If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
"Gene Wirchenko" wrote
| Microsoft dropped support for 16-bit applications. I do not call | that being very good with backward compatibility. | And I can't hook up a typewriter to my computer's PS2 port. Oh, well. But I can write VB6 software that runs on virtually every currently running Windows computer, back to Win95, with no support files needed. If I were programming on a Mac I'd b targetting only the last two versions. God help any Mac user who wants software to run on a 3-4 year old machine. Each bitness requires a shim to run the earlier version, as I expect you know. Win-64 has to have built-in functionality to adapt to Win-32. Likewise with Win-32 to Win-16. In other words, Microsoft didn't break anything. They just didn't build in support for Win16. I don't know how much trouble that would have been. But they have to draw the line somewhere. Software circa Win3.1 can't be any more than a novelty these days. |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
And, since you don't have any direct experience with Win10, you don't realize that many of these comments come from the relatively few "regulars" who do really stupid things with their Win10 systems thinking that they should be functionally like XP. The rest of us who have multiple Win10 systems with no such issues just shake our heads at those comments and keep working. I adjusted really fast. As I did from every version since 95. Working with os/2 at work was hard !!! KenW |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
Oh please.
Most Win 10 users do not know what they are doing and use the very minimal capability of this overly complicated OS. With the exception of maybe corporate users that have IT folks down the hall. MS keeps changing the user interface as an example of poor ergonomics. You have to relearn the OS all over again each time a now major release comes out. Although some deep components might not change much, they way you get to them are totally different. We should all go back to CP/M !!! |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
On 12/01/2018 21:17, Freely wrote:
We should all go back to CP/M !!! Don't be silly. You should all be going back to basics by starting with paper and pencils; Computers should be left to Chinese and Indians who are highly educated and all we have are people like you and SteveGG. -- With over 600 million devices now running Windows 10, customer satisfaction is higher than any previous version of windows. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
On 01/12/2018 04:10 PM, KenW wrote:
I adjusted really fast. As I did from every version since 95. Working with os/2 at work was hard !!! KenW I got a copy of that at a convention many moons ago. Won some game lottery. Probably version 1.0 :-) I tossed it as fast as I could. That might have been about the time of win 3.1? Anyway yes, I agree, it seemed way too hard, but then I was oh so naive on OSs. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
wrote
Starting with the introduction of 10, I posted ( repeatedly ) for anyone to give me one good reason to "upgrade" from 7 to 10. So far nobody has been able to do that. I've noticed the same thing. I join in here because I write Windows software and because I like to keep track of developments. In other words, as a programmer and as a tweaker. I also need to know these things because I help friends and family. What I've noticed is that there are mostly just a few regulars. Most of them are just experimenting and not using Win10 as their primary system. And many of the questions are things like: "That latest update just screwed me. What do I do?" That's in the category of, "How do I survive this thing?" rather than, "How can I better use this thing?" Ditto on all the above! On the other hand, at some point you won't be able to get Win7 or hardware that supports it. Then you'll have to face a decision about using Microsoft rental spyware as an unpaid beta tester or moving to Linux or Mac. At this point there's no clear way ahead to maintain what most Windows users consider to be the advantages of Windows: Lots of software combined with lots of control. Already bought Linux Mint OS and looking seriously at Mac! I elected to 'dump' Win10 in favour of going back to Win7 because Win10 didn't like my 3rd party OCXs. For 8.1/10 I use VMware. My daughter bought the Win10 machine and so far has no complaints. -- Garry Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-september.org Classic VB Users Regroup! comp.lang.basic.visual.misc microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
"GS" wrote
