WinXP User Moving to Win8 - Old Program Compatibility Question [Archive]

Strobe

December 25th 12, 08:23 AM

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 00:10:31 -0600, Damaeus >
wrote:

>I've been using WinXP up until now, but I'm about to build a new system
>and I want to put Windows 8 on it... you know, just jump into the deep end
>without my floaties. But having been a WinXP user for so long, there are
>many applications that I just love using and I want to keep using them in
>Windows 8. For example, I want to continue using my current newsreader
>(Forte Agent 6.0), and UltraEdit, mIRC, Paint Shop Pro 8. Plus I have the
>Dreamweaver MX studio. I use VirtualDub for editing videos. And I like
>to play Final Fantasy XI Online. I've seen some people have had problems
>with that game, so I'm expecting that.
>
>Anyway, I just basically want to know if Windows 8 will generally run all
>or most of the old programs.

I jumped from 32-bit XP to 64-bit Win8. Many old progs just installed and ran -
Irfanview, speedfan, wnbrowse.
I'm using Agent 1.92 in Win8 right now.
My ancient copy of Eudora couldn't be coaxed to run, however - I had to copy its
data files to Thunderbird, which is happy to run.
Several other minor progs, I simply DL'd the latest versions with no problems.

Perhaps I should explain that once I find that a program has reached maturity
and does everything that I want the way I want, I stick with it - I don't chase
every latest update for more bells and whistles.

One thing I really do miss is Solitaire - I get bored during some downloads.
The Win8 card app just isn't the same, somehow.

>If the Start Menu and classic desktop are gone forever, I might as well
>skip Windows 7 and go right on to 8. And actually, I'm kind of tired of
>the classic desktop, really. I'm not going to be using a touchscreen, but
>just a mouse and keyboard.

The 'Metro' I/F only makes sense if you have a touchscreen - I noticed a small
Win8 Asus laptop this morning in Starbucks, and the pretty YL using it seemed
very at ease with its touchscreen and icons.

However, I have no touchscreen on my PC, so I've installed Classic Shell
so that I can spend most of my time on the desktop, just like in XP. The
app icons are still there if I ever need them, they just stay out of my way
until they're needed.

BTW, Logitech now offer a reasonably sized (wireless) touch pad for about $80.
The ability to use multi-finger gestures (zoom, etc) is a step forward - but, as
I've said, that interface loses a lot of its ergonomic appeal if you have to
move a pointer to the icon instead of touching the icon directly.

That said, the Win8 file management tools seem better - and its ability to burn
an .ISO direct to disk is very welcome.

>My monitor is too far away and in my normal
>computing arrangement, I'd end up doing a lot of sit-ups if I use a
>touch-screen...not that I couldn't use a few sit-ups. Heh.

Ditto - I'm looking far too much like the Jolly Old Elf myself these days.
Can't complain too loudly, though - the pills that limit my exercise by
causing muscle pain have the side effect of keeping me alive.

--

Terry V.

BillW50

December 25th 12, 12:25 PM

On 12/25/2012 2:23 AM, Strobe wrote:
> The 'Metro' I/F only makes sense if you have a touchscreen - I noticed a small
> Win8 Asus laptop this morning in Starbucks, and the pretty YL using it seemed
> very at ease with its touchscreen and icons.
>
> However, I have no touchscreen on my PC, so I've installed Classic Shell
> so that I can spend most of my time on the desktop, just like in XP. The
> app icons are still there if I ever need them, they just stay out of my way
> until they're needed.

I run Windows 8 on both touchscreens and non. And I find the Metro side
to be fine with just the keyboard and mouse if you want to use it that
way. I usually do use the keyboard and mouse on the Metro side when I am
docked with my two tablets.

And I also don't mind of the Start Menu is there or not (one machine I
have Aston Shell that includes a Start Menu and one that doesn't). And
it isn't a real big deal to me. The Start Screen works good and you can
see all of the programs by hitting Win+Q which throws up the search. But
it also kicks up all programs like the Start Menu does. On a touch
screen you have to swipe and touch to do the very same thing. No big deal.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

Paul

December 25th 12, 12:38 PM

Strobe wrote:

>
> One thing I really do miss is Solitaire - I get bored during some downloads.
> The Win8 card app just isn't the same, somehow.
>

Solitaire is at the App Store. As well, there's a recipe for importing
the version from Windows 7.

http://www.howtogeek.com/122145/what-happened-to-solitaire-and-minesweeper-in-windows-8/

Paul

Paul

December 25th 12, 01:02 PM

Damaeus wrote:
> I've been using WinXP up until now, but I'm about to build a new system
> and I want to put Windows 8 on it... you know, just jump into the deep end
> without my floaties. But having been a WinXP user for so long, there are
> many applications that I just love using and I want to keep using them in
> Windows 8. For example, I want to continue using my current newsreader
> (Forte Agent 6.0), and UltraEdit, mIRC, Paint Shop Pro 8. Plus I have the
> Dreamweaver MX studio. I use VirtualDub for editing videos. And I like
> to play Final Fantasy XI Online. I've seen some people have had problems
> with that game, so I'm expecting that.
>
> Anyway, I just basically want to know if Windows 8 will generally run all
> or most of the old programs.
>
> If the Start Menu and classic desktop are gone forever, I might as well
> skip Windows 7 and go right on to 8. And actually, I'm kind of tired of
> the classic desktop, really. I'm not going to be using a touchscreen, but
> just a mouse and keyboard. My monitor is too far away and in my normal
> computing arrangement, I'd end up doing a lot of sit-ups if I use a
> touch-screen...not that I couldn't use a few sit-ups. Heh.
>
> Thanks,
> Damaeus

Run the first step of this, and it'll analyze your computer.
Windows8-UpgradeAssistant.exe checks your old apps against a list.

http://web.esd.microsoft.com/W8DL/WSEC5B1D8A9DFDFD92DFB736C5B1D8956B5B1D8/Windows8-UpgradeAssistant.exe

The output looks like this.

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/6143/assistant.gif

Now, if I take an example from my list.

"WinPcap 4.1.2
CACE Technologies
Not compatible"

That one was easy to fix. The installer is the thing that needs to be
fixed. I simply right-click on it, and use the Properties. And
set it to Compatibility mode and select a previous OS like WinXP,
and then it installed and ran fine. Any further trouble, a
Run As Administrator squares it away. So rather than "Not compatible",
I'd rate it "Just a Nuisance".

The only value of that list, is for applications that have no flags
against them. If an application is flagged, you don't really know
"how broken" it is. It could be extremely broken, or, a trivial fix
could be enough to get it running again.

Windows 8 has the ability to flat out deny program execution. I
don't know if this is done via an OS version check, or some other
means is being used. If you want to test this for me, you
can try installing Windows Virtual PC (the one that ran in
Windows 7). I think the installer runs OK, but then the OS
flat out refuses to allow the executable to run after
it's installed. So no "WinXP Mode" under Windows 8.
Hyper-V is likely the only Microsoft VM platform that runs.

Paul

SC Tom[_3_]

December 25th 12, 01:31 PM

"Damaeus" > wrote in message
...
> I also forgot to ask one other thing. I'd hate to abandon WinXP and get
> into Windows 8 and suddenly find that I can't do something with Windows 8
> that I could easily do in WinXP. I don't know what they would want to
> remove, but I know there are certain programs I've used that have removed
> features that I found handy in older versions. I'd hate to come across
> that in Windows 8.
>
> Has something useful been removed from Windows 8 that people are missing
> and wish they had back?

Yes, Windows 7 :-)

If you decide to keep Win8 and start to miss the old Start menu and the
familiarity of the WinXP/Win7 look and feel, thee are a number of programs
that will allow you to skip over the Modern UI, and go straight to the
desktop with Start menu:

<http://social.Technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w8itprogeneral/thread/b5f19449-f992-466b-b549-ce1452fd5a39#b5f19449-f992-466b-b549-ce1452fd5a39>

I went from Win7 to Win8, and really didn't find too much that didn't work.
Mostly it was some REALLY old XP and and Win9x utilities and games that also
didn't work in Win7, or were unstable enough to start looking for
replacements.
I didn't like the Modern UI at all, and really didn't feel like getting used
to it (YMMV), so I went with the "Tihiy's Windows 7 Explorer for Windows 8"
method since I already had all the necessary files on hand. Plus, it's not a
permanent solution; all I have to do is run a program, logout/login, and I'm
back to the original Win8.
--
SC Tom

John Aldred

December 25th 12, 03:28 PM

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 00:10:31 -0600, Damaeus wrote:

> I've been using WinXP up until now, but I'm about to build a new system
> and I want to put Windows 8 on it... you know, just jump into the deep
> end without my floaties. But having been a WinXP user for so long,
> there are many applications that I just love using and I want to keep
> using them in Windows 8. For example, I want to continue using my
> current newsreader (Forte Agent 6.0), and UltraEdit, mIRC, Paint Shop
> Pro 8. Plus I have the Dreamweaver MX studio. I use VirtualDub for
> editing videos. And I like to play Final Fantasy XI Online. I've seen
> some people have had problems with that game, so I'm expecting that.
>
> Anyway, I just basically want to know if Windows 8 will generally run
> all or most of the old programs.

I can confirm that Windows 8 Pro will run an ancient copy of Paint Shop
Pro (version 7 from 2001). Win 8 claimed to have made some compatibility
adjustments.

