xpfaq

Get It Try It

Is xp all that bad?
No, no operating system is all that bad. (Well...)

Why object to it then?
XP represents a degradation - somewhat - in user-friendliness. It's what Thomas Greene of The Register called 'electronic babysitting'. Serious users may have a difficult time with the 'XP look' - definitely Teletubbie-inspired. (Fortunately you can turn this off and revert to the more palatable 'Windows Classic'.) And XP does more than even 2K to limit your understanding of what's going on 'under the hood' (and that's saying a lot).

Is it slower than 2K?
Some tests have shown it faster. Then again, the way these tests are constructed... Time will tell. It will certainly consume more memory, as icons are now rendered in full 32-bit glory - expect the 'crunch' of normal system operations to weigh in at about eight times that of 2K/NT.

What is product activation?
Product activation is a way for Billg to reduce what he calls 'casual copying'. Bill has been rabid against what he sees as 'software piracy' for as long as he's been in the business.

Does he really have a point?
No, most likely not. Casual copying works only for the extremely uninterested computer user. Anyone who uses a PC regularly will need their own copy of the install CD/DVD. On the other hand, with today's technology, it's easier than ever to copy install CDs. What's happening is that Honest Harry Homeowner is getting the shaft. Bill doesn't care much what happens to Harry, as long as no one steals from him.

Do I risk having my PC stop working for me 'just like that'?
Most definitely. All the promises in the world don't help when it comes to Microsoft technology and Microsoft programming. On the one hand, you never know if Microsoft is telling you the truth - or the whole truth - and past experience would have you be very suspicious. On the other hand, Microsoft programmers aren't exactly related to Albert Einstein. History teaches us that Microsoft programmers, like few others, have a pronounced tendency to 'screw up'. With XP and product activation, anything can happen - literally. This is not to say it will - only that it can. If you run XP, you will always be at risk.

What alternatives do I have then?
If you are buying a new box in a computer store - very little. For a time, you will be able to find systems with 98 or ME or 2K, but these will gradually disappear, unless one very significant grass roots movement starts up. But this in turn is highly unlikely, what with the vice-like grip Microsoft holds computer manufacturers in. These manufacturers simply can't afford to pay full price for any version of Windows. And if they don't do as Microsoft tells them, they would have to. They can't risk that. You could always try your corner store of course, and see if they will build a box for you. Or you might try building one for yourself. With any luck you can get your old 98 or ME or 2K to work on it. Or you might try Linux - Thomas Greene says Mandrake is the easiest to set up, while SuSE is the best in the long run.

How do these alternative operating systems compare with XP?
In general, they compare very well, but how well they compare for you depends on who you are and what you intend to do with your box. If you like tinkering, then any flavour of Linux will serve you well. If you just want to have a box that runs and don't want to worry about configuring it or mucking about inside its operating system, then perhaps XP on a box right out of the showroom is ideal for you. If you want blinding graphics and multimedia, then you might try a Mac.

Is it difficult to migrate to another operating system?
No, not really, but again, it depends on who you are and what you intend to do. The user interfaces of all the major operating systems and desktops of today - XP, OSX, KDE, Gnome, Ximian - are roughly equivalent. Most give you a desktop, a file browser, an Internet browser, and an email program. How carefully thought out these various user interfaces are is another matter - it's not in the clever graphics that usability shows. Word has it right now, for example, that the modern Mac is the least usable of all the modern boxes out there.

So it's a big mistake to stick with Windows?
Yes and no. Big mistake it might not be - not today. But look at it this way: A lot changes in a few years in this business. Who would have guessed, even a few years ago, that Microsoft would be the odd man out, the only operating system vendor not using a flavour of Unix? All the rest - from Red Hat through Slackware, Debian, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Mandrake, SuSE and more, all the way to Apple's OSX - are flavours of Unix. It's all Unix on the one side, and Microsoft all by its lonesome on the other. What does that tell you? If you want flexibility, the ability to jump from one platform to the next as effortlessly as possible, where should you invest your time? The Internet is built on Unix. Most of its protocols are built with Unix in mind. All the cool tools are for Unix. Where do you want to go today?

Can I run Unix and XP on the same machine?
Unix wouldn't mind - XP most likely would. XP is inflexible - and most likely has 'guerilla code' to fight any such plans you have in mind. If you really want to try out Unix before taking the plunge, put it on one of your old boxes. It needs a lot less RAM and a lot less CPU to run well. Try it out there first - and if you like it and get used to it, put it on your new box too.