Since we're talking about Lenovo Thinkpads......

Since we're talking about Lenovo Thinkpads...... (another thread), I
have been considering getting another laptop that is a little more
modern and faster. I've been pretty pleaswd with my T43 models. I used
the first one for about 6 years. It worked great until we had lightning
hit the power lines and I had it plugged in charging. After that, I
would never start. I guess the lightning fried it. I bought another T43
on ebay (used), I have been using that one since.

About all I have had to fix is to replace the battery. But thats
expected.

I plan to buy another Lenovo laptop, but something newer. I will just
use XP again, but if I buy one preinstalled with Win7, I'd try it. I
have heard Win7 is good, but I;'ve never used it.

I DO NOT want Win8.x or 10. and I cant afford a lot. A working USED one
is fine.

What models of Thinkpads are more suited to Win7? Even if I install XP
myself, I would like something with a little more speed and power.

My T43 works fine, but when I go to a WIFI and use Firefox for
downloading a lot of files, the whole computer gets real slow. However,
closing Firefox and restarting it, fixes the slowness, so I sort assume
it's firefox that is causing the slowness more than the computer itself.
I am running Firefox 47.02, which is actually around a year old, but FF
keeps adding more bloat and I know that is a reason for slowness, not to
mention a lot of crappy websites.

In message ,
writes:
[]
I plan to buy another Lenovo laptop, but something newer. I will just
use XP again, but if I buy one preinstalled with Win7, I'd try it. I
have heard Win7 is good, but I;'ve never used it.

7 is more or less where XP was a few years ago: lots of people love it
and swear they'll never move on. On the whole, it's enough like XP (or
can be made to be) that an XP user can use it without much difficulty.
Most things that you might actually be using on XP will run under 7,
too, though if you have 16 bit software you're fond of get a 32 bit 7
(which will be able to run 16 bit software) rather than a 64 bit 7
(which won't). IMO, 3G RAM is sufficient for 7 if you're not going to do
anything you didn't do on XP, and I'd not recommend running it on a
single core machine, though I have one such which seems to run fine.

Basically, 7 is OK if you're used to XP. (IMO of course.)
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Who came first? Adam or Eve?" "Adam of course; men always do."
Victoria Wood (via Peter Hesketh)

wrote:
Since we're talking about Lenovo Thinkpads...... (another thread), I
have been considering getting another laptop that is a little more
modern and faster. I've been pretty pleaswd with my T43 models.
(snip)

I like my company provided t420.
Make sure that your new prospective Lenovo has actual buttons by the touch pad.
If you go with W7 get a 64 bit one and you can have 8 gb RAM or more.
It will be faster than XP and you can run several programs at the same time.
W7 will take some getting used to but I like it better than XP.
My old t400 and t410 did not support 64 bit. I still have the t410 32 bit W7 and
it crawls compared to the t420 64 bit. I agree with you on not getting w8x or w10.

On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 23:43:53 -0600, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

wrote:
Since we're talking about Lenovo Thinkpads...... (another thread), I
have been considering getting another laptop that is a little more
modern and faster. I've been pretty pleaswd with my T43 models.
(snip)

I like my company provided t420.
Make sure that your new prospective Lenovo has actual buttons by the touch pad.
If you go with W7 get a 64 bit one and you can have 8 gb RAM or more.
It will be faster than XP and you can run several programs at the same time.
W7 will take some getting used to but I like it better than XP.
My old t400 and t410 did not support 64 bit. I still have the t410 32 bit W7 and
it crawls compared to the t420 64 bit. I agree with you on not getting w8x or w10.

I will only go with Windows 7 if the computer comes with a pre-install
of it. I am not paying $100 or more to buy a Win7 installer CD, and that
seems to be the going rate. If I get a laptop with a blank HDD, I'll
just install XP (which I have).

I dont know if I want the 64 bit though, if I cant run my old software.
For example, I run Winamp and I created a lot of visualizations for it,
over the years and I want to keep using it. I still run Paint Shop Pro
and I still prefer the early versions 3 thru 5. After that it got too
bloated and complicated. Almost all the software I use is from the late
90s or early 2000s.

Mostly what I use my laptop for is to use it at WIFI spots, and play my
videos and music when I am on the road. I'm not sure waht I have for RAM
in this T43, but I know it's the maximum allowed on that machine.
I'm sure I could use more RAM, but I still think it's Firerfox that
causes the slowing down syndrome. It's like FF gets overloaded. Clearing
the cache helps a little bit.

