On 2/3/2014 3:02 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 13:48:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/3/2014 11:13 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/3/14, 10:04 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Maybe I'll stick with XP even after the support stops.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...are-in-january


Or you could buy an upgraded motherboard with a fast 80286 CPU.



Windows XP is still used in many non-personal computer applications like
gas station pumps, ATM machines and other "transparent" applications.
XP may be retaining a market share because the cost of upgrading both
software and hardware to support Win 7 or 8 is expensive for these
applications.

As a user of XP, Windows 7 and 8 (and now an iMac) I think XP was (is)
a very good and stable OS but Windows 7 has it beat hands down.
Even this Vista machine runs faster and has more capabilities than XP,
as good as it is.


Who cares if it is faster, as long as the XP machine is going as fast
as it needs to go?
Most of the delay is in "calling home" on those applications, not
handling the local transaction.
Games and video processing are the main power hogs on a PC. If you are
just "computing" your old 4.77 mz PC/XT went as fast as you needed to
go. (Visicalc spread sheets etc)
We ran a quarter million dollar business on one.


Geeze. And they call *me* Mr. Luddite.

On 2/3/2014 2:49 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:49:45 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/3/14, 11:46 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 10:04:24 -0500, Poco Loco
wrote:

Maybe I'll stick with XP even after the support stops.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...are-in-january

Microsoft has not given their business users any compelling reason to
switch.
If your mission is not significantly changing, why should you change
your hardware and software?
99% of all real business applications ran just fine on Windows 3.1 on
a 396. If you are just doing bookkeeping, inventory and point of sale,
you don't need that much computing power.
All of these flashy graphics do not actually add much to the average
business man's operation.
Hardware is pretty stagnant these days so I am not really sure why
they need a different OS.



Apple offers incremental improvements to its OS, not do-overs, and its
price is right. Mavericks, the latest, costs $0.00. I was going to put
Win 7 on my Macbook Air, but for $100+, I simply decided not to waste
the money.

The OS is not free, it is just bundled into the overpriced hardware.
IBM did the same thing with the System 360, all the software was free
including on site support ... until LBJ sued them over it.

Apple gets away with it because they are still a small player.

Most people do not get the retail version of windows anyway. They get
it bundled with the software and it is about $35-40 that way based on
what you can get a bare (or linux) system for.

I don't even pay that. When you get an off lease machine the extra
cost is negligible and you could reinstall that OS on a brand new
machine if you wanted to. You just need the sticker ... or just the
numbers.
I am not even sure Microsoft is checking for duplicate XP
installations these days. I do have a good W-7 number if I wanted to
play with it but I have XP on that machine now.
I have still not seen a compelling need to go to 7 or 8.

I am not impressed with the idea that just being newer is always
better.

I just fired up a win 8.1 machine. So far everything is loading in
flawlessly, even the 1999 Mapsource from Garmin. I'm in the process of
loading the 2014 map data now. So far so good.

In article ,
says...


I don't even pay that. When you get an off lease machine the extra
cost is negligible and you could reinstall that OS on a brand new
machine if you wanted to. You just need the sticker ... or just the
numbers.
I am not even sure Microsoft is checking for duplicate XP
installations these days. I do have a good W-7 number if I wanted to
play with it but I have XP on that machine now.
I have still not seen a compelling need to go to 7 or 8.

I am not impressed with the idea that just being newer is always
better.

Me too. But old OS's get overtaken by time.
XP was good, but I put win 7 on this box I built 4 year ago.
It's been trouble-free compared to XP.
Think I've done a hard reset only 5-6 times in 4 years.
And for gaming it's a no-brainer.

On 2/3/2014 3:08 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/3/2014 3:02 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 13:48:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/3/2014 11:13 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/3/14, 10:04 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Maybe I'll stick with XP even after the support stops.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...are-in-january



Or you could buy an upgraded motherboard with a fast 80286 CPU.



Windows XP is still used in many non-personal computer applications like
gas station pumps, ATM machines and other "transparent" applications.
XP may be retaining a market share because the cost of upgrading both
software and hardware to support Win 7 or 8 is expensive for these
applications.

As a user of XP, Windows 7 and 8 (and now an iMac) I think XP was (is)
a very good and stable OS but Windows 7 has it beat hands down.
Even this Vista machine runs faster and has more capabilities than XP,
as good as it is.


Who cares if it is faster, as long as the XP machine is going as fast
as it needs to go?
Most of the delay is in "calling home" on those applications, not
handling the local transaction.
Games and video processing are the main power hogs on a PC. If you are
just "computing" your old 4.77 mz PC/XT went as fast as you needed to
go. (Visicalc spread sheets etc)
We ran a quarter million dollar business on one.


Geeze. And they call *me* Mr. Luddite.

Here's one t watch to the end, although it shouldn't take much coaxing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIPJrrQlxzY

On 2/3/2014 3:44 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:06:36 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:



How about these?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpoX6Mh4kLw

I had a couple Moto bag phones until they finally just stopped
working.

That was actually a year after the official end of Amps66 because some
areas of SW Florida were designated as remote.