I no longer use Forte Agent but yesterday I received an email from
forteinc.com inviting me to upgrade to version 7 (compatible with Win 8)
for 19 USD.

--
John

Gene Wirchenko[_2_]

December 25th 12, 04:45 PM

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 00:16:08 -0600, Damaeus
> wrote:

>I also forgot to ask one other thing. I'd hate to abandon WinXP and get
>into Windows 8 and suddenly find that I can't do something with Windows 8
>that I could easily do in WinXP. I don't know what they would want to
>remove, but I know there are certain programs I've used that have removed
>features that I found handy in older versions. I'd hate to come across
>that in Windows 8.
>
>Has something useful been removed from Windows 8 that people are missing
>and wish they had back?

Not from 8 but earlier. XP would run 16-bit programs natively. I
have some 16-bit utilities. These will not run natively in 7.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Auric__

December 25th 12, 06:14 PM

Gene Wirchenko wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 00:16:08 -0600, Damaeus
> > wrote:
>
>>I also forgot to ask one other thing. I'd hate to abandon WinXP and get
>>into Windows 8 and suddenly find that I can't do something with Windows 8
>>that I could easily do in WinXP. I don't know what they would want to
>>remove, but I know there are certain programs I've used that have removed
>>features that I found handy in older versions. I'd hate to come across
>>that in Windows 8.
>>
>>Has something useful been removed from Windows 8 that people are missing
>>and wish they had back?
>
> Not from 8 but earlier. XP would run 16-bit programs natively. I
> have some 16-bit utilities. These will not run natively in 7.

You are mistaken, sir. My install of Win7 runs Win16 apps just fine. Perhaps
you typo'd and meant Win8 will not run them? (I phrase that as a question
because I have as yet not tried 8 myself.)

--
Then, after a second or so, nothing continued to happen.

Phantom Post

December 25th 12, 06:38 PM

Damaeus > wrote in
:

> I've been using WinXP up until now, but I'm about to build a new
> system and I want to put Windows 8 on it... you know, just jump into
> the deep end without my floaties. But having been a WinXP user for so
> long, there are many applications that I just love using and I want to
> keep using them in Windows 8. For example, I want to continue using
> my current newsreader (Forte Agent 6.0), and UltraEdit, mIRC, Paint
> Shop Pro 8. Plus I have the Dreamweaver MX studio. I use VirtualDub
> for editing videos. And I like to play Final Fantasy XI Online. I've
> seen some people have had problems with that game, so I'm expecting
> that.
>
> Anyway, I just basically want to know if Windows 8 will generally run
> all or most of the old programs.
>
> If the Start Menu and classic desktop are gone forever, I might as
> well skip Windows 7 and go right on to 8. And actually, I'm kind of
> tired of the classic desktop, really. I'm not going to be using a
> touchscreen, but just a mouse and keyboard. My monitor is too far
> away and in my normal computing arrangement, I'd end up doing a lot of
> sit-ups if I use a touch-screen...not that I couldn't use a few
> sit-ups. Heh.
>
> Thanks,
> Damaeus

Of the applications you mention, Paint Shop Pro 7 (even older than yours)
is working fine for me on Win8. So far I haven't had troubles with any
programs.

I do miss the simple card games and mahjong and such from earlier windows
versions. Which brings up one program that gave me momentary troubles.
I bought a $5 dual disc Hoyle game set (Mahjong/Board Games) and on
initial installation it would load and put a game up but then there was
no response when trying to play and it would freeze. Uninstalled and
coincidentally there happened to be new NVidia drivers and a Java update
available. After updating those I reinstalled the games and they now
work fine.

As for the new start menu - it takes some getting used to but I'm liking
it now that I've got it tamed. When Win8 is first installed there's a
bunch of useless crap tiles on the Metro start screen. With right
clicking you can easily get rid of all of them. Then right clicking on
the background and selecting "All apps" you can pick what you want and
easily pin them to the start page. It's then a simple matter to toggle
between the old style desktop and the Metro start page by using the
Windows logo key. If you can't help but roll down to the lower left
corner for the old Start button you even get a tile that appears and
takes you to the start page. So, in a sense, it's right where it used to
be. And I find looking at a full screen page of all my applications is
easier than scrolling around the traditional size, collapsed Start menu.

Win 8, while having the older, more traditional mode to work in, is
really the beginning of turning more towards "the cloud" and "free apps"
that are geared toward pushing advertising at you all the time and
tracking your every move. Except for having a weather tile on my start
page I avoid all that stuff like the plague. I had installed the MS
Mahjong app and initially didn't like that it logs on as some sort of
made up, anonymous username so that it can compare and store scores on
the cloud. After a few days of playing the basic layouts I tried the
"daily challenges" that it offered and right off I'm looking at some big
video game commercial. I alt-F4'd out of that and uninstalled. No more
"free apps" for me.

I'm liking my Win8 Pro with the free (at this time) MCE pack. Once you
figure out how to log out (now "Sign Out") and find where the heck the
button is to power down the computer it's all gravy.

--

Pat

email: valid would be net

Gene Wirchenko[_2_]

December 25th 12, 07:15 PM

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:14:56 +0000 (UTC), "Auric__"
> wrote:

>Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 00:16:08 -0600, Damaeus
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>I also forgot to ask one other thing. I'd hate to abandon WinXP and get
>>>into Windows 8 and suddenly find that I can't do something with Windows 8
>>>that I could easily do in WinXP. I don't know what they would want to
>>>remove, but I know there are certain programs I've used that have removed
>>>features that I found handy in older versions. I'd hate to come across
>>>that in Windows 8.
>>>
>>>Has something useful been removed from Windows 8 that people are missing
>>>and wish they had back?
>>
>> Not from 8 but earlier. XP would run 16-bit programs natively. I
>> have some 16-bit utilities. These will not run natively in 7.
>
>You are mistaken, sir. My install of Win7 runs Win16 apps just fine. Perhaps
>you typo'd and meant Win8 will not run them? (I phrase that as a question
>because I have as yet not tried 8 myself.)

I was not aware that there was a distinction in 16-bit apps
between Windows and non-Windows. I get an error message when I try to
run one of my 16-bit utilities (which are not Windows programs). I
can install XP Mode on my Windows 7 desktop which works but is
awkward. I can not use it on my Windows 7 laptop. The laptop came
with Windows 7 Home Premium, and Microsoft does not let XP Mode run on
that edition.

I think that limitation was a stupid thing for Microsoft to do. I
would be using the laptop a lot more if it would run my utilities
natively.

I have heard too much about awkwardnesses of Windows 8 and have
concluded it would not be a good fit for me. Given the arbitrary
limitation with XP Mode, I feel this even more strongly. The next
time that I am considering an operating system, I will seriously
consider going non-Microsoft.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

BillW50

December 25th 12, 07:15 PM

On 12/25/2012 12:14 PM, Auric__ wrote:
> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 00:16:08 -0600, Damaeus
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> I also forgot to ask one other thing. I'd hate to abandon WinXP and get
>>> into Windows 8 and suddenly find that I can't do something with Windows 8
>>> that I could easily do in WinXP. I don't know what they would want to
>>> remove, but I know there are certain programs I've used that have removed
>>> features that I found handy in older versions. I'd hate to come across
>>> that in Windows 8.
>>>
>>> Has something useful been removed from Windows 8 that people are missing
>>> and wish they had back?
>>
>> Not from 8 but earlier. XP would run 16-bit programs natively. I
>> have some 16-bit utilities. These will not run natively in 7.
>
> You are mistaken, sir. My install of Win7 runs Win16 apps just fine. Perhaps
> you typo'd and meant Win8 will not run them? (I phrase that as a question
> because I have as yet not tried 8 myself.)

Both Windows 7 and Windows 8 32 bit versions run 16 bit applications
just fine. It is just the 64 bit versions of Windows that won't run 16
bit software.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

BillW50

December 25th 12, 07:19 PM

On 12/25/2012 1:15 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:14:56 +0000 (UTC), "Auric__"
> > wrote:
>
>> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 00:16:08 -0600, Damaeus
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I also forgot to ask one other thing. I'd hate to abandon WinXP and get
>>>> into Windows 8 and suddenly find that I can't do something with Windows 8
>>>> that I could easily do in WinXP. I don't know what they would want to
>>>> remove, but I know there are certain programs I've used that have removed
>>>> features that I found handy in older versions. I'd hate to come across
>>>> that in Windows 8.
>>>>
>>>> Has something useful been removed from Windows 8 that people are missing
>>>> and wish they had back?
>>>
>>> Not from 8 but earlier. XP would run 16-bit programs natively. I
>>> have some 16-bit utilities. These will not run natively in 7.
>>
>> You are mistaken, sir. My install of Win7 runs Win16 apps just fine. Perhaps
>> you typo'd and meant Win8 will not run them? (I phrase that as a question
>> because I have as yet not tried 8 myself.)
>
> I was not aware that there was a distinction in 16-bit apps
> between Windows and non-Windows. I get an error message when I try to
> run one of my 16-bit utilities (which are not Windows programs). I
> can install XP Mode on my Windows 7 desktop which works but is
> awkward. I can not use it on my Windows 7 laptop. The laptop came
> with Windows 7 Home Premium, and Microsoft does not let XP Mode run on
> that edition.
>
> I think that limitation was a stupid thing for Microsoft to do. I
> would be using the laptop a lot more if it would run my utilities
> natively.
>
> I have heard too much about awkwardnesses of Windows 8 and have
> concluded it would not be a good fit for me. Given the arbitrary
> limitation with XP Mode, I feel this even more strongly. The next
> time that I am considering an operating system, I will seriously
> consider going non-Microsoft.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko

I occasionally run WordStar for DOS under both Windows 7 and Windows 8
32 bit versions. And it runs fine. And it is a 16 bit program.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

Gene Wirchenko[_2_]

December 25th 12, 09:08 PM

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 13:19:42 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:

[snip]

>I occasionally run WordStar for DOS under both Windows 7 and Windows 8
>32 bit versions. And it runs fine. And it is a 16 bit program.

