File :-(, x, )
geek girls z0m13_ch1x0rz
any and all geek girl wallpapers.
>> Anonymous
>>182538
That's awesome. /r/ing moar.
>> Real1
Whoa, she would be my perfect girlfriend! More perfect geeky girlfriends!
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>182538>>182544>>182577
Same person.

Also, putting a girl onto a filtered/autotraced pic of your own room, doesn't make her a geek at all.

See pic for example of what actual geeks look like.
>> Anonymous
>>182538


My guess is that this will be the best wallpaper I see in /w/ this week.
>> Anonymous
>>182582
Not same person, mind you.
>> Anonymous
>>182595
If you want me to believe you, you'll have to point out which posts are yours.
>> the1
>>182538
the only way you could make that better for me is adding on some big headphones around her neck. still freaking awesome though.
>> Anonymous
hahaha is this thread a joke or something? the day some faggots photoshopped bedroom is considered awesome by someone other than the idiot that made it is the day the world is officially fucking screwed
>> Anonymous
old repost is old
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
MOAR MOAR! ^0^
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Hey, it's a girl...and a computer. What more is needed?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
girl from pic No.182538
>> Anonymous
>>182822
a divide by zero, cause girls and computers can never coexist within the same frame
>> Anonymous
OH I found geek girls in real life only thing is they are all emo....
>> Anonymous
>>183006
emo or ugly, yeah i know what you mean...
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>183027
Geeks don't use apple computers. Just creative bitches.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
No way! My macbook isn't an apple one?
>>183373GTFO
There are geeks with macs too ya know
>> Anonymous
>>183404

1600x1200 please?
>> Anonymous
>>183415

Crop it yourself please?
>> Anonymous
>>183404
The common term for "geek with a Mac" is "failure."
>> Anonymous
>>183415

I'm sure he'd actually be willing to crop it for you, but... he's on a Mac. You just can't expect too much of one of those things, y'know?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
True geeks use Slackware or Debian.

Pic is related to the op but not to the os war. Nanoka Flanka is definitely a poindexter. I suspect she'd hack at command line. Who needs 3-D windows, anyhow?
>> Anonymous
>>183536
No... actually, "failure" is the common term for geeks who use Windows over any other OS. Plenty of geeks use Macs; at various points during local Linux user group meetings there would be more people with iBooks and PowerBooks than PC laptops.

And seriously, you don't know true geek until you've had to install Linux on some of the older Apple hardware.
>> Anonymous
>>183552
I'm sure then you aren't a mac user and still didn't upload a cropped version?
Or maybe you don't even know what crop means?

Stupid one. GTFO.
Enjoy your fucking operating system and don't forget to backup the drivers. Nobody knows when the BSOD will appear
>> Anonymous
We need pics of Isuzu from Gatekeepers 21.
>> Anonymous
as expected 4chan users are dumbasses completely deadset on trying to bash other OS systems than what they use...

Windows=Business
Mac=Media

get over it.

neither are better, its all about what you do and how you use em.

but if i have to put my two cents into this OD war, windows cant even crop images and keep them in crisp quality.. no wait... they keep at a quality that looks crisp to them, but because windows computers fail at maintaining optimum quality of visual, it appears crisp when really High def will be produced from a Mac 80% of the time.
>> Anonymous
Mac failed up until the recent years. I remember in high school they had a few months when they tried setting up iMacs instead of PCs, and the first class for macs was how to unfreeze them.

The problem with PCs is that they suck at media, and they are obsolete waaaay to quickly. The new Macs have the virtual windows in them, and that is good enough for me. I just need another 2 grand just to pay for one...
>> Anonymous
The fact of the matter is that you are probably talking about the fleet actions in DS9 where the whole aim of the federation fleet in both instances was to punch through Dominion lines. This means that they have to fly past them making the range so short. The Canon range is taken from TNG episode Wounded check it if you don't believe me. Also at Warp speeds these can even reach 5 million Kilometres if a Torpedo is fired at warp 1. (Human Error VOY)

The only battles shown in the SW films show battles at extremely close range. In ROTJ the ships were physically crashing into each other. This is noowhere near a thousand Kilometres (unless of course an X-Wing is hundreds of Kilometres long, which wouldn't at all suprise me with the rediculous figures). The Canon SW shows a maximum range of the Death star at only 77000 KM in ANH.

I would also like to point out that Federation weaponary is many more times more accurate than SW. SW still use manned turrets and as the movies show these are extremely inaccurate. When compared to a ccomputer controlled phaser strike there is no real comparison. Also Perhaps most advantageous to the Federation is that SW ships have awful sensors. They were unable to detect a ship that was stuck on there hull, they would never be able to detect a cloaked starship. The defiant could cloak and fly to within weapons range and pound the ship with Quantum torpedoes and phaser impacts before the ISD can even raise its shields. This would allow the Federation to neutralise an ISD shields and power cores before they even knew what was happening.
>> Anonymous
>>183627
WHAT THE FISH?
>> Anonymous
>>183627

Thread over, you win.
>> Anonymous
>>183623
I'll easily agree that Macs failed hard in the OS9 days and very early in the OSX days, but since 10.2 they've been great.
>> Linux...Windows? Not Bothering
You know... I never understood the stalwart defense people give Linux when bashing Windows. Windows is a good OS, not great by any means, but good. Linux is good as well. Both have their merits. Linux == flexibility; Windows == Ease of use. Windows is always consistant and reliable. Linux (in my experience) tends to be a bit more shaky.

And as for stability? Come on, my install of XP hasn't crashed in... since I installed it. And believe me... I've TRIED.

But beyond all that (and if you've read this far, you have my gratitude) Linux is a deritive of Unix, correct? Well... newsflash: so is Windows XP. Windows 9x/3.1.1 was an extended DOS shell, basically. However, Windows NT always stuck with a modified UNIX system. After Windows Me, Microsoft ditched DOS for the more stable UNIX. Of course, they modified it somewhat, but so did Mac. Hell... so does Linux. This is why you need some heavy duty DOS emulation to run older games... DosBox, anyone? Dos4GW? Yeah.

Real geeks know what their talking about.

Have fun /w/.
>> Anonymous
>>183683
In my experience, Windows has not been that consistant or reliable, though it has made great improvements in those regards in recent years. And while Linux has had its shaky moments, I've personally found it on the whole pretty damn solid.

But... Windows NT being Unix-derived? I don't think so. Sure, it provides some of the POSIX APIs. Sure, its TCP/IP stack was derived from BSD's. But that's about it. It's certainly not a modified Unix system.

That said, Windows has been getting progressively more like Unix in recent years, and I don't think this is a bad thing. But Unix is where it's going to, not where it's come from.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>183415
Brought to you by Gentoo Linux
>> Anonymous
damn it, more girls less arguing
>> Anonymous
keep the drama in /g/ please