It was actually all I wanted. I did not have a contract and I am not
even sure I could get an incoming call but when I picked up the phone
I could make a free 911 call and a regular call was $2.99 a minute on
a credit card.
I kept mine on the boat.
Those things did "get out" a whole lot better than the current digital
phone because you had a real antenna. They would work 30+ miles
offshore if you had the marine antenna.


I had a Mitsubish bag phone that put ou a full 3 watts.

On 2/3/2014 4:33 PM, HanK wrote:
On 2/3/2014 3:08 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/3/2014 3:02 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 13:48:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/3/2014 11:13 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/3/14, 10:04 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Maybe I'll stick with XP even after the support stops.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...are-in-january




Or you could buy an upgraded motherboard with a fast 80286 CPU.



Windows XP is still used in many non-personal computer applications
like
gas station pumps, ATM machines and other "transparent" applications.
XP may be retaining a market share because the cost of upgrading both
software and hardware to support Win 7 or 8 is expensive for these
applications.

As a user of XP, Windows 7 and 8 (and now an iMac) I think XP was (is)
a very good and stable OS but Windows 7 has it beat hands down.
Even this Vista machine runs faster and has more capabilities than XP,
as good as it is.


Who cares if it is faster, as long as the XP machine is going as fast
as it needs to go?
Most of the delay is in "calling home" on those applications, not
handling the local transaction.
Games and video processing are the main power hogs on a PC. If you are
just "computing" your old 4.77 mz PC/XT went as fast as you needed to
go. (Visicalc spread sheets etc)
We ran a quarter million dollar business on one.


Geeze. And they call *me* Mr. Luddite.

Here's one t watch to the end, although it shouldn't take much coaxing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIPJrrQlxzY



LOL

On 2/3/14, 2:49 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:49:45 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/3/14, 11:46 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 10:04:24 -0500, Poco Loco
wrote:

Maybe I'll stick with XP even after the support stops.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...are-in-january

Microsoft has not given their business users any compelling reason to
switch.
If your mission is not significantly changing, why should you change
your hardware and software?
99% of all real business applications ran just fine on Windows 3.1 on
a 396. If you are just doing bookkeeping, inventory and point of sale,
you don't need that much computing power.
All of these flashy graphics do not actually add much to the average
business man's operation.
Hardware is pretty stagnant these days so I am not really sure why
they need a different OS.



Apple offers incremental improvements to its OS, not do-overs, and its
price is right. Mavericks, the latest, costs $0.00. I was going to put
Win 7 on my Macbook Air, but for $100+, I simply decided not to waste
the money.

The OS is not free, it is just bundled into the overpriced hardware.
IBM did the same thing with the System 360, all the software was free
including on site support ... until LBJ sued them over it.

Apple gets away with it because they are still a small player.



Apple is giving away its OS to users with five and six year old
computers. It's hardly bundled for those users. Oh, and I recently
perused the web pages of two large Windoze computer suppliers for a
laptop similar to mine and a desktop similar to what I ordered. There
was less than $100 price difference either way, and what I saw from Dell
and HP were rather clunky desktops or all in ones and laptops that are
two generations behind in design. And of course, they run Windoze.

--
There’s no point crying over spilled 4-Methylcyclohexanemethanol.

On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 15:02:20 -0500, wrote:

On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 13:48:52 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 2/3/2014 11:13 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/3/14, 10:04 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
Maybe I'll stick with XP even after the support stops.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...are-in-january


Or you could buy an upgraded motherboard with a fast 80286 CPU.



Windows XP is still used in many non-personal computer applications like
gas station pumps, ATM machines and other "transparent" applications.
XP may be retaining a market share because the cost of upgrading both
software and hardware to support Win 7 or 8 is expensive for these
applications.

As a user of XP, Windows 7 and 8 (and now an iMac) I think XP was (is)
a very good and stable OS but Windows 7 has it beat hands down.
Even this Vista machine runs faster and has more capabilities than XP,
as good as it is.


Who cares if it is faster, as long as the XP machine is going as fast
as it needs to go?
Most of the delay is in "calling home" on those applications, not
handling the local transaction.
Games and video processing are the main power hogs on a PC. If you are
just "computing" your old 4.77 mz PC/XT went as fast as you needed to
go. (Visicalc spread sheets etc)
We ran a quarter million dollar business on one.

I can't type faster than my machine can display. I figure that's good enough.

On Mon, 3 Feb 2014 15:19:35 -0600, Boating All Out wrote:

In article ,
says...


I don't even pay that. When you get an off lease machine the extra
cost is negligible and you could reinstall that OS on a brand new
machine if you wanted to. You just need the sticker ... or just the
numbers.
I am not even sure Microsoft is checking for duplicate XP
installations these days. I do have a good W-7 number if I wanted to
play with it but I have XP on that machine now.
I have still not seen a compelling need to go to 7 or 8.

I am not impressed with the idea that just being newer is always
better.

Me too. But old OS's get overtaken by time.
XP was good, but I put win 7 on this box I built 4 year ago.
It's been trouble-free compared to XP.
Think I've done a hard reset only 5-6 times in 4 years.
And for gaming it's a no-brainer.

What is a 'hard reset'?

In article ,
says...


What is a 'hard reset'?

When you have to power off your PC because it doesn't respond to
keyboard or mouse input.