I use WordStar 2000 as my programming editor. Under Windows XP,
it rarely opens files so I use it under DOSBox.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Gene Wirchenko[_2_]

December 25th 12, 09:09 PM

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 13:19:42 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:

[snip]

>I occasionally run WordStar for DOS under both Windows 7 and Windows 8
>32 bit versions. And it runs fine. And it is a 16 bit program.

I should have stated that I was using 64-bit Windows. Hey, it
was what the systems came installed with.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

BillW50

December 25th 12, 09:15 PM

On 12/25/2012 3:08 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 13:19:42 -0600, > wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I occasionally run WordStar for DOS under both Windows 7 and Windows 8
>> 32 bit versions. And it runs fine. And it is a 16 bit program.
>
> I use WordStar 2000 as my programming editor. Under Windows XP,
> it rarely opens files so I use it under DOSBox.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko

I purposely stayed away from WordStar 2000 because it didn't stick with
the same commands as WordStar classic. So I don't know much about it.
But WordStar v4 to v7 works fine. Although you need to give it a 8.3
filename path or it doesn't understand. Although send to works fine. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

BillW50

December 25th 12, 09:20 PM

On 12/25/2012 3:09 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 13:19:42 -0600, > wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I occasionally run WordStar for DOS under both Windows 7 and Windows 8
>> 32 bit versions. And it runs fine. And it is a 16 bit program.
>
> I should have stated that I was using 64-bit Windows. Hey, it
> was what the systems came installed with.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko

Yup, I stay away from Windows 64 bit myself. I don't know why so many
people bother with it. Unless 4GB isn't enough RAM, but honestly 2GB is
generally overkill for me. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

Gene Wirchenko[_2_]

December 25th 12, 11:13 PM

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:15:37 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:

[snip]

>I purposely stayed away from WordStar 2000 because it didn't stick with
>the same commands as WordStar classic. So I don't know much about it.

I did not know that there was a difference when I bought it. It
did not occur to me that they would change it. As a programming
editor, it is comparable. I do wish that it had a one-key line delete
and separate Search and [Search and Replace] functions as does classic
WordStar.

>But WordStar v4 to v7 works fine. Although you need to give it a 8.3
>filename path or it doesn't understand. Although send to works fine. ;-)

I can live with 8.3.

I would like to see an updated WordStar (for use as a programming
editor). I have never found a GUI editor that I am really comfortable
with.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

BillW50

December 26th 12, 12:16 AM

On 12/25/2012 5:13 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:15:37 -0600, > wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I purposely stayed away from WordStar 2000 because it didn't stick with
>> the same commands as WordStar classic. So I don't know much about it.
>
> I did not know that there was a difference when I bought it. It
> did not occur to me that they would change it. As a programming
> editor, it is comparable. I do wish that it had a one-key line delete
> and separate Search and [Search and Replace] functions as does classic
> WordStar.
>
>> But WordStar v4 to v7 works fine. Although you need to give it a 8.3
>> filename path or it doesn't understand. Although send to works fine. ;-)
>
> I can live with 8.3.
>
> I would like to see an updated WordStar (for use as a programming
> editor). I have never found a GUI editor that I am really comfortable
> with.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko

Yeah I heard of it so I stayed away. Although everything I have heard it
still should be a very capable. It just used different commands. You
might not know, but WordStar worried about the then new Windows, bought
a GUI word processor that I think at the time was called Legacy. They
bought it and added classic WordStar commands to it. They came out with
v1.0, v1.5, and v2.0. I bought them, but it just wasn't the same.

Speaking about a programming editor, there was an early picture of Bill
Gates and what was on the computer in the background was WordStar. The
story was Gates used WordStar as a program editor too. I never saw the
picture myself. Many used WordStar as a programming editor and many
writers preferred it too.

Last I heard was that the source code for WordStar is long gone. A
number of companies owned the rights to it including Mattel. I forget
who the current owner is, but nobody had done a thing with it.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

Damaeus

December 26th 12, 12:55 AM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, Strobe > posted
on Tue, 25 Dec 2012 03:23:09 -0500 the following:

> On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 00:10:31 -0600, Damaeus >
> wrote:
>
> > Anyway, I just basically want to know if Windows 8 will generally run
> > all or most of the old programs.
>
> I jumped from 32-bit XP to 64-bit Win8. Many old progs just installed
> and ran - Irfanview, speedfan, wnbrowse. I'm using Agent 1.92 in Win8
> right now. My ancient copy of Eudora couldn't be coaxed to run,
> however - I had to copy its data files to Thunderbird, which is happy
> to run. Several other minor progs, I simply DL'd the latest versions
> with no problems.

That all sounds really good. :)

> Perhaps I should explain that once I find that a program has reached
> maturity and does everything that I want the way I want, I stick with
> it - I don't chase every latest update for more bells and whistles.

Same here. I use some very old programs, but I don't think I use anything
that has that old "Windows 3.11 look" anymore. Like, I don't use WinCode
2.6.1 anymore. :)

> One thing I really do miss is Solitaire - I get bored during some
> downloads. The Win8 card app just isn't the same, somehow.
>
> > If the Start Menu and classic desktop are gone forever, I might as
> > well skip Windows 7 and go right on to 8. And actually, I'm kind of
> > tired of the classic desktop, really. I'm not going to be using a
> > touchscreen, but just a mouse and keyboard.
>
> The 'Metro' I/F only makes sense if you have a touchscreen - I noticed
> a small Win8 Asus laptop this morning in Starbucks, and the pretty YL
> using it seemed very at ease with its touchscreen and icons.

I assume Metro is the new-fangled "start screen" with the multi-sized
jumbo areas on the screen that you can touch. I actually would like that,
even with a mouse. I don't keep a lot of icons on my XP desktop, anyway,
because I find it much more convenient to keep all my most-commonly used
icons in the WinXP QuickLaunch bar. And all those icons block whatever
kind of eye-candy background I have up. When I have all the programs I
normally use installed, I have about 30-40 icons on QuickLaunch.

> However, I have no touchscreen on my PC, so I've installed Classic
> Shell so that I can spend most of my time on the desktop, just like in
> XP. The app icons are still there if I ever need them, they just stay
> out of my way until they're needed.

Having the option to use a classic shell will be nice. I'm not interested
at all in a touch-screen. Seems like having my arm in the air so much
would eventually lead to a lot of fatigue, like holding bricks out to the
side as punishment.

> BTW, Logitech now offer a reasonably sized (wireless) touch pad for
> about $80. The ability to use multi-finger gestures (zoom, etc) is a
> step forward - but, as I've said, that interface loses a lot of its
> ergonomic appeal if you have to move a pointer to the icon instead of
> touching the icon directly.

I'm not into mouse gestures, finger gestures (unless they're dirty), or
anything else like that. I'm happy with a plain old point-and-click mouse
usage. About as fancy as I get is the scroll wheel on the mouse.

Damaeus

Damaeus

December 26th 12, 12:58 AM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, BillW50 > posted on Tue, 25
Dec 2012 06:25:39 -0600 the following:

> The Start Screen works good and you can see all of the programs by
> hitting Win+Q which throws up the search. But it also kicks up all
> programs like the Start Menu does. On a touch screen you have to swipe
> and touch to do the very same thing. No big deal.

That sounds good, too. The only time I ever use the Start Menu now is to
get to rarely-used programs that I don't have shortcuts for on the
QuickLaunch bar.

Damaeus

Damaeus

December 26th 12, 01:00 AM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, John Aldred >
posted on Tue, 25 Dec 2012 15:28:01 GMT the following:

> I no longer use Forte Agent but yesterday I received an email from
> forteinc.com inviting me to upgrade to version 7 (compatible with Win 8)
> for 19 USD.

If I have anyting left over from my Christmas monetary bounty, I might get
the Agent 7 upgrade. :)

Damaeus

Damaeus

December 26th 12, 01:09 AM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, Phantom Post > posted on
Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:38:28 +0000 (UTC) the following:

> I do miss the simple card games and mahjong and such from earlier windows
> versions. Which brings up one program that gave me momentary troubles.
> I bought a $5 dual disc Hoyle game set (Mahjong/Board Games) and on
> initial installation it would load and put a game up but then there was
> no response when trying to play and it would freeze. Uninstalled and
> coincidentally there happened to be new NVidia drivers and a Java update
> available. After updating those I reinstalled the games and they now
> work fine.

Excellent! :D

> As for the new start menu - it takes some getting used to but I'm liking
> it now that I've got it tamed. When Win8 is first installed there's a
> bunch of useless crap tiles on the Metro start screen.

