July 21st, 2005


Previous Entry Next Entry
jimbojones
11:12 am - Windows XP is fucking retarded.


I have 1.5 GB of RAM in this laptop.  The most of it I've used since the last time I rebooted it - 32 days and some change now - is 728 MB, a little less than half of what I've got physically available.  So why, why, why if I leave Adobe ImageReady minimized for more than an hour or two does the OS "helpfully" swap out the couple of hundred megs ImageReady occupies in RAM to the fucking hard disk, making it take ten or twenty seconds to tab back into it when I want to edit an image again?!  ::pounds head on keyboard::

note for the pedantic and/or curious: the problem really is Windows XP, not ImageReady.  If I leave any other app (say, FireFox with a bajillion tabs open) minimized for more than an hour or so while I'm doing something else, the same behavior occurs.

 
Current Mood: ranty
Current Music: Nine Inch Nails - You Know What You Are

(25 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments:



 
[User Picture] From: dixie_chicken
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 03:35 pm
  (Link)
Because it's Windows?

Wish I could help, man.


 
[User Picture] From: discogravy
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 04:09 pm
  (Link)
nah, jimbo could afford a real computer if he wanted one....


 
[User Picture] From: dixie_chicken
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 04:16 pm
  (Link)
Well, he asked why, and I told him. I can't make him do anything about it.


 
[User Picture] From: discogravy
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 05:39 pm
  (Link)
you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him put on a bathing suit, i guess


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 04:41 pm
  (Link)
Well, yes because it's windows. Duh.

I "worked around" the problem; I just disabled paging completely. With 1.5GB that isn't likely to present me with any real issues. But it pisses me off because I shouldn't NEED to forgo the ability to page to disk if I need to just to keep the OS from fucking DOING it when there's absolutely no call to.

I just really hate that every Microsoft product released or "upgraded" for the last five years is very literally worse than the last, and the trend is only getting worse.


 
[User Picture] From: freakout
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 05:02 pm
  (Link)
Is it XP Pro? I had the same problem, until I stole XP Home from that place that fired me for being untrustworthy.


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 05:05 pm
  (Link)
It is XP Pro. But while Windows 2000 would be something of an improvement (I'm not using Win2K on this laptop partly because it's difficult or impossible to get drivers for 2K for most laptops now, but mostly because since I have to support mostly XP boxes now it helps me to have to support my own), XP Home would most certainly not be. I dunno whether or not the annoying overeager paging issue is one that's in Pro but not Home, but Home is crippled in LOTS of other ways (like making it impossible to view or alter file security settings unless you're in Safe mode) that are considerably worse.


 
[User Picture] From: staringgoldfish
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 07:12 pm
  (Link)
That rant icon is hilarious.


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 08:00 pm
  (Link)
Thanks, I spent way too long adapting it for continuous play and <40K file size from a rather more disturbing and much larger and longer non-looped version where the little guy went on to beat himself to a bloody, lifeless pulp.


 
[User Picture] From: lindapendant
Date: July 21st, 2005 - 07:53 pm
  (Link)
staringgoldfish stole my comment.


 
[User Picture] From: clme
Date: July 22nd, 2005 - 04:30 am
  (Link)
I know the issue is Windows... but for the record:
Adobe is still evil just because of what they've done to Acrobat.

That is all.

No wait I lied.

Even with a gig of RAM in 2k I not only get annoying errors but I come across some programs that refuse to work without a page file. I haven't tried it at home though.

Unrelated: I love SATA so far.


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 22nd, 2005 - 06:04 am
  (Link)
ahahahahahaha oh holy shit, acrobat.

the 30 minute "FEAD Optimizer" whatsit before it will actually install itself. Jesus. Don't get me fucking started.

I don't really like SATA, unrelatedly... I mean it's fine in operation, but it's no different in operation than ATA133. I dislike it because the little connectors are fragile and wonky as hell.


 
[User Picture] From: clme
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 04:47 am
  (Link)
I haven't had an issue with connectors (yet), but I've only worked on my own and about a dozen at work so far.

