On 3/15/2015 12:58 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:55:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/14/15 7:30 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:55:13 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

http://makeuseof.tradepub.com/free/w_wile155/prgm.cgi

FREE book on Windoze 8. Computer to run it, extra.


Why would I want windoze 8 if I don't have a touch screen tablet?

That was what was added to 7.


Oh. I wouldn't know, since the last Windoze I knew anything about was 7.

I think that simply the number of commercial users who are staying on
XP demonstrates that there is no real functional reason to change.
Microsoft is pushing 7, 8 and even 9 on us because they can't make
money if people just say "I'm good".

When I was actually working in the computer business, I found that the
people who stayed one generation behind were the most successful.



Most of the commercial applications of XP are in card readers, cash
registers, ATM machines, etc. They aren't trying to run challenging
software packages.

The company I occasionally consult to had a mix of XP and Win 7
computers. The Win 7 machines were used in the engineering and drafting
departments because they were running Solid Works CAD software
that the XP machines struggled with. The XP computers were being used
in the administrative offices. About two months ago all the XP machines
were replaced as well. I don't know what they are using but I assume
they are either Win 7 or Win 8.1.

XP was good. Win 7 is better, IMO. Even Win 3.1 was a good, stable OS
but eventually the requirements of new software or file formats outpaces
the OS. Simple example: XP (or Vista) can't run mp4 files but Win 7
and 8 can.

On 3/15/15 9:59 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 04:08:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 3/15/2015 12:58 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:55:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/14/15 7:30 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:55:13 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

http://makeuseof.tradepub.com/free/w_wile155/prgm.cgi

FREE book on Windoze 8. Computer to run it, extra.


Why would I want windoze 8 if I don't have a touch screen tablet?

That was what was added to 7.


Oh. I wouldn't know, since the last Windoze I knew anything about was 7.

I think that simply the number of commercial users who are staying on
XP demonstrates that there is no real functional reason to change.
Microsoft is pushing 7, 8 and even 9 on us because they can't make
money if people just say "I'm good".

When I was actually working in the computer business, I found that the
people who stayed one generation behind were the most successful.



Most of the commercial applications of XP are in card readers, cash
registers, ATM machines, etc. They aren't trying to run challenging
software packages.

The company I occasionally consult to had a mix of XP and Win 7
computers. The Win 7 machines were used in the engineering and drafting
departments because they were running Solid Works CAD software
that the XP machines struggled with. The XP computers were being used
in the administrative offices. About two months ago all the XP machines
were replaced as well. I don't know what they are using but I assume
they are either Win 7 or Win 8.1.

XP was good. Win 7 is better, IMO. Even Win 3.1 was a good, stable OS
but eventually the requirements of new software or file formats outpaces
the OS. Simple example: XP (or Vista) can't run mp4 files but Win 7
and 8 can.



You have still not given the average home user like me a compelling
reason to change. You are also not giving a big office user with 100
work stations still doing the same job they were doing 10 years ago a
reason to change. It is the software vendors them selves, working in
concert to force obsolescence on their customers by encouraging
incompatible file formats into the industry with no actual
improvements in productivity.


My wife, who uses some top drawer database applications but who stays as
far away as possible from "interfacing" with the OS, isn't reporting any
problems with Win 7 on her home office computer, aside from occasionally
recalcitrant peripheral hardware issues. One annoying one: if she is
VPN'ing to the downtown office/servers and wants to print out something
locally, it is cumbersome to make that happen because the downtown gear
wants her to use one of the printers at those offices.

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

On 3/15/2015 10:11 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/15/15 9:59 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 04:08:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 3/15/2015 12:58 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:55:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/14/15 7:30 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:55:13 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

http://makeuseof.tradepub.com/free/w_wile155/prgm.cgi

FREE book on Windoze 8. Computer to run it, extra.


Why would I want windoze 8 if I don't have a touch screen tablet?

That was what was added to 7.


Oh. I wouldn't know, since the last Windoze I knew anything about
was 7.

I think that simply the number of commercial users who are staying on
XP demonstrates that there is no real functional reason to change.
Microsoft is pushing 7, 8 and even 9 on us because they can't make
money if people just say "I'm good".

When I was actually working in the computer business, I found that the
people who stayed one generation behind were the most successful.



Most of the commercial applications of XP are in card readers, cash
registers, ATM machines, etc. They aren't trying to run challenging
software packages.

The company I occasionally consult to had a mix of XP and Win 7
computers. The Win 7 machines were used in the engineering and drafting
departments because they were running Solid Works CAD software
that the XP machines struggled with. The XP computers were being used
in the administrative offices. About two months ago all the XP machines
were replaced as well. I don't know what they are using but I assume
they are either Win 7 or Win 8.1.

XP was good. Win 7 is better, IMO. Even Win 3.1 was a good, stable OS
but eventually the requirements of new software or file formats outpaces
the OS. Simple example: XP (or Vista) can't run mp4 files but Win 7
and 8 can.