Yes, that's typical. One of the first things I do when installing a new
browser is delete all the useless bookmarks they have installed for
checking stock quotes and shopping.

> With right clicking you can easily get rid of all of them. Then
> right clicking on the background and selecting "All apps" you can pick
> what you want and easily pin them to the start page. It's then a
> simple matter to toggle between the old style desktop and the Metro
> start page by using the Windows logo key. If you can't help but roll
> down to the lower left corner for the old Start button you even get a
> tile that appears and takes you to the start page. So, in a sense,
> it's right where it used to be. And I find looking at a full screen
> page of all my applications is easier than scrolling around the
> traditional size, collapsed Start menu.

That sounds good. One thing I don't want on my desktop is a bunch of
stuff constantly communicating with things online and running my Fair
Access Policy quota (satellite access) into the ground. Occasionally, one
of the computers on the network would secrety download gobs of data and
run our meter down to zero. If I want to check the weather, I'll go to a
weather website. :) And if I want to know if I have new messages on
Facebook, I'll just load Facebook and check manually. I can think of
maybe three or four things I'd want on the desktop at all times, but
that's it. I do like having a taskbar, though, so I can switch between
programs without bumping the bottom of the screen. And I've always hated
having "bump-panels" at the top of the screen where menus and other common
program features are. I bump the top of my screen a LOT when aiming for
things on menu bars, toolbars, etc..., so any kind of bump-panel at the
top will have to be disabled or moved to the bottom.

> I'm liking my Win8 Pro with the free (at this time) MCE pack. Once you
> figure out how to log out (now "Sign Out") and find where the heck the
> button is to power down the computer it's all gravy.

I'm going to get the plain Windows 8 for home use. I see nothing in the
Pro version that would be useful to me. And I certainly don't want any
kind of "remote desktop" access anywhere on my computer. If I want to use
the computer, I can wait until I get home.

Damaeus

Phantom Post

December 26th 12, 01:49 AM

Damaeus > wrote in
:

>
>> I'm liking my Win8 Pro with the free (at this time) MCE pack. Once
>> you figure out how to log out (now "Sign Out") and find where the
>> heck the button is to power down the computer it's all gravy.
>
> I'm going to get the plain Windows 8 for home use. I see nothing in
> the Pro version that would be useful to me. And I certainly don't
> want any kind of "remote desktop" access anywhere on my computer. If
> I want to use the computer, I can wait until I get home.
>
>

I did forget to mention that I'm running 64 bit Win8. I had much more
trouble with applications when first switching from 32 bit XP pro to 64 bit
Win7 pro. Win 8 was pretty painless.

--

Pat

email: valid would be net

Paul

December 26th 12, 01:51 AM

Damaeus wrote:

>
> I'm going to get the plain Windows 8 for home use.
>
> Damaeus

I recommend you read up on all the pricing information
to date, before jumping to conclusions. The pricing
is not nearly as "smooth" as you might think. Projections
range from $15 (when purchasing a computer with Win7
and wanting Win8), to $200 for people who wait too long
and buy a retail copy at Best Buy in February. Amidst
all the offers, you might find one which is a higher
version than you want, but cheaper than some other
versions. If the "Plain" version is say, $150 in
February, and any edition is cheaper than that in
January, you take what you can get in January. If
you have no interest in Windows 8 at all, then you
can safely skip it. If your computer has an OS,
you're covered.

Paul

Damaeus

December 26th 12, 01:56 AM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, Phantom Post > posted on
Wed, 26 Dec 2012 01:49:22 +0000 (UTC) the following:

> I did forget to mention that I'm running 64 bit Win8. I had much more
> trouble with applications when first switching from 32 bit XP pro to
> 64 bit Win7 pro. Win 8 was pretty painless.

I'm going to get the 64-bit version, too. I'm starting with 8GB of RAM in
an Asus Crosshair V Formula Z motherboard. The only downer is that this
means I'll have to retire my WinTV 404, which runs on a PCI slot (the new
motherboard has no PCI slots), until I can find a PCIe replacement that'll
capture raw video. So many of the "modern" TV tuner/capture cards only
capture to compressed video, which I hate. It's much easier and painless
to edit raw AVI files.

Damaeus

Paul

December 26th 12, 02:20 AM

Damaeus wrote:
> In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, Phantom Post > posted on
> Wed, 26 Dec 2012 01:49:22 +0000 (UTC) the following:
>
>> I did forget to mention that I'm running 64 bit Win8. I had much more
>> trouble with applications when first switching from 32 bit XP pro to
>> 64 bit Win7 pro. Win 8 was pretty painless.
>
> I'm going to get the 64-bit version, too. I'm starting with 8GB of RAM in
> an Asus Crosshair V Formula Z motherboard. The only downer is that this
> means I'll have to retire my WinTV 404, which runs on a PCI slot (the new
> motherboard has no PCI slots), until I can find a PCIe replacement that'll
> capture raw video. So many of the "modern" TV tuner/capture cards only
> capture to compressed video, which I hate. It's much easier and painless
> to edit raw AVI files.
>
> Damaeus

These are always a tease. (PCI Express slot to PCI card adapter.)

http://www.amazon.com/StarTech-com-Express-Adapter-Card-PEX1PCI1/dp/B0024CV3SA/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1356487900&sr=8-1&keywords=pci+to+pci+express+adapter

Finding a chip to do the protocol conversion was never an issue.
The problem was the mechanical details - will the card you want
fit or not. That's the tough part. Check the reviews before
wasting the money.

In the past, some BIOS have had problems with subtending busses.
They didn't tolerate bridges well. So I don't know if that
would be an issue with this concept or not. PCI Express slots
are in relatively modern computers, so you'd hope that would not
be an issue.

One reviewer writes:

"I will note that if your PCI cards are not "low profile" You WILL
need to cut away part of your case if there are multiple ports on
the back of the PCI card. I used tinsnips to do this but a dremel
would also work."

Good times :-) I always wanted to Dremel a computer case...

Paul

Damaeus

December 26th 12, 02:28 AM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, Paul > posted on Tue, 25
Dec 2012 21:20:45 -0500 the following:

> Good times :-) I always wanted to Dremel a computer case...

Heh... I've been using this same case since I built my first computer
that held an Abit KT7A-RAID motherboard. I'm not going to "Dremel" it
now.

Damaeus

Damaeus

December 26th 12, 02:47 AM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, Paul > posted on Tue, 25
Dec 2012 20:51:42 -0500 the following:

> Damaeus wrote:
>
> > I'm going to get the plain Windows 8 for home use.
>
> I recommend you read up on all the pricing information to date, before
> jumping to conclusions. The pricing is not nearly as "smooth" as you
> might think. Projections range from $15 (when purchasing a computer
> with Win7 and wanting Win8), to $200 for people who wait too long and
> buy a retail copy at Best Buy in February. Amidst all the offers, you
> might find one which is a higher version than you want, but cheaper
> than some other versions. If the "Plain" version is say, $150 in
> February, and any edition is cheaper than that in January, you take
> what you can get in January. If you have no interest in Windows 8 at
> all, then you can safely skip it. If your computer has an OS, you're
> covered.

Well, I *could* just keep WinXP, but when I last installed XP in this
temporary computer, it was so out of date that Internet Explorer 6 was not
compatible with the Microsoft Update site so I couldn't download SP3. I
think I needed at least IE7, and IE7 was not compatible with WinXP with no
service pack. I had to find a "direct download" of an install package to
get SP3 installed, and then I was able to get other things working. But
this machine is so slow that it's painful to use, especially with only 1GB
of RAM. I haven't bothered loading my full spread of software.

Anyway, I've read that full retail versions are a thing of the past now.
They now only have OEM and upgrade versions. I don't think an upgrade
version will work for me because I don't have any full retail versions
from the past. I have WinXP upgrade and a special Win98SE upgrade disc
marked "not for retail or OEM distribution". So I need a full version,
even if it's OEM, if that's the only choice. I'm planning on buying
something within the next few days when I get all my funds together so
I'll know exactly how much I have to work with. So far I have $550. The
motherboard is going to be $230, CPU is about $130, memory is about $80.
Newegg.com has full version Win8 OEM copies for $99.99. That's fine with
me, as long as I can use that disc to purchase future upgrades. I was
hoping for an actual full retail version, but all I can find on the web
notes that Windows 8 does not come full retail, only upgrades. I *need* a
full-version, purely Microsoft disc so I can safely buy future upgrades. I
don't know what they think the removal of full-retail versions does to
people who have built their own systems in the past. I used to have the
Packard Bell disc with Win95 on it that I used to use to get an XP upgrade
disc to install, but I don't even know where that Packard Bell disc is
anymore. The only reason XP would install on this temporary machine is
because the IDE/ATA hard drive I borrowed out of my friend's broken-down
DELL machine already had XP on it. I'm using my newer SATA drive as a
slave via a PCI SATA adapter card because the motherboard is an Abit NF-7,
and it has no SATA plugs on it.

Ashton Crusher[_2_]

December 26th 12, 03:39 AM

Gene Wirchenko[_2_]

December 26th 12, 03:53 AM

On Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:16:11 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:

[snip]

>Yeah I heard of it so I stayed away. Although everything I have heard it
>still should be a very capable. It just used different commands. You

Yes.

