Meh idc. I use XP atm only because it runs the best on my laptop. If I
had the hardware, Windows 7 would be my favorite. It mostly depends on
hardware I guess though (XP runs the best on my laptop, I legally own
Vista basic, but I like windows 7 the best ^.^)

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:52 AM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote:
> Now you've gone and made a great point :) What I was trying to say is
> that I try to help in every way I can, and will gladly debate any
> matter at hand, mainly if I have knowledge to support it. I just hope
> not to hurt any feelings if I say bad things about xp and such.
>
> On Jun 15, 10:46 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote:
>> we're all here are pretty much act like brothers...lol, some of here are
>> pretty much seniors here...
>> and we discuss not accuse or something like that....
>> also spam here is prette annoying..but it has it's positiveness, spam often
>> target active forums and popular sites...which means our group has became
>> popular and well known...rite? ^^
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:40 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > One of the things I find curious about our group is that most people
>> > do act civilized :) I mean, after posting some time ago that I didn't
>> > like xp and liked vista, I feared everyone would be all over me, but I
>> > also made my points regarding each subject. I also noticed a few days
>> > ago there were a spammer littering the group, this is not an easy
>> > thing to filter, is it?
>>
>> > On Jun 15, 10:20 am, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > To tell the truth I never did look at laptops with any respect
>> > > whatsoever as I find true computers to be desktops. The exception of
>> > > course are desktop replacements, which I've had the pleasure of
>> > > working with, and definitely pwn any measly regular branded laptop. So
>> > > I'm kinda in a tough spot when owning myself one of those laptops, and
>> > > worse since I happened to choose a business model that disables any
>> > > email support, only phone :(
>>
>> > > On Jun 15, 10:16 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > > > haha, dont be, juz brag to them and let them PWNED !! ^^
>>
>> > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 5:10 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > > Well, I gotta be careful, if after installing V1.1 my hdd score went
>> > > > > almost a whole wei point, then now it might reach 7.9... and then how
>> > > > > will I face people with laptops costing 4 times what mine cost? :)
>>
>> > > > > On Jun 15, 10:06 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > > > > well, i could make a V1.1 and V1.2 suggestion / bugs report
>> > section, juz
>> > > > > > like espi have done many article in the group, but pinned topics
>> > are not
>> > > > > in
>> > > > > > my authority, as MAD_BEAST limit it to prevent clutter..
>>
>> > > > > > as for the installation method of the V1.1E, juz click and
>> > proceed...no
>> > > > > > uninstall and stuff...simple but powerful..juz like an
>> > update/patch..
>>
>> > > > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:56 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > In that case some topics might have to be joined together, and
>> > closed
>> > > > > > > so they info would never get lost between lots of posting. After
>> > all
>> > > > > > > the pinned topics could be discussed on new topics, right?
>>
>> > > > > > > On Jun 15, 9:54 am, Espionage724 <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > I think MAD_BEAST in the past said something like there was a
>> > limited
>> > > > > > > > amount of things we could sticky (like 3 maybe). I could be
>> > wrong
>> > > > > > > > though
>>
>> > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:51 AM, tribaljet <
>> > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > It was nothing, I'm glad to help, and I could mention if I
>> > had a
>> > > > > quirk
>> > > > > > > > > or two but that issue in particular would never go unnoticed
>> > :)
>> > > > > Would
>> > > > > > > > > the install procedure be the same or in this specific case
>> > the
>> > > > > install
>> > > > > > > > > could be done without uninstalling, like an update?
>> > > > > > > > > And since you're a moderator, can't you pin a topic about
>> > your
>> > > > > > > > > releases? I feel we should have a couple of pinned topics,
>> > like a
>> > > > > faq
>> > > > > > > > > regarding the most common issues like addreg howto and proper
>> > > > > install
>> > > > > > > > > methods, wei scores (I know there is a topic already, but a
>> > cleaned
>> > > > > > > > > one with only the scores and the specs for those scores), a
>> > cleaned
>> > > > > up
>> > > > > > > > > download section, among a few other things. I firmly believe
>> > this
>> > > > > > > > > group has done many many things in the past before I joined,
>> > and
>> > > > > I've
>> > > > > > > > > seen some of the wonders myself, but there are too many
>> > leftovers
>> > > > > from
>> > > > > > > > > early days that haven't been cleaned up after all the ruckus
>> > with
>> > > > > > > > > intel.
>>
>> > > > > > > > > On Jun 15, 9:44 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> well, im not saying that it's like installing a full
>> > driver...it's
>> > > > > > > like a
>> > > > > > > > >> patch to an already installed driver...
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> im planning an upgrade coz V1.1 is pretty old now, and V1.2
>> > is
>> > > > > under
>> > > > > > > early
>> > > > > > > > >> stage of development...
>> > > > > > > > >> some that u can expect from the update is...
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> - fully working with netbooks, which apparently most netbook
>> > users
>> > > > > > > wanted it
>> > > > > > > > >> back then...
>> > > > > > > > >> - some minor bug fixed such as MSI code which make PCI slows
>> > down
>> > > > > such
>> > > > > > > as in
>> > > > > > > > >> ur case...
>> > > > > > > > >> - and some major bug regarding performance..