You have still not given the average home user like me a compelling
reason to change. You are also not giving a big office user with 100
work stations still doing the same job they were doing 10 years ago a
reason to change. It is the software vendors them selves, working in
concert to force obsolescence on their customers by encouraging
incompatible file formats into the industry with no actual
improvements in productivity.


My wife, who uses some top drawer database applications but who stays as
far away as possible from "interfacing" with the OS, isn't reporting any
problems with Win 7 on her home office computer, aside from occasionally
recalcitrant peripheral hardware issues. One annoying one: if she is
VPN'ing to the downtown office/servers and wants to print out something
locally, it is cumbersome to make that happen because the downtown gear
wants her to use one of the printers at those offices.

Does her administrator trust her to copy or download files? If so the
solution is simple.

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."

On 3/15/2015 9:59 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 04:08:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 3/15/2015 12:58 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:55:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/14/15 7:30 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:55:13 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

http://makeuseof.tradepub.com/free/w_wile155/prgm.cgi

FREE book on Windoze 8. Computer to run it, extra.


Why would I want windoze 8 if I don't have a touch screen tablet?

That was what was added to 7.


Oh. I wouldn't know, since the last Windoze I knew anything about was 7.

I think that simply the number of commercial users who are staying on
XP demonstrates that there is no real functional reason to change.
Microsoft is pushing 7, 8 and even 9 on us because they can't make
money if people just say "I'm good".

When I was actually working in the computer business, I found that the
people who stayed one generation behind were the most successful.



Most of the commercial applications of XP are in card readers, cash
registers, ATM machines, etc. They aren't trying to run challenging
software packages.

The company I occasionally consult to had a mix of XP and Win 7
computers. The Win 7 machines were used in the engineering and drafting
departments because they were running Solid Works CAD software
that the XP machines struggled with. The XP computers were being used
in the administrative offices. About two months ago all the XP machines
were replaced as well. I don't know what they are using but I assume
they are either Win 7 or Win 8.1.

XP was good. Win 7 is better, IMO. Even Win 3.1 was a good, stable OS
but eventually the requirements of new software or file formats outpaces
the OS. Simple example: XP (or Vista) can't run mp4 files but Win 7
and 8 can.



You have still not given the average home user like me a compelling
reason to change. You are also not giving a big office user with 100
work stations still doing the same job they were doing 10 years ago a
reason to change. It is the software vendors them selves, working in
concert to force obsolescence on their customers by encouraging
incompatible file formats into the industry with no actual
improvements in productivity.

I don't think you're an average home user.

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."

On 3/15/2015 10:31 AM, Justan Olphart wrote:
On 3/15/2015 9:59 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 04:08:44 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 3/15/2015 12:58 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 19:55:04 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 3/14/15 7:30 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 17:55:13 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

http://makeuseof.tradepub.com/free/w_wile155/prgm.cgi

FREE book on Windoze 8. Computer to run it, extra.


Why would I want windoze 8 if I don't have a touch screen tablet?

That was what was added to 7.


Oh. I wouldn't know, since the last Windoze I knew anything about
was 7.

I think that simply the number of commercial users who are staying on
XP demonstrates that there is no real functional reason to change.
Microsoft is pushing 7, 8 and even 9 on us because they can't make
money if people just say "I'm good".

When I was actually working in the computer business, I found that the
people who stayed one generation behind were the most successful.



Most of the commercial applications of XP are in card readers, cash
registers, ATM machines, etc. They aren't trying to run challenging
software packages.

The company I occasionally consult to had a mix of XP and Win 7
computers. The Win 7 machines were used in the engineering and drafting
departments because they were running Solid Works CAD software
that the XP machines struggled with. The XP computers were being used
in the administrative offices. About two months ago all the XP machines
were replaced as well. I don't know what they are using but I assume
they are either Win 7 or Win 8.1.

XP was good. Win 7 is better, IMO. Even Win 3.1 was a good, stable OS
but eventually the requirements of new software or file formats outpaces
the OS. Simple example: XP (or Vista) can't run mp4 files but Win 7
and 8 can.



You have still not given the average home user like me a compelling
reason to change. You are also not giving a big office user with 100
work stations still doing the same job they were doing 10 years ago a
reason to change. It is the software vendors them selves, working in
concert to force obsolescence on their customers by encouraging
incompatible file formats into the industry with no actual
improvements in productivity.


I don't think you're an average home user.

Nor do I. I think Greg is very knowledgeable about computers but I have
a sense that he enjoys finding work-arounds and ways of keeping older
equipment doing what he wants it to do ... for his purposes.

The average home user (like me) are more interested in simply using a
computer than finding ways to make obsolete machines function.

Computers and OS have come a long way, IMO, and prices have dropped
in a major way. A $400 Dell or HP laptop today is much more powerful
than a $1,500 version was 15 years ago.