>might not know, but WordStar worried about the then new Windows, bought
>a GUI word processor that I think at the time was called Legacy. They
>bought it and added classic WordStar commands to it. They came out with
>v1.0, v1.5, and v2.0. I bought them, but it just wasn't the same.

I did not hear about Legacy.

>Speaking about a programming editor, there was an early picture of Bill
>Gates and what was on the computer in the background was WordStar. The
>story was Gates used WordStar as a program editor too. I never saw the
>picture myself. Many used WordStar as a programming editor and many
>writers preferred it too.

I used classic WordStar as a programming editor, too.

>Last I heard was that the source code for WordStar is long gone. A
>number of companies owned the rights to it including Mattel. I forget
>who the current owner is, but nobody had done a thing with it.

It strikes me that it would not be the difficult to do for
someone with experience with editors. Many people have written
editors resembling WordStar, but the resemblance was not very close on
the ones that I checked. Some of them, I deleted within two minutes
of starting the program.

WordStar has a very nice ease-of-use that I have not seen in any
other editor. My opinion, and other people's MMV.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Paul

December 26th 12, 04:50 AM

Damaeus wrote:
> In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, Paul > posted on Tue, 25
> Dec 2012 20:51:42 -0500 the following:
>
>> Damaeus wrote:
>>
>>> I'm going to get the plain Windows 8 for home use.
>> I recommend you read up on all the pricing information to date, before
>> jumping to conclusions. The pricing is not nearly as "smooth" as you
>> might think. Projections range from $15 (when purchasing a computer
>> with Win7 and wanting Win8), to $200 for people who wait too long and
>> buy a retail copy at Best Buy in February. Amidst all the offers, you
>> might find one which is a higher version than you want, but cheaper
>> than some other versions. If the "Plain" version is say, $150 in
>> February, and any edition is cheaper than that in January, you take
>> what you can get in January. If you have no interest in Windows 8 at
>> all, then you can safely skip it. If your computer has an OS, you're
>> covered.
>
> Well, I *could* just keep WinXP, but when I last installed XP in this
> temporary computer, it was so out of date that Internet Explorer 6 was not
> compatible with the Microsoft Update site so I couldn't download SP3. I
> think I needed at least IE7, and IE7 was not compatible with WinXP with no
> service pack. I had to find a "direct download" of an install package to
> get SP3 installed, and then I was able to get other things working. But
> this machine is so slow that it's painful to use, especially with only 1GB
> of RAM. I haven't bothered loading my full spread of software.
>
> Anyway, I've read that full retail versions are a thing of the past now.
> They now only have OEM and upgrade versions. I don't think an upgrade
> version will work for me because I don't have any full retail versions
> from the past. I have WinXP upgrade and a special Win98SE upgrade disc
> marked "not for retail or OEM distribution". So I need a full version,
> even if it's OEM, if that's the only choice. I'm planning on buying
> something within the next few days when I get all my funds together so
> I'll know exactly how much I have to work with. So far I have $550. The
> motherboard is going to be $230, CPU is about $130, memory is about $80.
> Newegg.com has full version Win8 OEM copies for $99.99. That's fine with
> me, as long as I can use that disc to purchase future upgrades. I was
> hoping for an actual full retail version, but all I can find on the web
> notes that Windows 8 does not come full retail, only upgrades. I *need* a
> full-version, purely Microsoft disc so I can safely buy future upgrades. I
> don't know what they think the removal of full-retail versions does to
> people who have built their own systems in the past. I used to have the
> Packard Bell disc with Win95 on it that I used to use to get an XP upgrade
> disc to install, but I don't even know where that Packard Bell disc is
> anymore. The only reason XP would install on this temporary machine is
> because the IDE/ATA hard drive I borrowed out of my friend's broken-down
> DELL machine already had XP on it. I'm using my newer SATA drive as a
> slave via a PCI SATA adapter card because the motherboard is an Abit NF-7,
> and it has no SATA plugs on it.
>

I purchased the Win8 Pro upgrade edition for $39.99+tax, and did not
give it any previous OS to look at. I installed it on a clean
disk, and did a "Refresh this PC" operation after the install,
to get it to activate. It didn't exactly behave like an upgrade.

I understand the $39.99 download version, isn't available worldwide,
which is why I have to be careful to not oversell it. For better or worse,
people around the world are treated differently. And there may not be
ready tables that explain the best offer available to them.

All I can tell you is, I have a copy of Win8 Pro to use here (mainly
for testing, not as an everyday OS). And I didn't need to show it any
licenses from a previous OS, to get the status in the System control
panel to say "Activated".

As for why the editions are changing, the plan for Windows 9 is to go
to yearly subscriptions. So this OS release might be considered a
transition point between the two approaches. Microsoft could always change
their mind at the last minute, which is why you can't completely
abandon everything that has been learned about their past practices.

Paul

Damaeus

December 26th 12, 10:03 AM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, Paul > posted on Tue, 25
Dec 2012 23:50:07 -0500 the following:

> As for why the editions are changing, the plan for Windows 9 is to go
> to yearly subscriptions. So this OS release might be considered a
> transition point between the two approaches. Microsoft could always change
> their mind at the last minute, which is why you can't completely
> abandon everything that has been learned about their past practices.

Yearly subscriptions? How gross. I'd rather eat someone else's boogers.
I suppose, though, that a yearly subscription might not be TOO bad as long
as it's not more than about $20 a year. I could accept paying $5.00 for
the initial purchase, then a $20 yearly subscription fee starting off, but
I don't want to pay $100 to get the disc (maybe which will include the
first year of operation), and then have to pay another $20 a year for
every year after that.

Well, at this point, since I really want the 64-bit version of Windows 8
for video editing and any future advantages that might come out of having
64-bit, I'm now sure that I'll run a dual-boot with XP if I can get XP to
install one more time. The motherboard I'm getting has no IDE connections
so I won't be able to use my IDE hard drives...that is unless I get a PCIe
IDE adapter card, which I'll end up doing since I don't want to have to
replace my CD and DVD drives yet. Those are expenses I wasn't planning
on. Unfortunately I've already started to clean off the SATA drive that
had XP on it, so having the upgrade disc recognize that install is going
to be impossible. I'll be searching my room top to bottom to see if I can
locate that Packard Bell disc. It just has to be around here somewhere.
lol

Damaeus

Phantom Post

December 26th 12, 10:16 AM

Paul > wrote in :

> I purchased the Win8 Pro upgrade edition for $39.99+tax, and did not
> give it any previous OS to look at. I installed it on a clean
> disk, and did a "Refresh this PC" operation after the install,
> to get it to activate. It didn't exactly behave like an upgrade.
>

I too did the $39.99 upgrade. I first installed it directly to my
new/clean SSD. Install went OK but then it would not activate and gave me a
message that I had an upgrade version that was not for clean installs. I
then restored my Win7 image to the SSD and reinstalled Win8 choosing the
option to keep nothing. It created a Windows.old folder and this time Win8
activated promptly at the end of installation.

I didn't know about the "Refresh this PC" option, or if it would have
worked for me.

--

Pat

email: valid would be net

Paul

December 26th 12, 02:22 PM

Phantom Post wrote:
> Paul > wrote in :
>
>> I purchased the Win8 Pro upgrade edition for $39.99+tax, and did not
>> give it any previous OS to look at. I installed it on a clean
>> disk, and did a "Refresh this PC" operation after the install,
>> to get it to activate. It didn't exactly behave like an upgrade.
>>
>
> I too did the $39.99 upgrade. I first installed it directly to my
> new/clean SSD. Install went OK but then it would not activate and gave me a
> message that I had an upgrade version that was not for clean installs. I
> then restored my Win7 image to the SSD and reinstalled Win8 choosing the
> option to keep nothing. It created a Windows.old folder and this time Win8
> activated promptly at the end of installation.
>
> I didn't know about the "Refresh this PC" option, or if it would have
> worked for me.
>

There are many things they could have done, to reinforce their
license terms, but didn't.

On that page I found with the recipe, I tried the .bat file with
the slmgr call, but that didn't work for whatever reason. But
doing the refresh right after that, the status changed to
activated. The machine had a working Internet connection the
whole time, so they could have phoned home at any time. I didn't
attempt to "starve" windows 8 to make this happen.

Paul

BillW50

December 26th 12, 09:07 PM

On 12/25/2012 9:53 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> It strikes me that it would not be the difficult to do for
> someone with experience with editors. Many people have written
> editors resembling WordStar, but the resemblance was not very close on
> the ones that I checked. Some of them, I deleted within two minutes
> of starting the program.
>
> WordStar has a very nice ease-of-use that I have not seen in any
> other editor. My opinion, and other people's MMV.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko

The only one that I found is very close is VDE (Video Display Editor).
It has been around since around the early 90's. And it is very fast even
on XT machines (remember those?). It used to have a limit of only
working with files like 80kb or smaller. I have no idea today what is
happening with it anymore. The author's name is Eric Meyer if I recall
correctly.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 7 SP1

Gene Wirchenko[_2_]

December 27th 12, 05:36 AM

On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:07:42 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:

>On 12/25/2012 9:53 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:

[snip]

>> WordStar has a very nice ease-of-use that I have not seen in any
>> other editor. My opinion, and other people's MMV.

