Thats trolling supreme if I ever saw it, bearing in mind you need to spend about £800 on a MAC in the first instance to be graced with enough horsepower to do the same amount of grunt as a £300 regular PC does.... oh and you can run a MAC OS on a PC for less than half the cost......but why the hell would you want too? as for never seeing it run better, that just shows you up as a pretender or as someone totally out of touch. I don't want to know about how MAC has style...when Steve Jobs himself has worn the same out of style rollneck for the last 20 years, if they hadn't changed focus to portable media devices they would have likely gone bust a while ago. Indeed I did much of my early IT training on Macs doing various DTP courses...and the MacOS ran like dogs, I would go as far to say MacOS didnt come good till around same time as XP dominated the world, and yes, every company steals the better ideas from each other... although Mac fans tend to get a little quiet about that, despite being equally guilty.I'm not a troll. I built my first PCs back in the late 80s and was a dyed-in-the-wool PC guy but worked with Macs during the day. After a few years when it was time to upgrade, the choice was obvious. Windows 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1... cute little clown suits for DOS. The first cut at Mac OSX was a dog, but by this time the hardware has caught up with the software and it's pretty much bulletproof. I have to ask -- why subject yourself to Windows? Seriously. You can RUN Windows on an Intel Mac, and I've never seen it run better than on a Mac, weird as that sounds.
No disrespect, BUT it's your first custom build, so it's entirely likely you missed something minor that can cause these issues, sure they are damn easy to build compared to dipswitch nightmares 15+ years ago, but the devil is often in the little things you overlook, whether it be bios settings, ram timings, brand combos that just don't like each other... they key phrase that stands out to me is "Linux crashes less" which obviously suggests all is not well. Few people report something that works perfectly fine, so it's easy to forget that the bulk of the people seeking answers on the forum are actually in the vast minority, I must be in the lucky majority as have very rarely seen most of the issues first hand in the many rigs i've built round it, I've seen many improvements over Vista, but again I had virtually no problems with vista either.I just have to say it, my Windows 7 experience has been less then great...
In fact its been horrid.
I have built my first computer just recently from the ground up with my own choices in hardware, nothing is defective and yet Windows 7 has been giving me nothing but issues.
I honestly dont see what is so great about it, its all flashy effects and unstable as all heck.
I have had no less then 20 bluescreens and that number counting by the day.
Many times 7 refuses to start properly, or starts but bluescreens off the bat, I have had issues updating as well and its been one headache after the next.
I dont get it, all this hype Microsoft gives to 7 and its no better then Vista on my machine, heck I rather have XP again with all the issues I have had.
I am beginning to wonder if paying the $140 I did on the OS is worth it, heck I have had more success with Linux then I ever did with Windows.
I use Ubuntu linux 10.10 and so far its crashed far less, had not nearly as many issues and works better in my opinion.
Windows the better OS?
Not to me.
Try to be current, 30gig is a very small number these days, many games are 25gig, as is a single bluray movie, nobody should lose sleep upping the specs for a OS at each iteration, it's called progress... not bloat, since they had to dumb a lot down for the masses without losing functionality, and that a flipping hard one to balance. Microsoft rested on the XP laurels WAAYYYY to long and should have pushed us to a 64bit only OS years ago, I still hold out that windows 8 should drop 32bit support completely as 32bit is past its prime, hell the Sinclair QL in the 1980's was 32bit! people need to sacrifice backwards compatiblity if they want Microsoft to be able to push the frontier....it's all the legacy crap that stops it happening, it's makes more sense to set a 5-6 year (about 2 OS releases) hardware limit before classing it obsolete and moving on without worrying about having to bloat the OS with stuff for compatibilty's sake... look at the time we had the changeover of 16bit to 32bit... that was maybe 7 years, yet the market seems stuck in the past not wanting to let go to a 32bit has been.I agree that the Windows 7 experience comes with over 30 GB Space for the operation system alone.
shes not my grand daughter, cheeky...lol shes my first and only daughter, I don't think its ever a good idea to have kids in your Teens or 20's, as nobody is grown up enough at that age themselves.And I suppose your 4 yr old GD told you all this. If thats the case put her on the computer as I'm not getting any sense from what your saying ( OS, Streaming????? )