In message ,
writes:
On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 23:43:53 -0600, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

wrote:
Since we're talking about Lenovo Thinkpads...... (another thread), I
have been considering getting another laptop that is a little more
modern and faster. I've been pretty pleaswd with my T43 models.
(snip)

I like my company provided t420.
Make sure that your new prospective Lenovo has actual buttons by the
touch pad.
If you go with W7 get a 64 bit one and you can have 8 gb RAM or more.
It will be faster than XP and you can run several programs at the same time.
W7 will take some getting used to but I like it better than XP.
My old t400 and t410 did not support 64 bit. I still have the t410 32
bit W7 and
it crawls compared to the t420 64 bit. I agree with you on not getting
w8x or w10.

I will only go with Windows 7 if the computer comes with a pre-install
of it. I am not paying $100 or more to buy a Win7 installer CD, and that
seems to be the going rate. If I get a laptop with a blank HDD, I'll
just install XP (which I have).

Presumably you have a spare licence, or a volume licence (you may not
want to answer that on a public newsgroup!).

I dont know if I want the 64 bit though, if I cant run my old software.
For example, I run Winamp and I created a lot of visualizations for it,
over the years and I want to keep using it. I still run Paint Shop Pro
and I still prefer the early versions 3 thru 5. After that it got too
bloated and complicated. Almost all the software I use is from the late
90s or early 2000s.

I don't know an easy way to tell if software is 16 or 32 bit (Paul? Note
I said _easy_!), but I think most of those are 32 bit.

Mostly what I use my laptop for is to use it at WIFI spots, and play my
videos and music when I am on the road.
For those applications, you should be able to find 32 (or 64) bit
software that isn't that unusable, if you do end up with a 64 but W7.
(The second-hand market seemed to have more W7-64 systems than W7-32
last time I looked.)

I'm not sure waht I have for RAM
in this T43, but I know it's the maximum allowed on that machine.

(Right-click on empty part of taskbar, select Task Manager, Performance
tab - look under Physical Memory.)

I'm sure I could use more RAM, but I still think it's Firerfox that
causes the slowing down syndrome. It's like FF gets overloaded. Clearing
the cache helps a little bit.

Task Manager again, Performance tab - if the "PF Usage" bar is showing
above (or near) the amount of Physical memory, something is indeed
slowing it down (look at the PCU Usage section as well of course).
Processes tab, click twice on Mem Usage column heading to see what's
using all the memory (or CPU column for using the CPU). IME, the worst
candidate _is_ Firefox (I use version 26 with some plugins), but only
after using it a while; closing it and restarting it makes it release
lots of memory. (Note that it takes quite a while to close, as seen by
task manager; you'll see the memory usage drop when it eventually
closes.)

FWIW, I find the 2G (max. in this netbook) I have isn't often filled -
usually only if I have had both Firefox and Chrome open for a long time.

(Note that if Task Manager shows you _aren't_ getting close to your
amount of actual RAM, then adding more _won't_ make any difference.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"This is a one line proof... if we start sufficiently far to the left."
[Cambridge University Math Dept.]

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 17:26:06 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message ,


I will only go with Windows 7 if the computer comes with a pre-install
of it. I am not paying $100 or more to buy a Win7 installer CD, and that
seems to be the going rate. If I get a laptop with a blank HDD, I'll
just install XP (which I have).

Presumably you have a spare licence, or a volume licence (you may not
want to answer that on a public newsgroup!).

Any old hardware hacker has a machine or two around with a COA sticker
on it. In real life MS doesn't really seem to care about XP anymore
anyway. They will authenticate anything with a valid number.
Mine all say "genuine microsoft" or words to that effect.

In message ,
writes:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 17:26:06 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:
[]
Presumably you have a spare licence, or a volume licence (you may not
want to answer that on a public newsgroup!).

Any old hardware hacker has a machine or two around with a COA sticker
on it. In real life MS doesn't really seem to care about XP anymore
anyway. They will authenticate anything with a valid number.
Mine all say "genuine microsoft" or words to that effect.

One does wonder why they continue to do that.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

As individuals, politicians are usually quite charming, so it is quite hard to
dislike them, but in most cases, it is worth making the effort.
- Mark Williams (UMRA), 2013-4-26

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 17:26:06 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message ,
writes:
On Wed, 15 Nov 2017 23:43:53 -0600, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

wrote:


I will only go with Windows 7 if the computer comes with a pre-install
of it. I am not paying $100 or more to buy a Win7 installer CD, and that
seems to be the going rate. If I get a laptop with a blank HDD, I'll
just install XP (which I have).

Presumably you have a spare licence, or a volume licence (you may not
want to answer that on a public newsgroup!).

I have what I need. Nuff said....