>The only one that I found is very close is VDE (Video Display Editor).
>It has been around since around the early 90's. And it is very fast even
>on XT machines (remember those?). It used to have a limit of only
>working with files like 80kb or smaller. I have no idea today what is
>happening with it anymore. The author's name is Eric Meyer if I recall
>correctly.

I found a Website devoted to it
https://sites.google.com/site/vdeeditor/
On the basis of the site, it looks good so far. When I finish up some
current programming, I will dig into it and see if it does the trick
for me. Thank you for mentioning it.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Juan I. Cahis

December 27th 12, 12:34 PM

Dear friends:

I followed this discussion very attentively, because I was planning the
same migration, from WinXP to Win-8.

But is this really the correct path? Maybe the paradigm has irremediably
shifted to another path, and we can renew our computer tools to another
direction in a lot effortless and more productive way.

A friend wrote me (he lives in the USA) that he received a (Samsung?)
Chromebook as a Christmas Gift, and he is fascinated with it. He promised
me that he never will ever think to have a Windows Laptop again. Could this
kind of machines be the new paradigm?

Of course, I am not talking of big corporations that they have invested a
lot of money in Ms-Windows only programs, I am talking in normal users that
apart of Ms-Office don't run many Microsoft provided software. And
regarding Ms-Office, I normally use Apple's iWork on my iPad without any
significant compatibility problem, and they are many other Ms-Office
compatible tools in the market too.

I read in some US newspapers through the Internet, that the tablet sales
during last Christmas was 50 to 1 for Apple's iPad versus Microsoft's RT
Tablet. And if you add to this statistic all the Android Tablets, these
figures could be doubled. Tablets are not Laptops, but could be these new
Chromebook like Notebooks the new Laptop Paradigm of the future?

Note that I am a retired person and not related to any computer or software
manufacturer. Also, I don't run games in my computers, apart of solitaries
or similar low CPU consuming games.

What do you think about?

--
Enviado desde mi iPad usando NewsTap, Juan I. Cahis, Santiago de Chile.

BillW50

December 27th 12, 01:19 PM

In ,
Gene Wirchenko typed:
> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:07:42 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:
>
>> On 12/25/2012 9:53 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> WordStar has a very nice ease-of-use that I have not seen in
>>> any other editor. My opinion, and other people's MMV.
>
>> The only one that I found is very close is VDE (Video Display
>> Editor). It has been around since around the early 90's. And it is
>> very fast even on XT machines (remember those?). It used to have a
>> limit of only working with files like 80kb or smaller. I have no
>> idea today what is happening with it anymore. The author's name is
>> Eric Meyer if I recall correctly.
>
> I found a Website devoted to it
> https://sites.google.com/site/vdeeditor/
> On the basis of the site, it looks good so far. When I finish up some
> current programming, I will dig into it and see if it does the trick
> for me. Thank you for mentioning it.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko

Yes that is it! I used to use it all of the time back in the CP/M and
DOS days. Even in the early Windows days. Although when drives and CPUs
got so much faster, WordStar wasn't so slow anymore and I ended up using
WordStar more and more. Maybe I too should take another look at it. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2

BillW50

December 27th 12, 02:28 PM

In
,
Juan I. Cahis typed:
> Dear friends:
>
> I followed this discussion very attentively, because I was planning
> the same migration, from WinXP to Win-8.
>
> But is this really the correct path? Maybe the paradigm has
> irremediably shifted to another path, and we can renew our computer
> tools to another direction in a lot effortless and more productive
> way.
>
> A friend wrote me (he lives in the USA) that he received a (Samsung?)
> Chromebook as a Christmas Gift, and he is fascinated with it. He
> promised me that he never will ever think to have a Windows Laptop
> again. Could this kind of machines be the new paradigm?
>
> Of course, I am not talking of big corporations that they have
> invested a lot of money in Ms-Windows only programs, I am talking in
> normal users that apart of Ms-Office don't run many Microsoft
> provided software. And regarding Ms-Office, I normally use Apple's
> iWork on my iPad without any significant compatibility problem, and
> they are many other Ms-Office compatible tools in the market too.
>
> I read in some US newspapers through the Internet, that the tablet
> sales during last Christmas was 50 to 1 for Apple's iPad versus
> Microsoft's RT Tablet. And if you add to this statistic all the
> Android Tablets, these figures could be doubled. Tablets are not
> Laptops, but could be these new Chromebook like Notebooks the new
> Laptop Paradigm of the future?
>
> Note that I am a retired person and not related to any computer or
> software manufacturer. Also, I don't run games in my computers, apart
> of solitaries or similar low CPU consuming games.
>
> What do you think about?

Ah... the first question is what do you want to do? I too have used
Androids, iPads, etc. and I find them ok for what they do. Same thing
with Linux machines too. But I can still do so much more with Windows.
And just about any device you purchase, will work with Windows.

You read that tablet sales were 50 to 1 in iPads favor? I am not
surprised, as PC tablets in the past have only been found in a small
niche mainly among business users. And since they have been such a small
group, prices have been very high for PC tablets and selections have
been tiny to choose from. But this appears to be changing. Even though I
have been using tablets for over 10 years, I never had a PC tablet.
Although just in the last month, I now have three of them. Thanks mostly
to Windows 8, which helps to make PC tablets easier to use.

Now don't confuse Windows RT with Windows 8. RT doesn't have the classic
desktop side. And in time when there are more Metro Apps, RT will only
be as useful as an Android or an iPad. But Windows 8 on a PC tablet is
very much more. As it does both. So it is like having two machines in
one. Apple missed this one. As the iPad isn't compatible with the Mac.
And the Android isn't compatible with anything but itself.

Now if you read the comments on PC tablets (even older ones on eBay),
many people feel they blow things like the iPad away and I do agree. The
only thing I don't hear much about iPads, Androids, PC tablets, etc. Is
that some things are still better with a keyboard and mouse, even on a
tablet. So a PC tablet with at least a detectable keyboard I feel
maximizes the whole experience. Although a dock is even better yet
(although not as portable). I use both either a dock or a wireless
keyboard and mouse. Now you have the full desktop experience. And just
lift it off and you now have total tablet experience too. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2

Paul

December 27th 12, 04:10 PM

Juan I. Cahis wrote:
> Dear friends:
>
> I followed this discussion very attentively, because I was planning the
> same migration, from WinXP to Win-8.
>
> But is this really the correct path? Maybe the paradigm has irremediably
> shifted to another path, and we can renew our computer tools to another
> direction in a lot effortless and more productive way.
>
> A friend wrote me (he lives in the USA) that he received a (Samsung?)
> Chromebook as a Christmas Gift, and he is fascinated with it. He promised
> me that he never will ever think to have a Windows Laptop again. Could this
> kind of machines be the new paradigm?
>
> Of course, I am not talking of big corporations that they have invested a
> lot of money in Ms-Windows only programs, I am talking in normal users that
> apart of Ms-Office don't run many Microsoft provided software. And
> regarding Ms-Office, I normally use Apple's iWork on my iPad without any
> significant compatibility problem, and they are many other Ms-Office
> compatible tools in the market too.
>
> I read in some US newspapers through the Internet, that the tablet sales
> during last Christmas was 50 to 1 for Apple's iPad versus Microsoft's RT
> Tablet. And if you add to this statistic all the Android Tablets, these
> figures could be doubled. Tablets are not Laptops, but could be these new
> Chromebook like Notebooks the new Laptop Paradigm of the future?
>
> Note that I am a retired person and not related to any computer or software
> manufacturer. Also, I don't run games in my computers, apart of solitaries
> or similar low CPU consuming games.
>
> What do you think about?
>
>

Have you read this article ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChromeBook

It's a "content consumption" platform, not a "content creation" platform.

Who wants all their data cloud based, with expensive 3G or 4G contracts
for puny amounts of data ? That would be a non-starter right there.

The computer I own, is gutless enough as it is. I can't imagine spending
good money, for something inferior to what I've got.

