending on what I'm doing.

"Get used to it. Windows 2000 will no longer be supported by microsoft eventually. Not sure of the date, but it can't be far off."

Try at least 2010. So many companies are running 2k because they have admins that know a bit about stability and security issues that MS expanded the phase of support. So people like you and me are not alone.

The annoying thing is, that right now I really don’t have that choice. I simply don’t have the money to buy myself a new computer just like that, as I allready said XP doesn’t really run stable on my machine (an AMD3200+, 1 gig, radeon 9700 - one SHOULD think that’d be enough). Win2k still does, and because of my rl job I do need to run windows on my computer. So it is win2k right now for me. Not much of a choice.

And:

- I provide content from my webpage as torrents as well (all legal here, no worries, it’s my own music) and from XP on MS decided to allow a maximum of 10 open channels. Which makes it pretty useless, even for *legal* p2p useages like mine. I know there’s a hack for this restriction, it made XP even more unstable as it allready was. And then: I’m sorry, I have to *HACK MY SYSTEM* to be able to run my p2p service? 10 channels are far from enough - some users dl very slowly, so I can provide many more than 10 peers at the same time with no problem (AND play SL on the side). On XP I can’t even fetch my mail while the torrent client is running with only about 1/10th of it’s possible output.

- since windows appeared first I had good reasons for every step I took from version to version. I’m sure you agree that we can ignore the 3.1 here. Back in the 90s I worked in a computer games shop, where we allways installed the altest windows on at least one of our demo machines. So I allways had the chance to look at it first. When there was better stability and usefull new features I made the step at home as well. The switch to 2k was because it’s much more stable than any other I saw before (including the new ones, running on friends machines too, not just on mine). Oh, and NTFS is a really great advanteage compared to fat32…

So my “choice” here is to swap great stability for … What? That’s my point: There has been nothing at all up to this point XP or Vista had to offer to me. Everything I want my OS to do (in sane dimensions) I can allready do with my win2k, there has been no revolutionary new features that make the new versions a real *must have* like before. Oh - be assured, I do quite a lot of things with my OS too, not just fetch my mail and run word. From scripting to watching movies, to running all kinds of games to running my rl homestudio via Cubase VST from it. This computer right now is *exactly* the kind of multi-media wondermachine I allways hoped I one day would own since first getting my fingers on a c64 and starting to dream about THE FUTURE (/echo)…

- don’t even get me started about the whole license business going on XP and Vista… Just so much: It simply irritates me that, to be able to install my OS that at that point I allready own (I know, legally that’s a whole other thing, but I bloody paid for it, and in my view that still should count a bit) on a new hd I have to get some new registration…

and so on and so on…

I promise: As soon as they come up with something really cool or usefull exclusively for XP or Vista, like neural-interface-cybersex, I’m game. But until then I see no reason to trade my win2k for an alternative that takes away a lot of the control I have about what my computer does. I’m just that kind of guy.

First of all: Good bye and have a nice first life!

For your technical problems: Well, google is a good friend, for example regarding the "limitation" to 10 connections...

cu
Aleco

... and really reading before you answer could be yours:

"I know there’s a hack for this restriction, it made XP even more unstable as it allready was. And then: I’m sorry, I have to *HACK MY SYSTEM* to be able to run my p2p service?"

And that doesn't solve all the other issues I have with that system. Apart from me not wanting to be forced to upgrade some of the other programs I use, because of course the versions I do have don't support XP properly.

And then there's the issues I encountered when I tried introducing my sound hardware setup to XP, something I never had any problems with under 2000. For what I do with my PC, XP (or Vista... shudder) offers NOTHING AT ALL in terms of new useable features, while at the same time restricting my access to my computer by loads of unwanted new "features".

No - thanks.

And: I don't have technical problems. Everything important runs just fine. What I'm telling you is that there's no way I'm going to change that, just to be able to run SL.

You did make your point clear.

And now?

cu
Aleco

Well, see the topic.

Except the ability to play SL in the way you want.




So SL isn't important, but you still feel it important to let us all know that you are leaving and why.

I'm not really disagreeing with you, although my experience of Win2000 (limited to one machine not used very often) is that it was barely more stable than Win98, whereas in 4 years of using XP I had less than half a dozen complete crashes, and in a year of using Vista one major crash, which I think was due to a brief power outage.

I do think that it is unrealistic of you to expect LL to make special allowances for what is an obsolete OS, however well it may perform the tasks you want it to.

I have a example of what he means.............My company wanted to build a server and run our accounting soft from it. But The accounting soft was only XP and vista (yet) so we could`nt build at the moment. In facts many 2000 is using accounting soft as well. So you have a point.

Well, yes, I am pissed. True.

What I mean is "important" like rl work done on the machine and other things.