Windows--98, 2000, ME, XP???

[Anonymous Poster]

Never ceases to amaze me what I find on this list...

I feel just the opposite. I worked at MS for five years (they bought my previous company) and I was often frustrated by undiagnosable problems. Even with NT4.0, it was common for us to "pave" flaky machines, that is to re-install the OS. I don't know about Win2k, I left too soon to know how well that is working internally.

I like GNU/Linux much better because if you know what you are doing you can see what's going on anywhere and fix any problem. Also I find it more configurable. You get improvements for free, instead of having to pay for the next release. You can try all the other software for free too. I feel more comfortable with the "peer review" security model, rather than the "security through obscurity" model. Finally -- I konw this sounds corny -- but it feels nice to participate in a community project, rather than with a big company that basically just wants a few more bucks out ot you.

I admit that it takes elbow grease. However, I know a retired Mexican truck driver who got Mandrake running on a second hand pc as his first computer experience.

Oh yeah, and it's nice to get some use out of your old computers. I use 486's for GNU/Linux firewalls and routers.

If you'd like to know more please ask! I'm always eager to carry on about this (as you can tell!)

 

[ejb]

Thats the foolish part of most laws...pass a law that only the honest people will follow and think it will solve some crime...it won't!

Do we really think that if we made encryption illegal, that criminals would stop using it? I am pretty sure it is already illegal to fly a plane into a building, isn't it??

When encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption....

Yes, let's pass more laws that honest people will be forced to follow...and criminals will ignore..that will solve the problem...

 

[TerryinMD]

Claude,

I get peeved at all of the "do-gooders" who try to "inform" us of all of the "wrongdoings" by MS or any other large company. Computer security is highly subjective and is very difficult to control in an open society. Especially when your dealing with commercial products. If you go back 10 or so years, most of the things that are available to commercial users and overseas buyers were controlled by Government rules. Was it wise to open up these controls? I'm not too sure.....

Terry

 

[Boner]

95.

 

[Chuck52]

Been reading this thread for a while and thought I'd add my perspective about the PC versus MAC history. In the sciences, physics, chemistry and mathematics, as well as the social sciences and engineering, most of the programs used to calculate molecular or atomic properties, structural forces, statistical relationships, etc, were written in the FORTRAN language. When I started out as an undergraduate in the late 60's, it was even possible to convince some college departments to substitute learning FORTRAN for a second foreign language in earning a science degree. When personal computers came along, it wasn't long before folks started trying to port some of those programs to run on the new toys. Since most of those old programs were written to run as efficiently as possible on mainframe computers which had much less memory and oher resources than the least expensive modern personal computer, it wasn't long at all before the kinds of calculations which used to require waiting for time on the campus mainframe were being run, albeit very slowly, on PC's in the professors very own office or lab. For whatever reason, the Apple folks never went out of their way to make such porting to their computers easy. Perhaps because the IBM compatibles were so readilly available, they became the default platform for this. Very good FORTRAN compilers were available for these computers by the early 80's. I suppose third party software people were just not encouraged to produce such compilers for the Apple computer. At the same time, many academic types jumped on the Mac bandwagon for word processing, desktop publishing, and database stuff. However, lots of us liked the idea of doing our calculations and writing our papers on the same computer, so we were content to deal with the perhaps less efficient word processing and graphics software on our PC's. One of my major gripes with M$ has always been the crappy support for the kind of graphics I work with in their products. Early on, I found that the WordPerfect products worked for me in this area much better than M$ WORD, and that has caused me many headaches over the years when I have had to interact with one of my WORD-addicted associates....somehow it has always been _my_ problem to convert the documents.

Another result of Apple's close control of their design has been that the majority of computers used to drive instruments are PC's. So now, the instruments I have in my lab are all run by Windows based PC's. I process all the data on PC's, and I write the reports and manuscripts on a PC. There is now a trend toward using Linux for instrument control, so I may be in for yet another retooling of my poor tired brain.

BTW, I just upgraded to Windows 2000 from WIN98 on my home computer, a two year old and therefor obsolete 450 MHz HP 8570 Pavillion. That computer has an integrated sound/modem card and a "special" keyboard with all kinds of extra keys and a volume control. I bought it, in part, God help me, because it looked nicer than the equivalent Dell or Gateway systems. I found drivers for everything and got it all going over about two days, so it can be done. M$ has even come out with some compatibilty fixes so that a limited number of popular games will now run under WIN2000.

Chuck

 

[GlueGuy]

Saw this article, and I think it is a semi-rational discussion of the various M$ upgrade paths available today. It's from Jim Seymor, and he is not on the top of my list, but he does stay in the thick of it.

Get out of the MS licensing forest

The GlueGuy

 

[glennmac]

Well, I've been away for about a month researching new jobs, computers, office equipment and cameras. I made my Windows decision. In a sense, I got none of the Windows versions; but in another sense, I got all of them.

I bought the high end Apple Titanium G4 powerbook. It runs Apple's brand new operating system, OS X. Screw M$. However, I can run all the Windows versions on the Mac, if I want to, and I can run them all at the same time if I want to. This is because OS X has true preemptive multitasking. (Do I sound like I know what I'm talking about?) Using a program called Virtual PC, which emulates the PC hardware interface, I can run any or all Windows versions simultaneously with OS X. Can drag and drop files between them, and share printers and other peripherals. The Motorola chips are so fast that the emulation is supposed to be reasonably speedy.

I'm now an official zealot, and proud of it -- even if I no longer own a BX.

 

[GlueGuy]

<font color=blue>, if I want to, and I can run them all at the same time if I want to.</font color=blue>

Sure you could do that, but would you want to? Interesting that no one has made it possible to run (any) mAC OS run on (any) version of Windows or Linux.

The GlueGuy

 

[BobT]

Howdy Glennmac,

Wondered where you ran off to...did you notice yet? Thomas is BACK!

BobT.
A Indiana Boy

 

[Anonymous Poster]

At the risk of being labeled computer illiterate, I've still got to ask. Do all the above comments apply to desktop systems?? My reason for asking is that I'm looking at purchasing an IBM system, with Windows ME, for home use. IF this system turns out to be less than expected, is it easier to upgrade a desktop system as opposed to a laptop?? So as to keep this in line with the theme of this website let me put it this way. If my JD comes with turfs, will it be easy to change over to R4's /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

Now go easy on me. I'm still trying to get over the loss of my 8 track player and being computer illiterate doesn't help./w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif


Russ