|
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
Maybe I'll stick with XP even after the support stops.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...are-in-january |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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. -- There’s no point crying over spilled 4-Methylcyclohexanemethanol. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:46:56 -0500, 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. And the new stuff is a PITA to learn. I'm happy with XP, But I was just as happy with 3.1 for workgroups. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
In article , says...
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. What's $100 after spending $1000 on a laptop? But if you don't need Win 7, why even think about it? |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 12:38:14 -0500, Poco Loco
wrote: On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 11:46:56 -0500, 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. And the new stuff is a PITA to learn. I'm happy with XP, But I was just as happy with 3.1 for workgroups. === Both of my navigation computers on the boat are still running XP and doing just fine. Support for new hardware and web browsers is becoming increasingly problematic however. My newer machines are mostly Win 7 these days and I like it a lot. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
In article , says...
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. What's $100 after spending +$1000 on a laptop? But if you don't need Win 7, why even think about it? |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On Monday, February 3, 2014 1:27:00 PM UTC-5, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... 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. What's $100 after spending $1000 on a laptop? But if you don't need Win 7, why even think about it? Besides, the Apple OS isn't really free. Its cost is just bundled into the overpriced Mac hardware. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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. How about these? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpoX6Mh4kLw |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
|
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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 |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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 |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
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'? |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
|
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
|
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
"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. I think the vista machine would probably run XP a lot faster than your old machine. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
"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. Mavericks is a lot more expensive than $0.00! You have paid at least 30% more for the hardware. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On 2/3/2014 5:49 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... 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. Unless you get specific, this means nothing. If you want the Apple logo, you have to pay up for it. Simple as that. Not necessarily. Here's the Windows Vista laptop I am using right now ..... :-) http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/yy303/Eisboch/DSC_8888.jpg?t=1391469190 |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On Monday, February 3, 2014 3:14:06 PM UTC-6, HanK wrote:
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. Can you do that on a Win7? |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On Monday, February 3, 2014 4:42:59 PM UTC-6, Boating All Out wrote:
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. I've had to do that with my old box. even unplugged it for a day. That helped. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On 2/3/2014 5:20 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
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. If you browse and shop on the Internet XP's age will begin to show. Actually it has already. Graphic displays on websites are getting more and more complex and Win 7 and 8 simply handle them better. I could see that on the Compaq I had running XP before it died. I had this Vista and the Win 7 also when it worked. All three were basically the same in terms of CPU speed and RAM and all three were/are "Multimedia" models, supposedly optimized for multimedia, something a computer guru suggested to me when I was buying the XP machine years ago. He said that a computer optimized for multimedia (what the optimization is ... I don't know) would generally run faster and better for all applications and uses. I can't verify that except my laptops run a heck of a lot faster than my wife's Dell desktop. Then again, I am not sure how her Dell is populated in terms of CPU and RAM. If all you use your computer for is email and newsgroups, Win 3.1 would probably still work. :-) |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On 2/3/2014 6:19 PM, Tim wrote:
On Monday, February 3, 2014 3:14:06 PM UTC-6, HanK wrote: 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. Can you do that on a Win7? Yes. If you have a GPS WITH LIFETIME MAPS |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On 2/3/2014 5:42 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