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> i had to handed to u tribaljet..^^ without ur report on the
>> > V1.1
>> > > > > not
>> > > > > > > long
>> > > > > > > > >> ago, i never knew what the bugs are, finally now V1.1 will
>> > be
>> > > > > renew
>> > > > > > > > >> again...^^ i might released it next week for testers...
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:35 PM, tribaljet <
>> > [email protected]
>>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > So you're saying those who have V1.1 installed should
>> > install
>> > > > > this
>> > > > > > > new
>> > > > > > > > >> > version? And what kind of improvements might we expect? I
>> > > > > personally
>> > > > > > > > >> > ask because you know I've had my share of problems
>> > regarding
>> > > > > driver
>> > > > > > > > >> > installs, which after your help were solved and now things
>> > work
>> > > > > > > better
>> > > > > > > > >> > than ever.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > On Jun 15, 9:29 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > ah, maybe pretty soon i wanna make an update on
>> > V1.1...full
>> > > > > > > improvements
>> > > > > > > > >> > > coming soon for V1.1 users ^^
>> > > > > > > > >> > > while waiting for the V1.2, V1.1 can enjoy an
>> > > > > upgrade...V1.1E...
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:26 PM, tribaljet <
>> > > > > [email protected]
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > It seems the majority of netbooks use 945gse, but a
>> > few also
>> > > > > use
>> > > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > same as mine, 945gme with the device id 27ae.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > On Jun 15, 9:21 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > hmm, pardon me if it's off topic but what chipset
>> > that
>> > > > > most
>> > > > > > > netbooks
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > use??
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > i think i know how to make V1.1 fully compatible
>> > with
>> > > > > > > netbooks....
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:00 PM, tribaljet <
>> > > > > > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > So, between 166mhz (the power saving mode and
>> > default
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > > > some
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > chipsets), 250 (the mobile default) and 400
>> > (desktop
>> > > > > > > default), if
>> > > > > > > > >> > you
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > have 400 is great, making the fsb the only
>> > limiting
>> > > > > factor
>> > > > > > > in your
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > graphic performance.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Jun 15, 8:56 am, Espionage724 <
>> > > > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I think GPUz in the past shows 400Mhz
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 3:20 AM, tribaljet <
>> > > > > > > > >> > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Maybe it increases the speed a bit, but your
>> > chipset
>> > > > > > > resembles
>> > > > > > > > >> > more
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > the 945gms than 945gm which is the general
>> > chip. I
>> > > > > think
>> > > > > > > you
>> > > > > > > > >> > can't
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > activate dual channel, and your gpu clock is,
>> > at
>> > > > > least
>> > > > > > > at
>> > > > > > > > >> > default,
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > at
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > 166mhz. I'm not sure what's the equivalent
>> > desktop
>> > > > > > > chipset but
>> > > > > > > > >> > you
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > should use gpu-z to check the actual clock
>> > speeds.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Jun 15, 8:01 am, Espionage724 <
>> > > > > > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > > >> > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> hmmm, but GMABooster (not that I even 100%
>> > trust it
>> > > > > > > seeing as
>> > > > > > > > >> > it
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> doesn't work) says I run at 200Mhz.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 2:58 AM, tribaljet <
>> > > > > > > > >> > [email protected]
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Since you have a celeron, I think you have
>> > a
>> > > > > 940gml
>> > > > > > > chipset,
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > which
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > has
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > a gma 950 gpu. 945gm chipsets are for core
>> > duos
>> > > > > and
>> > > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > >> > likes. I
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > think
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > the only limitations you have are the fsbs
>> > of
>> > > > > cpus,
>> > > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > >> > maximum
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > amount
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > of ram and a slower gpu, working at 166mhz
>> > > > > instead of
>> > > > > > > 250,
>> > > > > > > > >> > which
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > explains your gaming performance.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > On Jun 15, 7:48 am, Espionage724 <
>> > > > > > > [email protected]>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> No, it means my chipset is lesser I guess?
>> > Which
>> > > > > I
>> > > > > > > guess in
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > turn
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > would
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> >> mean lower transfer rate between devices?
>> > But
>> > > > > I'm
>>
>> ...
>>
>> read more »
>
> --
> 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
>



-- 
Espionage724 Has A Signature...

-- 
9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS

Reply via email to