On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:59:58 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

At some point XP will have too many drawbacks, and you'll be more or
less compelled to go to Vista anyway.

Since we are not yet at that point with Win2K, it seems likely that XP
has a few good years left in it.

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:12:56 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

Jim forgets that this iS a newsGROUP.


All I know is that this newsgroup is starting to suck big time.

There's a lot of truth to that unfortunately. Until we all learn to
disagree without being disagreeable it will not likely get better.
Meanwhile anyone new who pokes their head in the door will think
they've stepped into the loony bin.

HK wrote:
JimH wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:04:39 -0400, HK wrote:

VISTA isn't slow if you are running the right processor and an
appropriate amount of memory for the applications you use.
You really shouldn't need a state-of-the-art, multi-core, multi
processor, 2 Gig PC just to support the operating system, although I
have to admit that IBM has frequently moved in that direction. Today's
VISTA compatible PCs have more hardware resources available to them
than a corporate mainframe computer 15 years ago. To do what? Browse
the web, type EMAILs, run spreadsheets, play music....

Ridiculous.


"640k of memory should be enough for anybody"
Bill Gates, circa 1981


Old Wayne sounds like those losing control IT managers of the mid 1980s
who were terrified by PCs because they meant that users could kind of do
things their way instead of his way.

You haven't got a clue about being an IT manager.

Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:12:56 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

Jim forgets that this iS a newsGROUP.

All I know is that this newsgroup is starting to suck big time.

There's a lot of truth to that unfortunately. Until we all learn to
disagree without being disagreeable it will not likely get better.
Meanwhile anyone new who pokes their head in the door will think
they've stepped into the loony bin.


We're all following the example you, Reggie, John, Dan, et cetera, set.

BAR wrote:
HK wrote:
JimH wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
news On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 15:04:39 -0400, HK wrote:

VISTA isn't slow if you are running the right processor and an
appropriate amount of memory for the applications you use.
You really shouldn't need a state-of-the-art, multi-core, multi
processor, 2 Gig PC just to support the operating system, although I
have to admit that IBM has frequently moved in that direction. Today's
VISTA compatible PCs have more hardware resources available to them
than a corporate mainframe computer 15 years ago. To do what? Browse
the web, type EMAILs, run spreadsheets, play music....

Ridiculous.


"640k of memory should be enough for anybody"
Bill Gates, circa 1981


Old Wayne sounds like those losing control IT managers of the mid
1980s who were terrified by PCs because they meant that users could
kind of do things their way instead of his way.

You haven't got a clue about being an IT manager.


Y-A-W-N.

HK wrote:
Wayne.B wrote:
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:12:56 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:

Jim forgets that this iS a newsGROUP.

All I know is that this newsgroup is starting to suck big time.

There's a lot of truth to that unfortunately. Until we all learn to
disagree without being disagreeable it will not likely get better.
Meanwhile anyone new who pokes their head in the door will think
they've stepped into the loony bin.


We're all following the example you, Reggie, John, Dan, et cetera, set.

We have all learned from the master, who is you Krause.

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 21:07:53 -0400, HK wrote:

We're all following the example you, Reggie, John, Dan, et cetera, set.

Not so fast, look in the mirror first.

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:42:40 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:37:45 -0400, HK wrote:

Old Wayne sounds like those losing control IT managers of the mid 1980s
who were terrified by PCs because they meant that users could kind of do
things their way instead of his way.

Oh no, just because I managed large corporate systems, I never had
that mentality although there are certainly some who do. I've been
dabbling in home computers for a long time, well before the IBM PC,
MS/DOS, etc. My first was actually a DIY project using a board level
engineering prototype called the SC/MP. It was made by National
Advanced Systems back in the 70s and was programmed in hexadecimal
machine language via a keypad device. Those were the days. Of
course it didn't do much compared to what we now have. My first
"boxed" home computer was the Commodore VIC-20 which used an audio
cassette for input/output. It had a decent Basic compiler and could
do some useful things. Well before all of that I had a TI-59
programmable hand held with all the bells and whistles. It was an
amazing device in its day.

Oh man does that bring back memories.

When I was in high school, the Math Club used to work at the Sylvania
plant over in Danvers "programming" one of their computers - with
phone jacks of all things.

My first exposure to the mini-computer was a Digital Research CP/M
machine working with the IBM P/LM compiler. From there it was a few
home built computers that essentially did nothing more than play Lunar
Lander, Kingdom and Collassal Cave. Used to bootstrap the earlier
computers eventually moving the paper tape which I found at a ham flea
market.

Proably the most fun computer was the VIC-20 and when I upgraded to
the Commodore 64 I was in hog heaven - man, could I do some stuff with
that. It still runs.

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 18:21:22 -0400, HK wrote:

Yeah, obviously. Wayne apparently hasn't bought a new computer since he
retired.

Darn right, I buy new computers when I need them, not until. I built
a "Super PC" once similar to what you do. It was nifty at the time
but obsolete in a year or so. Why bother unless it is just a hobby to
do that sort of thing.

I have never been obsessed with a need to have the "latest and
greatest". That's all Detroit marketing BS as far as I'm concerned,
designed to separate the gullible from their money.

On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 19:37:04 -0400, " JimH" ask wrote:

Do you see the same trend Harry? Precious! ;-)


Oh, and yes, that *was* so very precious! ;-) :-)

You are really losing it John. Time for another snot nosed brat filled
Disney cruise? ;-)

Knock it off guys, it's getting tiresome.