If you want a new toy, pick up a Raspberry PI (about $35). Or the
quad core version another company makes for $135 plus expensive shipping.
You get to use stuff you already own, for I/O. And, you will have to be
very creative, to get your money's worth (find a good use for it).

http://com.odroid.com/sigong/blog/blog_list.php?bid=138 (table near bottom)

Paul

Juan I. Cahis

December 27th 12, 04:22 PM

Dear Bill & friends:

"BillW50" > wrote:
> In
> ,
> Juan I. Cahis typed:
>> Dear friends:
>>
>> I followed this discussion very attentively, because I was planning
>> the same migration, from WinXP to Win-8.
>>
>> But is this really the correct path? Maybe the paradigm has
>> irremediably shifted to another path, and we can renew our computer
>> tools to another direction in a lot effortless and more productive
>> way.
>>
>> A friend wrote me (he lives in the USA) that he received a (Samsung?)
>> Chromebook as a Christmas Gift, and he is fascinated with it. He
>> promised me that he never will ever think to have a Windows Laptop
>> again. Could this kind of machines be the new paradigm?
>>
>> Of course, I am not talking of big corporations that they have
>> invested a lot of money in Ms-Windows only programs, I am talking in
>> normal users that apart of Ms-Office don't run many Microsoft
>> provided software. And regarding Ms-Office, I normally use Apple's
>> iWork on my iPad without any significant compatibility problem, and
>> they are many other Ms-Office compatible tools in the market too.
>>
>> I read in some US newspapers through the Internet, that the tablet
>> sales during last Christmas was 50 to 1 for Apple's iPad versus
>> Microsoft's RT Tablet. And if you add to this statistic all the
>> Android Tablets, these figures could be doubled. Tablets are not
>> Laptops, but could be these new Chromebook like Notebooks the new
>> Laptop Paradigm of the future?
>>
>> Note that I am a retired person and not related to any computer or
>> software manufacturer. Also, I don't run games in my computers, apart
>> of solitaries or similar low CPU consuming games.
>>
>> What do you think about?
>
> Ah... the first question is what do you want to do? I too have used
> Androids, iPads, etc. and I find them ok for what they do. Same thing
> with Linux machines too. But I can still do so much more with Windows.
> And just about any device you purchase, will work with Windows.
>
> You read that tablet sales were 50 to 1 in iPads favor? I am not
> surprised, as PC tablets in the past have only been found in a small
> niche mainly among business users. And since they have been such a small
> group, prices have been very high for PC tablets and selections have
> been tiny to choose from. But this appears to be changing. Even though I
> have been using tablets for over 10 years, I never had a PC tablet.
> Although just in the last month, I now have three of them. Thanks mostly
> to Windows 8, which helps to make PC tablets easier to use.
>
> Now don't confuse Windows RT with Windows 8. RT doesn't have the classic
> desktop side. And in time when there are more Metro Apps, RT will only
> be as useful as an Android or an iPad. But Windows 8 on a PC tablet is
> very much more. As it does both. So it is like having two machines in
> one. Apple missed this one. As the iPad isn't compatible with the Mac.
> And the Android isn't compatible with anything but itself.
>
> Now if you read the comments on PC tablets (even older ones on eBay),
> many people feel they blow things like the iPad away and I do agree. The
> only thing I don't hear much about iPads, Androids, PC tablets, etc. Is
> that some things are still better with a keyboard and mouse, even on a
> tablet. So a PC tablet with at least a detectable keyboard I feel
> maximizes the whole experience. Although a dock is even better yet
> (although not as portable). I use both either a dock or a wireless
> keyboard and mouse. Now you have the full desktop experience. And just
> lift it off and you now have total tablet experience too. ;-)

Which PC-Tablet would you recommend? On which specs will you recommend us
to take a strong look?

If I want to invest into one (with Windows-8), I would like to take the
advantage of the experience of this group friends.

--
Enviado desde mi iPad usando NewsTap, Juan I. Cahis, Santiago de Chile.

BillW50

December 27th 12, 06:50 PM

On 12/27/2012 10:22 AM, Juan I. Cahis wrote:
> Dear Bill& friends:
>
> > wrote:
>> In
>> ,
>> Juan I. Cahis typed:
>>> Dear friends:
>>>
>>> I followed this discussion very attentively, because I was planning
>>> the same migration, from WinXP to Win-8.
>>>
>>> But is this really the correct path? Maybe the paradigm has
>>> irremediably shifted to another path, and we can renew our computer
>>> tools to another direction in a lot effortless and more productive
>>> way.
>>>
>>> A friend wrote me (he lives in the USA) that he received a (Samsung?)
>>> Chromebook as a Christmas Gift, and he is fascinated with it. He
>>> promised me that he never will ever think to have a Windows Laptop
>>> again. Could this kind of machines be the new paradigm?
>>>
>>> Of course, I am not talking of big corporations that they have
>>> invested a lot of money in Ms-Windows only programs, I am talking in
>>> normal users that apart of Ms-Office don't run many Microsoft
>>> provided software. And regarding Ms-Office, I normally use Apple's
>>> iWork on my iPad without any significant compatibility problem, and
>>> they are many other Ms-Office compatible tools in the market too.
>>>
>>> I read in some US newspapers through the Internet, that the tablet
>>> sales during last Christmas was 50 to 1 for Apple's iPad versus
>>> Microsoft's RT Tablet. And if you add to this statistic all the
>>> Android Tablets, these figures could be doubled. Tablets are not
>>> Laptops, but could be these new Chromebook like Notebooks the new
>>> Laptop Paradigm of the future?
>>>
>>> Note that I am a retired person and not related to any computer or
>>> software manufacturer. Also, I don't run games in my computers, apart
>>> of solitaries or similar low CPU consuming games.
>>>
>>> What do you think about?
>>
>> Ah... the first question is what do you want to do? I too have used
>> Androids, iPads, etc. and I find them ok for what they do. Same thing
>> with Linux machines too. But I can still do so much more with Windows.
>> And just about any device you purchase, will work with Windows.
>>
>> You read that tablet sales were 50 to 1 in iPads favor? I am not
>> surprised, as PC tablets in the past have only been found in a small
>> niche mainly among business users. And since they have been such a small
>> group, prices have been very high for PC tablets and selections have
>> been tiny to choose from. But this appears to be changing. Even though I
>> have been using tablets for over 10 years, I never had a PC tablet.
>> Although just in the last month, I now have three of them. Thanks mostly
>> to Windows 8, which helps to make PC tablets easier to use.
>>
>> Now don't confuse Windows RT with Windows 8. RT doesn't have the classic
>> desktop side. And in time when there are more Metro Apps, RT will only
>> be as useful as an Android or an iPad. But Windows 8 on a PC tablet is
>> very much more. As it does both. So it is like having two machines in
>> one. Apple missed this one. As the iPad isn't compatible with the Mac.
>> And the Android isn't compatible with anything but itself.
>>
>> Now if you read the comments on PC tablets (even older ones on eBay),
>> many people feel they blow things like the iPad away and I do agree. The
>> only thing I don't hear much about iPads, Androids, PC tablets, etc. Is
>> that some things are still better with a keyboard and mouse, even on a
>> tablet. So a PC tablet with at least a detectable keyboard I feel
>> maximizes the whole experience. Although a dock is even better yet
>> (although not as portable). I use both either a dock or a wireless
>> keyboard and mouse. Now you have the full desktop experience. And just
>> lift it off and you now have total tablet experience too. ;-)
>
> Which PC-Tablet would you recommend? On which specs will you recommend us
> to take a strong look?
>
> If I want to invest into one (with Windows-8), I would like to take the
> advantage of the experience of this group friends.

Whoa! Recommendations? I stayed away from PC tablets because I didn't
see the point without a keyboard and a mouse. It was only Windows 8 that
got me interested in them. And I have been playing around with them less
than a month. So I still don't know a lot about them yet.

Also because of Windows 8, PC tablet manufactures were taken by
surprise. As now there is a growing interest in PC tablets like never
before. And nobody can supply enough yet. And there is like almost
nothing out there that comes with Windows 8 yet. You can buy Windows RT
tablets, but what Windows user wants to be stuck with only Metro Apps? I
am sure once Metro Apps starts catching up, Windows RT will be more
attractive. Especially among iPad and Android users.

The only new PC tablets you can basically find right now has Windows 7
on them. And oddly enough, many of them don't appear to be fully
compatible with Windows 8. And many of them lack Windows 8 drivers, so
right now it isn't a real good time to be shopping for a Windows 8 tablet.

I first purchased two Dell Latitude Slate Tablets. They came with
Windows 7 Pro. If you read the commends about them is they are very
slow. Yes indeed they are, because they use an Intel Atom Z670 1.5GHz
CPU. Sure it will run everything just about, but saying crawling would
be more accurate. So-so for email and web browsing, but things like most
youtube videos it just won't be able to keep up.

One I left Windows 7 on it and tweaked it for performance. And it is
much better, but it really needs a multi-core CPU to run Windows 7/8
well. The other one I upgraded to Windows 8. I also tweaked it for
performance. And you can tell it is even slower than Windows 7 is. Plus
there are drivers and Windows 8 update issues. Sure it is doable, but on
the desktop side Windows 7 on the same machine is better. IMHO, any Atom
CPU should never be sold with anything other than XP on them.

Next I am going to be playing around with used older PC tablets that
came with XP Tablet PC edition. Since I never played with them before,
I'll see what they can do. Can't do much of anything else until
manufactures catch up and get Windows 8 tablets out there. Some of them
sounds promising. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - Thunderbird v12
Centrino Core2 Duo T7400 2.16 GHz - 4GB - Windows 8

BillW50

December 27th 12, 09:09 PM

In ,
Damaeus typed:
> I've been using WinXP up until now, but I'm about to build a new
> system and I want to put Windows 8 on it... you know, just jump into
> the deep end without my floaties. But having been a WinXP user for
> so long, there are many applications that I just love using and I
> want to keep using them in Windows 8. For example, I want to
> continue using my current newsreader (Forte Agent 6.0), and
> UltraEdit, mIRC, Paint Shop Pro 8. Plus I have the Dreamweaver MX
> studio. I use VirtualDub for editing videos. And I like to play
> Final Fantasy XI Online. I've seen some people have had problems
> with that game, so I'm expecting that.
>
> Anyway, I just basically want to know if Windows 8 will generally run
> all or most of the old programs.
>
> If the Start Menu and classic desktop are gone forever, I might as
> well skip Windows 7 and go right on to 8. And actually, I'm kind of
> tired of the classic desktop, really. I'm not going to be using a
> touchscreen, but just a mouse and keyboard. My monitor is too far
> away and in my normal computing arrangement, I'd end up doing a lot
> of sit-ups if I use a touch-screen...not that I couldn't use a few
> sit-ups. Heh.
>
> Thanks,
> Damaeus

Oh yeah... another thing to add... While I have been using Windows 7
since July of 2009 and Windows 8 since March of 2012, XP is still my
favorite version. As XP runs more than the previous versions and even
more than the newer Windows versions so far. So just a heads up. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2

Damaeus

December 28th 12, 01:29 PM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, "BillW50" > posted on Thu,
27 Dec 2012 15:09:35 -0600 the following:

> Oh yeah... another thing to add... While I have been using Windows 7
> since July of 2009 and Windows 8 since March of 2012, XP is still my
> favorite version. As XP runs more than the previous versions and even
> more than the newer Windows versions so far. So just a heads up. ;-)

Yeah, I want to have XP on another partition, but I'm getting a lot of
grief about it in a web forum I've been posting to. I like XP, too, but I
still want Windows 8 running alongside it so if I can't do something in
Windows 8 that I can do in XP, I'll still have XP to come to my rescue.