I dont know if I want the 64 bit though, if I cant run my old software.
For example, I run Winamp and I created a lot of visualizations for it,
over the years and I want to keep using it. I still run Paint Shop Pro
and I still prefer the early versions 3 thru 5. After that it got too
bloated and complicated. Almost all the software I use is from the late
90s or early 2000s.

I don't know an easy way to tell if software is 16 or 32 bit (Paul? Note
I said _easy_!), but I think most of those are 32 bit.

Yea, that has always puzzled me. For example, I have Paint Shop Pro
3.12, and I have both the 16 bit and the 32 bit installed. (plus some
newer versions) on my Win98 machine. THe reason is because the 16 bit
does a quick and easy screen capture, whereas the 32 bit shows the
numbers for the capture size of the graphic on top of the graphic, and
often saves the graphic with these numbers IN the graphic..... WEIRD. So
I use the 16 bit to capture the graphic, save it (using an 8+3 filename.
Then switch toi a newer version of PSP to do my editing.


Mostly what I use my laptop for is to use it at WIFI spots, and play my
videos and music when I am on the road.
For those applications, you should be able to find 32 (or 64) bit
software that isn't that unusable, if you do end up with a 64 but W7.
(The second-hand market seemed to have more W7-64 systems than W7-32
last time I looked.)

I'm not sure waht I have for RAM
in this T43, but I know it's the maximum allowed on that machine.

(Right-click on empty part of taskbar, select Task Manager, Performance
tab - look under Physical Memory.)

OK, I will look at that. I also have a small file that gives all kinds
of info about any computer. I dont think I have that installed on my
laptop though.

I'm sure I could use more RAM, but I still think it's Firerfox that
causes the slowing down syndrome. It's like FF gets overloaded. Clearing
the cache helps a little bit.

Task Manager again, Performance tab - if the "PF Usage" bar is showing
above (or near) the amount of Physical memory, something is indeed
slowing it down (look at the PCU Usage section as well of course).
Processes tab, click twice on Mem Usage column heading to see what's
using all the memory (or CPU column for using the CPU). IME, the worst
candidate _is_ Firefox (I use version 26 with some plugins), but only
after using it a while; closing it and restarting it makes it release
lots of memory. (Note that it takes quite a while to close, as seen by
task manager; you'll see the memory usage drop when it eventually
closes.)

FWIW, I find the 2G (max. in this netbook) I have isn't often filled -
usually only if I have had both Firefox and Chrome open for a long time.

(Note that if Task Manager shows you _aren't_ getting close to your
amount of actual RAM, then adding more _won't_ make any difference.)

The problem is Firefox. I never have that problem with any other
programs. It seems like FF just starts to overload the longer I use it.
Clearing the cache helps, but shutting down FF helps more. And I dont
have many many plugins. Just a few to save videos from youtube. Thats a
bout all. I have 3 of those because some wont work on certain videos, so
I use another one, which usually does.

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 22:22:59 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message ,
writes:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 17:26:06 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:
[]
Presumably you have a spare licence, or a volume licence (you may not
want to answer that on a public newsgroup!).

Any old hardware hacker has a machine or two around with a COA sticker
on it. In real life MS doesn't really seem to care about XP anymore
anyway. They will authenticate anything with a valid number.
Mine all say "genuine microsoft" or words to that effect.

One does wonder why they continue to do that.

I suspect maintaining the old server that tried to track hardware
changes and then had people sitting by the phone to reconcile the
differences was not worth it for a software package they were not
selling anymore. They certainly do not want to say they will breach
the EULA contract and abandon their customers after a while.
That is why they want to migrate to the subscription model with a hard
drop dead date if you don't keep paying, getting away from a lifetime
sale.

In message ,
writes:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 22:22:59 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message ,
writes:
[]
on it. In real life MS doesn't really seem to care about XP anymore
anyway. They will authenticate anything with a valid number.
Mine all say "genuine microsoft" or words to that effect.

One does wonder why they continue to do that.

I suspect maintaining the old server that tried to track hardware
changes and then had people sitting by the phone to reconcile the
differences was not worth it for a software package they were not

Oh, sure; I meant, I'm not sure why they're continuing to authenticate
at all.

selling anymore. They certainly do not want to say they will breach
the EULA contract and abandon their customers after a while.

Why not though? Obviously, I'm happy that they _are_ continuing to
authenticate, just wondering why.

That is why they want to migrate to the subscription model with a hard
drop dead date if you don't keep paying, getting away from a lifetime
sale.