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. The only issue I've ever encountered using Vista or Win 7 is an occasional program "not responding". Usually it will clear itself if you have patience. If it doesn't in a reasonable period of time, I just open "Task Manager" (Ctr, alt, delete, then click on Task Manager), look for the non-responding application and close it manually by selecting "End Task". Application closes and can then be re-opened. No hard reset required. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On 2/3/2014 5:54 PM, Califbill wrote:
"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. I think the vista machine would probably run XP a lot faster than your old machine. Maybe, but why? This Vista machine outperforms the Compaq I had with XP with basically the same CPU speed and RAM. Other than slow boots from a power off condition, I have no complaints about Vista. I rarely shut it down completely. I just put it in "sleep" mode. It has been stable and this HP Pavilion has had no hick-ups in 5 years, used daily. Many people expressed frustration and problems with Vista but I haven't had any issues or complaints. The Win 7 and 8 has some updated applications that are better than what is in this Vista machine, but I really haven't had any need to upgrade it. I'll just use it until it croaks. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
"F.O.A.D." wrote: 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. True, Mavericks was a free upgrade but not without some disappointments. It will not run some popular programs that previous versions of the Apple OSX ran. An example is Pro-Tools 9. I had a brand new, unopened box with Pro-Tools that I was looking forward to installing in the iMac once I became familiar with it. Pro-Tools is a professional grade audio recording software package. Pro-Tools isn't cheap. The current version is $699. I decided to install my copy only to find out that Mavericks (which I upgraded to a month ago) won't run it. My options are to revert back to the older, 10.8.5 OSX (whatever they called it) or go out and purchase the newer version. I'll stick with the full Garage Band for now. That all said though, I like the iMac. Nice display and is faster for some of the things I like to do with audio and video. For many purposes though I still think it's an overgrown, high priced iPhone. :-) |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote: 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. True, Mavericks was a free upgrade but not without some disappointments. It will not run some popular programs that previous versions of the Apple OSX ran. An example is Pro-Tools 9. I had a brand new, unopened box with Pro-Tools that I was looking forward to installing in the iMac once I became familiar with it. Pro-Tools is a professional grade audio recording software package. Pro-Tools isn't cheap. The current version is $699. I decided to install my copy only to find out that Mavericks (which I upgraded to a month ago) won't run it. My options are to revert back to the older, 10.8.5 OSX (whatever they called it) or go out and purchase the newer version. I'll stick with the full Garage Band for now. That all said though, I like the iMac. Nice display and is faster for some of the things I like to do with audio and video. For many purposes though I still think it's an overgrown, high priced iPhone. :-) Well you can make phone calls with it. đŸ˜„ |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On 2/3/2014 6:32 PM, HanK wrote:
On 2/3/2014 6:19 PM, Tim wrote: On Monday, February 3, 2014 3:14:06 PM UTC-6, HanK wrote: 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. Can you do that on a Win7? Yes. If you have a GPS WITH LIFETIME MAPS From what I can determine Win 8 is basically Win 7 with an updated HMI interface and display. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On 2/3/2014 6:22 PM, Tim wrote:
On Monday, February 3, 2014 4:42:59 PM UTC-6, Boating All Out wrote: 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. I've had to do that with my old box. even unplugged it for a day. That helped. Just needed a rest after a hard fought debate with Harry. :-) |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On 2/3/2014 7:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/3/2014 6:32 PM, HanK wrote: On 2/3/2014 6:19 PM, Tim wrote: On Monday, February 3, 2014 3:14:06 PM UTC-6, HanK wrote: 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. Can you do that on a Win7? Yes. If you have a GPS WITH LIFETIME MAPS From what I can determine Win 8 is basically Win 7 with an updated HMI interface and display. Goes deeper than that I think. I know there is a bios upgrade that has something to do with the way the HDD stores information and how much of it you get to use.... Haven't looked further than that, ran up aginst that when we thought of taking our Win 8 system and reverting to 7.. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote: 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. True, Mavericks was a free upgrade but not without some disappointments. It will not run some popular programs that previous versions of the Apple OSX ran. An example is Pro-Tools 9. I had a brand new, unopened box with Pro-Tools that I was looking forward to installing in the iMac once I became familiar with it. Pro-Tools is a professional grade audio recording software package. Pro-Tools isn't cheap. The current version is $699. I decided to install my copy only to find out that Mavericks (which I upgraded to a month ago) won't run it. My options are to revert back to the older, 10.8.5 OSX (whatever they called it) or go out and purchase the newer version. I'll stick with the full Garage Band for now. That all said though, I like the iMac. Nice display and is faster for some of the things I like to do with audio and video. For many purposes though I still think it's an overgrown, high priced iPhone. :-) There isn't one windoze app I used to use that I haven't found a better replacement for on my macs. Even the Mac version of ms office suite runs better. The photo apps are better. The big database manager I use is better. I am sure there are better windoze apps out there but I don't use them. |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
"Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 2/3/2014 6:22 PM, Tim wrote: On Monday, February 3, 2014 4:42:59 PM UTC-6, Boating All Out wrote: 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. I've had to do that with my old box. even unplugged it for a day. That helped. Just needed a rest after a hard fought debate with Harry. :-) You want a tonic? |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote: 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. True, Mavericks was a free upgrade but not without some disappointments. It will not run some popular programs that previous versions of the Apple OSX ran. An example is Pro-Tools 9. I had a brand new, unopened box with Pro-Tools that I was looking forward to installing in the iMac once I became familiar with it. Pro-Tools is a professional grade audio recording software package. Pro-Tools isn't cheap. The current version is $699. I decided to install my copy only to find out that Mavericks (which I upgraded to a month ago) won't run it. My options are to revert back to the older, 10.8.5 OSX (whatever they called it) or go out and purchase the newer version. I'll stick with the full Garage Band for now. That all said though, I like the iMac. Nice display and is faster for some of the things I like to do with audio and video. For many purposes though I still think it's an overgrown, high priced iPhone. :-) There isn't one windoze app I used to use that I haven't found a better replacement for on my macs. Even the Mac version of ms office suite runs better. The photo apps are better. The big database manager I use is better. I am sure there are better windoze apps out there but I don't use them. P.s. My new Mac is "preparing for shipment" but from where I don't know. Could be china, the USA, or Ireland . |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
In article ,
says... On 2/3/2014 5:49 PM, Boating All Out wrote: In article , says... 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. Unless you get specific, this means nothing. If you want the Apple logo, you have to pay up for it. Simple as that. Not necessarily. Here's the Windows Vista laptop I am using right now .... :-) http://i802.photobucket.com/albums/yy303/Eisboch/DSC_8888.jpg?t=1391469190 I antipicipated that when I wrote "logo." But it is an option. A pretty good one. (-: |
Windows XP users 'increasing'?
On 2/3/2014 7:15 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
"Mr. Luddite" wrote: "F.O.A.D." wrote: 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. True, Mavericks was a free upgrade but not without some disappointments. It will not run some popular programs that previous versions of the Apple OSX ran. An example is Pro-Tools 9. I had a brand new, unopened box with Pro-Tools that I was looking forward to installing in the iMac once I became familiar with it. Pro-Tools is a professional grade audio recording software package. Pro-Tools isn't cheap. The current version is $699. I decided to install my copy only to find out that Mavericks (which I upgraded to a month ago) won't run it. My options are to revert back to the older, 10.8.5 OSX (whatever they called it) or go out and purchase the newer version. I'll stick with the full Garage Band for now. That all said though, I like the iMac. Nice display and is faster for some of the things I like to do with audio and video. For many purposes though I still think it's an overgrown, high priced iPhone. :-) There isn't one windoze app I used to use that I haven't found a better replacement for on my macs. Even the Mac version of ms office suite runs better. The photo apps are better. The big database manager I use is better. I am sure there are better windoze apps out there but I don't use them. I don't use the iMac for anything other than recording and mixing stuff. Still learning the techniques. I was looking forward to learning Pro-Tools but for $699 for the latest version that will run on Mavericks, I can wait. Actually, the full blown version of Garage Band is very good. The version that comes in a Mac is a scaled down version. For a one time charge of $4.99 you can upgrade to the full version that is very extensive and powerful. It will probably do me fine for the level I'll ever get to. I also started fooling around with the video editing and "Movie Maker" program that is in the iMac. It's much better than Microsoft's current "Movie Maker" with many more features and editing capabilities. Just started fooling around with that. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com