Damaeus

BillW50

December 29th 12, 08:57 AM

In ,
Damaeus typed:
> In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, "BillW50" > posted on
> Thu, 27 Dec 2012 15:09:35 -0600 the following:
>
>> Oh yeah... another thing to add... While I have been using Windows 7
>> since July of 2009 and Windows 8 since March of 2012, XP is still my
>> favorite version. As XP runs more than the previous versions and even
>> more than the newer Windows versions so far. So just a heads up. ;-)
>
> Yeah, I want to have XP on another partition, but I'm getting a lot of
> grief about it in a web forum I've been posting to. I like XP, too,
> but I still want Windows 8 running alongside it so if I can't do
> something in Windows 8 that I can do in XP, I'll still have XP to
> come to my rescue.
>
> Damaeus

I avoid those problems by purchasing two or more of a model. Thus
dualbooting doesn't offer me any advantages. But there seems to be a
solution to your problem that might work out for you. As it appears
Microsoft is ok that after an upgrade, if you go back to your previous
version. Thus I propose that one should be able to leave the original OS
on one drive and then clone it for the upgrade Windows (if required) on
a new drive. Then remove the original and save as a backup. Do the
upgrade on the clone and you now have the new Windows.

Now at any time you can remove the upgrade drive and put your backup
drive with the original Windows. So it is like dualbooting, but you are
switching hard drives instead. Most of my machines are easy to swap hard
drives. I bought spare carriers for these Gateway M465 machines for
example and I can swap drives in about two seconds. I dunno, but is that
doable for you?

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2

Damaeus

December 30th 12, 10:02 AM

In news:alt.comp.os.windows-8, "BillW50" > posted on Sat,
29 Dec 2012 02:57:45 -0600 the following:

> In ,
> Damaeus typed:
>
> > Yeah, I want to have XP on another partition, but I'm getting a lot of
> > grief about it in a web forum I've been posting to. I like XP, too,
> > but I still want Windows 8 running alongside it so if I can't do
> > something in Windows 8 that I can do in XP, I'll still have XP to come
> > to my rescue.
>
> I avoid those problems by purchasing two or more of a model.

Heh... if I had the money and the space, I'd have three or four computers:
Win8, WinXP, Linux, and Macintosh for the optional fourth.

> Thus dualbooting doesn't offer me any advantages. But there seems to
> be a solution to your problem that might work out for you. As it
> appears Microsoft is ok that after an upgrade, if you go back to your
> previous version. Thus I propose that one should be able to leave the
> original OS on one drive and then clone it for the upgrade Windows (if
> required) on a new drive. Then remove the original and save as a
> backup. Do the upgrade on the clone and you now have the new Windows.

Before building my new system, I'm going to re-partition the 320GB drive
(unless I get a SSD to add) and install WinXP on it while I still have an
old IDE drive with XP, otherwise I don't think I'll be able to install XP
at all. I can't find the disc I used to get the upgrade to install with
no detectable XP installs on any of the drives. This is why I hate having
an upgrade disc, and it's why I bought the full version of Win8, so I'll
know I have a good disc for future upgrades to later versions.

> Now at any time you can remove the upgrade drive and put your backup
> drive with the original Windows. So it is like dualbooting, but you are
> switching hard drives instead. Most of my machines are easy to swap hard
> drives. I bought spare carriers for these Gateway M465 machines for
> example and I can swap drives in about two seconds. I dunno, but is that
> doable for you?

I can't swap hard drives in two seconds. I have an Antec case and the
hard drives are easy to remove because they are in a "cage" that can be
removed with just the flicking of a lever, but I'd still have to remove
four screws holding the drive in cage. The closest thing I could do is
install the different operating systems on different physical discs, then
when I want to change which OS I'm using, I could just change the plugs.
One hard drive would always be disconnected, but I really don't want to go
that route. I mean, that's what boot menus are for.

I researched dual-booting Win8 and WinXP. The advice I found says to
install XP first, and then Win8, otherwise XP will overwite the boot menu
put in place by Win8.

Damaeus

Gene Wirchenko[_2_]

February 1st 13, 03:52 AM

On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 07:19:38 -0600, "BillW50" > wrote:

>In ,
>Gene Wirchenko typed:
>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:07:42 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/25/2012 9:53 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>> WordStar has a very nice ease-of-use that I have not seen in
>>>> any other editor. My opinion, and other people's MMV.
>>
>>> The only one that I found is very close is VDE (Video Display
>>> Editor). It has been around since around the early 90's. And it is
>>> very fast even on XT machines (remember those?). It used to have a
>>> limit of only working with files like 80kb or smaller. I have no
>>> idea today what is happening with it anymore. The author's name is
>>> Eric Meyer if I recall correctly.
>>
>> I found a Website devoted to it
>> https://sites.google.com/site/vdeeditor/
>> On the basis of the site, it looks good so far. When I finish up some
>> current programming, I will dig into it and see if it does the trick
>> for me. Thank you for mentioning it.

>Yes that is it! I used to use it all of the time back in the CP/M and
>DOS days. Even in the early Windows days. Although when drives and CPUs
>got so much faster, WordStar wasn't so slow anymore and I ended up using
>WordStar more and more. Maybe I too should take another look at it. ;-)

I finally got around to installing VDE. It is quite a bit like
WordStar with some minor differences that are tripping me up just a
bit. In particular, I have been using WordStar 2000 which has
different key assignments. VDE appears to be quite usable though, far
more than any other WordStar-compatible. That, sadly, does not say
much though.

I will have to read the documentation and see if some of my
concerns are covered by configuration. WordStar 2000 allows one to
edit up to three files at once. VDE does, too, but I can not see how
to have them all showing at once. Sometimes, I want that, as when
comparing code segments.

But so far, pretty good.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

BillW50

February 2nd 13, 04:39 PM

In ,
Gene Wirchenko typed:
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 07:19:38 -0600, "BillW50" > wrote:
>
>> In ,
>> Gene Wirchenko typed:
>>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2012 15:07:42 -0600, BillW50 > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/25/2012 9:53 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>>> WordStar has a very nice ease-of-use that I have not seen in
>>>>> any other editor. My opinion, and other people's MMV.
>>>
>>>> The only one that I found is very close is VDE (Video Display
>>>> Editor). It has been around since around the early 90's. And it is
>>>> very fast even on XT machines (remember those?). It used to have a
>>>> limit of only working with files like 80kb or smaller. I have no
>>>> idea today what is happening with it anymore. The author's name is
>>>> Eric Meyer if I recall correctly.
>>>
>>> I found a Website devoted to it
>>> https://sites.google.com/site/vdeeditor/
>>> On the basis of the site, it looks good so far. When I finish up
>>> some current programming, I will dig into it and see if it does the
>>> trick for me. Thank you for mentioning it.
>
>> Yes that is it! I used to use it all of the time back in the CP/M and
>> DOS days. Even in the early Windows days. Although when drives and
>> CPUs got so much faster, WordStar wasn't so slow anymore and I ended
>> up using WordStar more and more. Maybe I too should take another
>> look at it. ;-)
>
> I finally got around to installing VDE. It is quite a bit like
> WordStar with some minor differences that are tripping me up just a
> bit. In particular, I have been using WordStar 2000 which has
> different key assignments. VDE appears to be quite usable though, far
> more than any other WordStar-compatible. That, sadly, does not say
> much though.
>
> I will have to read the documentation and see if some of my
> concerns are covered by configuration. WordStar 2000 allows one to
> edit up to three files at once. VDE does, too, but I can not see how
> to have them all showing at once. Sometimes, I want that, as when
> comparing code segments.
>
> But so far, pretty good.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko

It has been years since I have used VDE myself. And I seem to recall you
could open up five files at a time. Although later versions might be
able to open more. And I am guessing you are looking for is something
that is sometimes called split window. And I can't recall if VDE had
this ability or not.

As for the key commands, WordStar and VDE both started out with the same
keys. Although Eric added features that WordStar didn't have. So he made
up new command keys for the newer features. Although later, WordStar
added some of them, but WordStar used different key commands. This is
where the difference started to creep in.

--
Bill
Motion Computing LE1700 Tablet ('09 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo L7400 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM
Windows XP Tablet PC Edition 2005 SP2