I like SATA because its OMGFAST compared to the ATA100/66 stuff I've been working on for years and the data cable is nice and small and doesn't block air so I dont have to try and slit the cables. Even the few ATA133/150 hard drives I've worked on have had issues of some sort in comparison.

I can see where connectors will present an issue in the future, but until it happens I'm going to play ignorant.

What does piss me off though is that to load a Microsoft OS on a SATA drive I've either got to ghost it or else install a goddamn floppy drive to load SCSI/mass-storage drivers. THE XP INSTALLER WILL NOT LOAD DRIVERS FROM CD FOR MASS STORAGE DEVICES. This makes me very upset, but I dont blame it on the SATA people. I was this close to just burning a copy of my (legal) XP CD with the drivers I needed on it already.


 
From: ex_lovecraf
Date: July 22nd, 2005 - 11:43 pm
  (Link)

cont. from hydrozoa's journal

I think you may have misunderstood the original point I was making. You seem to be focusing on the immediate reaction Meg had to "Easy E" and his approach. That wasn't really what I was addressing. I thought Meg's initial response was totally understandable, and I also think that her later insight and recoginition that "Easy E" most likely had no ill intent is admirable.

What I am more concerned by is the response that some people had to Meg's telling of the story. Like, this response is practically seething with unxpressed racist and classist assumptions. This person is allowing no possibility that "Easy E"'s behavior could be anything other than an intentional harrassment, and displaying a clear ignorance of black culture.

In counterpoint, there's the reaction from yourself and stjude , here, that shows a far more open, tolerant worldview. You're obviously capable of recognizing that "Easy E"'s behavior is valid and even unexceptional within the context of his own culture, and that it isn't a matter of his culture or our culture being better, merely different. As you said, culture clashes are inevitable. The real question is do we have a sensible, sane reaction like Meg, you, stjude, and I did, or do we totally freak out and act like a crime was committed, as sanpaku does.

I think reactions like sanpaku's are fueled by (possibly unconscious, probably unexamined) racist and classist assumptions, founded in a the system of privilege that allows white women to freely view and treat black men as threats, regardless of the reality of the situation.

So, anyways, I hope that clears up my point, and why I said I thought you were building a straw man.


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 12:18 am
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

Oh, sure, if you're talking about that sanpaku guy, I'm with you. You didn't specify him in your original post, and I read it as implying that even Meg's initial expression of dismay was classist/racist, which I definitely wouldn't agree with. I think she's perfectly entitled to express dismay at personally being addressed in any way she personally isn't comfortable with.

Btw was I really super-hostile to you at some point in some thread? I recall disagreeing with you several times, but I don't recall personally ever being anything but pretty nice about it. I CAN be an asshole in general, so I'm not categorically stating it's impossible, but I don't remember ever being an asshole to you specifically. =)


 
From: ex_lovecraf
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 01:00 am
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

Oh, sure, if you're talking about that sanpaku guy, I'm with you. You didn't specify him in your original post, and I read it as implying that even Meg's initial expression of dismay was classist/racist, which I definitely wouldn't agree with. I think she's perfectly entitled to express dismay at personally being addressed in any way she personally isn't comfortable with.

Yeah, if you read my comment again, you'll see I said "....is so blatantly elitist and such a viciously privileged reaction that I won't even respond to the person who made the comment." I didn't want to call him/her out by name because Meg had literally just asked me not to troll. But I can see how you could miss that.

Btw was I really super-hostile to you at some point in some thread?

Maybe not super-hostile. But you did send me that lead-weight thing the other day, and make comments about how it's fun to set me off.

There are a bunch of people on Meg's f-list that don't know me, and don't know that I've known Meg longer than...mmm..I think everyone on her f-list. I've known her for over a decade, and she and I have a very close, tight, complex relationship. And people see us giving each other shit like really old friends who have been through really screwed up crap together can do, and they mistake what's going on and think its okay to be hostile to me. And like, you're one of the people who has needlessly come to her defense against me, and tried to embarass or humiliate me in an efort to make me go away, and I do find that very hostile, because you (and the others) are seriously misinterpretting what is going on, and y'all really don't know me from Adam, so, you know, I find it extra-aggravating. It's lame when everytime you try to talk to one of your oldest friends a bunch of people you don't know butt in thinking they're defending Meg from some random internet stranger. Cause that's just not whats happening.