| Already bought Linux Mint OS and looking seriously at Mac! I elected to 'dump' | Win10 in favour of going back to Win7 because Win10 didn't like my 3rd party | OCXs. For 8.1/10 I use VMware. My daughter bought the Win10 machine and so far | has no complaints. As some have pointed out, it's probably not a big deal for people who use it only for basic things. Though they might feel differently if they get a bad update or end up waiting a long time for updates to install. I wonder about the latter: It used to be people complained about waiting 40 seconds to boot. People would leave their computers always on. They'd buy an SSD. Anything to avoid that endless 40 seconds. Now many seem to be putting up with much longer waits but don't complain because it's an official update? I've always thought of Linux like a car kit and Mac like a sportscar. The former is cheap and flexible, but you have to be ready to always have dirty hands as you adjust this or that thing that's not quite finished. The latter is well made and attractive. Good for driving along the beach and making eyes at young ladies. But it's also expensive, restrictive and limited. Don't try to carry more than 1 bag of groceries or drive in the snow. Windows has always been like a decent, normal car. Not incredible, but dependable and flexible. Now it's turning into a bloated, spyware taxi. But I still don't have the stomach for a car kit or a Corvette. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
"GS" wrote
Already bought Linux Mint OS and looking seriously at Mac! I elected to 'dump' Win10 in favour of going back to Win7 because Win10 didn't like my 3rd party OCXs. For 8.1/10 I use VMware. My daughter bought the Win10 machine and so far has no complaints. As some have pointed out, it's probably not a big deal for people who use it only for basic things. Though they might feel differently if they get a bad update or end up waiting a long time for updates to install. I wonder about the latter: It used to be people complained about waiting 40 seconds to boot. People would leave their computers always on. They'd buy an SSD. Anything to avoid that endless 40 seconds. Now many seem to be putting up with much longer waits but don't complain because it's an official update? I've always thought of Linux like a car kit and Mac like a sportscar. The former is cheap and flexible, but you have to be ready to always have dirty hands as you adjust this or that thing that's not quite finished. The latter is well made and attractive. Good for driving along the beach and making eyes at young ladies. But it's also expensive, restrictive and limited. Don't try to carry more than 1 bag of groceries or drive in the snow. Windows has always been like a decent, normal car. Not incredible, but dependable and flexible. Now it's turning into a bloated, spyware taxi. But I still don't have the stomach for a car kit or a Corvette. I love your attitude! -- Garry Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-september.org Classic VB Users Regroup! comp.lang.basic.visual.misc microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 13:31:11 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote: On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 12:06:46 -0800, Gene Wirchenko wrote: On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 11:32:09 -0700, Ken Blake wrote: [snip] I won't do that, because if I did, your reply would be "that's not a good reason." Maybe, but your idea of a good reason might not be a good reason for someone else. The latest is not always the greatest. I agree with both those statements, especially the first one; we are all different and have different likes and dislikes. Great. Some on both sides see only their side as valid. But I still won't do it, simply because anyone who pasts a message entitled "Avoid 10 !" saying "Starting with the introduction of 10, I posted ( repeatedly ) for anyone to give me one good reason to "upgrade" from 7 to 10. So far nobody has been able to do that" is highly unlikely to accept as a good reason anything anyone says. Clearly, his mind is already made up. Well, I really would like to see a good reason. For me, there does not seem to be one. That means that I am going to stick with my solution which works for me. If 10 works for others, fine by me. Pick your poison. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 15:31:49 -0500, "Mayayana"
wrote: "Gene Wirchenko" wrote | Microsoft dropped support for 16-bit applications. I do not call | that being very good with backward compatibility. | And I can't hook up a typewriter to my computer's PS2 port. Oh, well. But I can write VB6 software that runs on virtually every currently running Windows computer, back to Win95, with no support files needed. If I were programming on a Mac I'd b targetting only the last two versions. God help any Mac user who wants software to run on a 3-4 year old machine. I was at a Mac meeting on Monday. Someone described doing just that but with a machine that was about nine years old. It was a high-end laptop at the time it came out which might have softened the difficulty, but nine years. Each bitness requires a shim to run the earlier version, as I expect you know. Win-64 has to have built-in functionality to adapt to Win-32. Likewise with Win-32 to Win-16. In other words, Microsoft didn't break anything. They just didn't build in support for Win16. I don't know how much trouble that would have been. But they have to draw the line somewhere. Software circa Win3.1 can't be any more than a novelty these days. Yes, it can be. That it might well not be needed by you does not mean that it is not needed by others. Microsoft's XP Mode system does not work properly on my Windows 7 Professional system despite multiple tries. And it does not work -- by design -- on my laptop which has Windows 7 Home. This is not backwards compatibility; it is backward combatability. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
"Gene Wirchenko" wrote