Indeed. I don't think even W10 has got to that yet, but the
can't-block-updates (for most people with moderate or low computer
skills, anyway) is certainly moving towards that.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Europeans see luxury as a badge of civilisation. Whereas we [British] have
shabbiness as a badge of civilisation. - Laurence Llewelyn-Bowen, in Radio
Times 12-18 October 2013

On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 05:07:07 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message ,
writes:
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 22:22:59 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message ,
writes:
[]
on it. In real life MS doesn't really seem to care about XP anymore
anyway. They will authenticate anything with a valid number.
Mine all say "genuine microsoft" or words to that effect.

One does wonder why they continue to do that.

I suspect maintaining the old server that tried to track hardware
changes and then had people sitting by the phone to reconcile the
differences was not worth it for a software package they were not

Oh, sure; I meant, I'm not sure why they're continuing to authenticate
at all.

selling anymore. They certainly do not want to say they will breach
the EULA contract and abandon their customers after a while.

Why not though? Obviously, I'm happy that they _are_ continuing to
authenticate, just wondering why.

I think they believe there is no future in the reputation you get from
being the richest guy in the world and breaching a contract on a
product they sold in good faith.
There is no expiration date in the Eula we all signed. I suspect that
the cost of simply authenticating anything with a valid COA number is
preferable to promoting piracy tools.
There is no shortage of people who have cracked the authentification
When I thought that server was finally pulled down it took about a
minute on google to find a hack. Before I actually tried one, I
remembered I had not loaded SP3. When I did it sailed through.

That is why they want to migrate to the subscription model with a hard
drop dead date if you don't keep paying, getting away from a lifetime
sale.

Indeed. I don't think even W10 has got to that yet, but the
can't-block-updates (for most people with moderate or low computer
skills, anyway) is certainly moving towards that.

10 seems to clearly be priming that market to subscription services,
at least that is what I hear. I am just starting to dabble with 7,
mostly because there are streaming services that are getting clunky or
don't work at all with XP. My only 7 machine is hooked to the TV.

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 19:39:49 -0500, wrote:

Any old hardware hacker has a machine or two around with a COA sticker
on it. In real life MS doesn't really seem to care about XP anymore
anyway. They will authenticate anything with a valid number.
Mine all say "genuine microsoft" or words to that effect.

One does wonder why they continue to do that.

I suspect maintaining the old server that tried to track hardware
changes and then had people sitting by the phone to reconcile the
differences was not worth it for a software package they were not
selling anymore. They certainly do not want to say they will breach
the EULA contract and abandon their customers after a while.
That is why they want to migrate to the subscription model with a hard
drop dead date if you don't keep paying, getting away from a lifetime
sale.

This is just my opinion, but I think if MS had any common sense they
would have at least TWO releases that they support. One being their
newest bloatware (Windows 10), and the other being something simple such
as XP. If I look at Linux, there are TOO MANY choices. There are a
hundred or more distrosm and each one has multiple desktops, and other
variations. I dont know where to begin....

Windows has ONE current version, and one or two older ones still
supported. That's it.

Many of most young people seem to want the latest gadget with the most
bells, whistles and buttons. Most of them can afford a new computer too.

But what about us older persons. (I am one of them). I most likely know
more about the works and hardware of computers than the younger crowd,
but I dont want complicated, bloated, or too many unneeded bells and
whistles. Unlike most young people use a high powered modern computer to
do three things. Connect to facebook, play games, and stream
videos/music. Myself, I actually use my computer as a tool. Do graphic
editing, compose or edit music, create flyers and posters, and so on. In
all honesty, I do almost all of this running Win 98. The reason is that
98 was simple and the resources run the software to make these
creations, not to power the OS and run all sorts of worthless scripts,
not to mention all the advertising and privacy invasion that all eats up
resources.

BUt I also use XP, and almost have to use XP for the internet now,
because there are no browsers that run on 98 that work well anymore.

Why is MS not providing a SENIOR operating system, made for us elders,
or anyone else who dont want all the bloat and crap?

Sure they want to sell a product, and supporting XP forever wont make
them sales, but they could make a similar SIMPLE OS to XP with
improvements (not bloat) and still make it so we can use older computers
to run it, because retired elderly people surviving on little cash cant
afford new computers.

MS could be selling both their latest bloatware and their simple OS at
the same time. Instead, all they offer is ONE CHOICE. Take it or leave
it... You could not get me to use Win10 if you gave it to me free,
including the computer it's on. If someone did give me a free computer
with Win10, I'd probably format the drive and find a way to install XP
on it.

Heck, back in 2001, I bought a computer with Win2000 on it. Within a
week, I removed 2000, and installed Win98 on it (which is the same
computer I am posting this message from now).