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 03:04 am
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

Actually, in theory that was supposed to be an unexpended mine. I found it google image searching the phrase "poke it with a stick", because that's basically what meg's f-list's reaction to you was, and you kept rewarding it.

And I wouldn't say I was defending Meg against you, by any means. I'm not laboring under any misconception that she needs me to defend her against you (or would appreciate it if I did. I'm on her f-list, but frankly I think she has pretty mixed feelings about me.)

Honestly, you might not have liked it, and you may not like me, but I was telling you a truth that I thought it would do you good to hear. Meg's f-list tends to go off on you because you react predictably and in a way that, whether you think it looks that way or not, looks thrashing and ranty and thoroughly abstracted. As long as you keep giving them the pleasure, they're going to keep doing it.

::shrugs:: I'm not asking you to like me, but I would ask you to go back and reread what I said in that (or any other thread) and contrast it with most of the rest of the reactions you got before you brand me "hostile."


 
From: ex_lovecraf
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 04:36 am
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

"::shrugs:: I'm not asking you to like me, but I would ask you to go back and reread what I said in that (or any other thread) and contrast it with most of the rest of the reactions you got before you brand me "hostile.""

"Actually, in theory that was supposed to be an unexpended mine. I found it google image searching the phrase "poke it with a stick", because that's basically what meg's f-list's reaction to you was, and you kept rewarding it."

I'm not sure what makes you think poking people with sticks to get a reaction out of them for your own entertainment is not hostile, but I assure you, it is. Also, I think you need to address the reasons why you said "meg's f-list's reaction" when you are actually talking about your actions. I think you also need to address why it is that you find joining up with a group of strangers to provoke a hostile reaction in another stranger "rewarding".

You were not telling me a truth I needed to hear, and you are only saying that now because you aren't honest enough to admit you think teasing people and gettinga reaction out of them is fun. You like to bully people and make yourself feel big by making others feel small. It's hardly anything new or remarkable.

You are not the first person in the world to notice that I'm easy to get a reaction out of, and quite honestly you're a jackass for thinking you needed to tell me. I'm 30 years old, I see a professional therapist, I don't need some jerk on the internet trying to "help me" out by mocking me. You don't care about me, you have no sympathy or concern for me, and you are only insulting my intelligence when you pretend that you are trying to help me. Don't pretend you are doing me a favor when you try to get a rise out of me. It just makes you look like a dishonest creep.


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 03:23 pm
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

Dude, I *wasn't* trying to get a rise out of you, is the point. If I really wanted to just mock you relentlessly to watch you thrash, I could have done a much better job of it.

But, yanno. You find what you seek.



 
From: ex_lovecraf
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 03:53 pm
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

Dude, I *wasn't* trying to get a rise out of you, is the point.

At this point you are either in willfull denial, or incredibly stupid. I'm not good at telling the difference between when people are intentionally being dicks and when they're just idiots who can't see their own behavior for what it is. If you really weren't trying to get a rise out of me, then you've got the social skills of a twelve year old.

Comments like this:
"OMG POKE IT WITH A STICK! HAHA! LEWL!"

That is trying to get a rise out of me. You can try and spin it any way you want, but if you honestly believe that such comments are in any way productive, and are anything other than hostile, you're delusional. You were trolling me in the hopes that I would lose my temper and go off on you, so that you could have a laugh at my expense.

I can understand why you would want to pretend that you weren't doing that, and why you would want to portray your actions as "helpful", but no, I'm sorry "OMG! POKE IT WITH A STICK!" is neither helpful, nor productive. No one likes being called an "it" (which is dehumanizing), no one likes being yelled at, and no one likes having their personal flaws pointed out in demeaning and humiliating manner in public by strangers, and if you don't recognize that, you've clearly got bigger socialization problems than I do. Because, at the very least, I know when I'm being an asshole, and I don't pretend I'm doing anyone a favor when I act like an asshole.


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 03:58 pm
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

"That was a little joke, son."

Seriously. RELAX. Sometime. At least just for a minute. Step back from the keyboard, take a deep breath, and relax.