| I was at a Mac meeting on Monday. Someone described doing just | that but with a machine that was about nine years old. It was a | high-end laptop at the time it came out which might have softened the | difficulty, but nine years. | But isn't that very much the exception? My understanding is that Apple only supports 2 versions back, which is basically 2 years back. And their fan base don't mind because most of them want an excuse to buy new stuff. The vast majority of software on Windows still supports XP, now 17 years old. | Microsoft's XP Mode system does not work properly on my Windows 7 | Professional system despite multiple tries. And it does not work -- | by design -- on my laptop which has Windows 7 Home. This is not | backwards compatibility; it is backward combatability. | Yes. I haven't tried to use it but I'd guess it's really more of a slight wrapper than an actual compatibility mode. I remember debates about that when Vista came out. The API function GetVersionEx can be called to find out what Windows version your software is running on. But with Vista it started lying. For "compatibility". If the software was run in compa t mode GetVersionEx would return the compat version! But lying to the software, of course, doesn't cure anything. It just makes the software look bad. I had to write my own function to find the real version. Then if my software was running on Vista/7 and I hadn't yet updated it to support those versions, I'd have it quit with a message. The other option was to accept Microsoft's new rules and have my software be untested at best and malfunctioning at worst. In other words, the compat mode didn't provide XP compatibility. It just provided a slight wrapper to make Vista/7 seem like XP by doing things like lying with GetVersionEx and transparently rerouting operations with folders that had moved. I don't know all the details. I just made sure none of my software would work until I'd got around to updating and testing. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
"Gene Wirchenko" wrote
I was at a Mac meeting on Monday. Someone described doing just that but with a machine that was about nine years old. It was a high-end laptop at the time it came out which might have softened the difficulty, but nine years. But isn't that very much the exception? My understanding is that Apple only supports 2 versions back, which is basically 2 years back. And their fan base don't mind because most of them want an excuse to buy new stuff. The vast majority of software on Windows still supports XP, now 17 years old. Microsoft's XP Mode system does not work properly on my Windows 7 Professional system despite multiple tries. And it does not work -- by design -- on my laptop which has Windows 7 Home. This is not backwards compatibility; it is backward combatability. Yes. I haven't tried to use it but I'd guess it's really more of a slight wrapper than an actual compatibility mode. I remember debates about that when Vista came out. The API function GetVersionEx can be called to find out what Windows version your software is running on. But with Vista it started lying. For "compatibility". If the software was run in compa t mode GetVersionEx would return the compat version! But lying to the software, of course, doesn't cure anything. It just makes the software look bad. I had to write my own function to find the real version. Then if my software was running on Vista/7 and I hadn't yet updated it to support those versions, I'd have it quit with a message. The other option was to accept Microsoft's new rules and have my software be untested at best and malfunctioning at worst. In other words, the compat mode didn't provide XP compatibility. It just provided a slight wrapper to make Vista/7 seem like XP by doing things like lying with GetVersionEx and transparently rerouting operations with folders that had moved. I don't know all the details. I just made sure none of my software would work until I'd got around to updating and testing. Keep in mind that since Vista is v6.0, that Win7 (v6.1) is really just a Vista Service Pack. (IMO) -- Garry Free usenet access at http://www.eternal-september.org Classic VB Users Regroup! comp.lang.basic.visual.misc microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Avoid 10 !
wrote in message ... Starting with the introduction of 10, I posted ( repeatedly ) for anyone to give me one good reason to "upgrade" from 7 to 10. So far nobody has been able to do that. I have a few reasons to upgrade from Win7 to Win8.1. They apply to Win10 as well. On the other hand I see no reason to upgrade from Win8.1 to Win10. The reasons to upgrade from Win7 to Win8.1 include: * On Win8.1 one can use Classic theme with DWM enabled, on Win7 one cannot. * A few bugs/glitches in the theme were fixed in Win8, such as a black pixel on the leftmost tab in tabbed dialogs and garbage on the window corner after resizing. * Quick start. Also the fact it keeps AMD Overdrive settings unlike full reboot. * Boot menu on the external monitor (I use laptop in the role of desktop, with external monitor). * Better hardware support, more universal printer drivers, newer driver model, USB 3.0 support out of the box. * Seems working faster for me. ------------------------ Win10 on the other hand, has tons of disadvantages compared to Win8.1. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|