 
From: ex_lovecraf
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 04:48 pm
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

Actually jimbo, I am relaxed. I'm siting in my bedroom, jumping back and forth through a dozen conversations, listening to some nice music, and smoking a Saturday morning bowl. I'm neither tense nor agitated. Though I'm surprised you want me to relax, since I thought you found it funny when I got excited.

I'll admit to being a bit excited, because I do smell blood in the air -- your blood -- and I think I have you pretty well cornered now. My curiousity is fully engaged - how will you evade next? Which way will you dodge? Will you ever be honest with yourself and me?

I find this conversation quite interesting, because you are a very evasive person who is clearly deep in denial. You're very passive-aggresive, insulting and attacking people, and then trying to pretend that it didn't happen. Claiming first that your attacks were meant to be "helpful", and having exposed that for the evasion it is, now you claim they were meant to be "jokes". This of course doesn't actually work as a defense. We already knew you were joking.

The problem is that you were making a joke at my expense. You were trying to belittle me to make yourself laugh. This obviously doesn't reflect well on your character.

So what is wrong with you that you find it funny to provoke hostile reactions from perfect strangers? Which would you prefer, an opportunity to explain yourself, or shall I openly speculate as to your motives? I'm sure you'll find it every bit as insulting as I find it when others openly speculate about my motives.

I'm also curious why you don't just take the obvious, adult route, and apologize. It could be worth a shot, I might even say "Hey, thanks for the apology, I feel much better about it now." But I don't know if you're actually capable of taking responsibility for your own actions. I think you'll continue to try to play this game where it's somehow magically my fault that I was offended by your misguided and rude attempts to agitate me. It really depends on how much of your own bullshit you believe, I guess.


 
[User Picture] From: jimbojones
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 05:26 pm
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

I'm also curious why you don't just take the obvious, adult route, and apologize.
I am sorry that I so offended you. It was not my intent, and I took no pleasure from it.

With that said, if I ever twit you again, feel free to take it in as poor a context as you wish - you're too twitchy and exciteable by far to bother dealing with on any kind of friendly basis, and I have no reason to deal with you on some kind of painfully formal basis.

If that offends you, tough shit.


 
From: ex_lovecraf
Date: July 23rd, 2005 - 06:54 pm
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

you're too twitchy and exciteable by far to bother dealing with on any kind of friendly basis, and I have no reason to deal with you on some kind of painfully formal basis.

The implication here being that you have, in the past, attempt to deal with me in "any kind of friendly basis". The fact is you have not. You and I have never had a conversation that was in any way friendly. Our entire history has been you butting your nose into my conversations with Meg to express your condscending and uninformed opinions about me.

I'm sorry you find someone asking to be treated with a bit of civility and common courtesy "painfully formal". Might I kindly suggest you grow the fuck up.


 
[User Picture] From: hydrozoa
Date: July 25th, 2005 - 09:23 pm
  (Link)

Re: cont. from hydrozoa's journal

it's probably foolish of me to jump in, but it warrants mention that, while we met 10 years ago, we didn't speak to one another for a space of about five years. there was a good reason for it, as i recall.

also, i don't think it's fair to say that we have this mystical connection that no one else is fit to understand, especially when you pick up on the fact that i'm joking maybe 50% of the time. or it seems that way, from the way you respond half the time. our relationship is certainly complex, but i wouldn't call it "close" or "tight" at this juncture. yes, 10 years ago, but not now. clearly, it doesn't matter how long we've known one another if we still can't get along.

re. my freinds list, i gotta say, you're asking for it a lot of the time. more than once, you've demanded to know why i didn't defend you from some cruel interloper on my f-list, then condemned the whole list for being stupid when they don't agree with you. but you get really, really, REALLY mad about insignificant things, and it seems that people have trouble taking you seriously ergo. it's not because they can't understand our magical star-baby relationship; it's because you make a caricature out of yourself over and over. i would be willing to bet that this happens frequently outside of my journal as well. i know that you've been banned from more than one community.

OK, hit me. and try not to use too many fancy words that'll confuse me.


> Go to Top
LiveJournal.com