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 |
#166
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
In the last episode of ,
Roderick Stewart said: On Tue, 7 Oct 2014 09:04:16 -0500, "Neil Gould" wrote: The abillity to develop apps in a single environment for all Windows devices is quite recent and not yet entirely implemented, but that is the direction that MS is going (both announced and partially implemented). The result of this capability is that developers won't have to develop apps for any particular Windows device. Surely, the implications of this are easy to grasp. Yes. All your personal data will be in the "cloud", which means it'll be stored on somebody else's computer. I can easily grasp the implications of that. That's totally unrelated to what Neil just said. Try reading again. -- In Jolt We Trust |
Ads |
#167
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
On 10/7/2014 4:00 PM, Roderick Stewart wrote:
On Tue, 7 Oct 2014 12:02:34 -0500, "Neil Gould" wrote: The abillity to develop apps in a single environment for all Windows devices is quite recent and not yet entirely implemented, but that is the direction that MS is going (both announced and partially implemented). The result of this capability is that developers won't have to develop apps for any particular Windows device. Surely, the implications of this are easy to grasp. Yes. All your personal data will be in the "cloud", which means it'll be stored on somebody else's computer. I can easily grasp the implications of that. The use of the cloud, as in "somebody-else's computer" is not required. Perhaps you haven't seen the numerous "personal cloud" drives that one can purchase and easily install, even lacking the knowledge that such a thing is simply an HD in an ethernet case. The savvy user can even access it remotely without problems. Since all of the devices have SD card, usb and ethernet ports, it is not necssary to have a "cloud" at all. Even if you were to use a "personal cloud", rather than the default remote one that Microsoft coaxes you to set up, and you were, as you suggest, savvy, and contacted it remotely, what mechanism would you need to use to do this? WIFI (only needed when local) and a fixed IP address. You may not be using somebody else's computer, but somebody else's network doesn't strike me as a whole lot more secure. It would be YOUR network, not someone else's. It's not conceptually that different from Workgroup networks in earlier versions of Windows. Although there are implications that make the notion less attractive to those that *are* savvy, it'snot any more technically complex than how folks access their home security systems from work or while on vacation. And that's just the savvy users. Supposing you're a celebrity, and not savvy, and you have a load of nude pictures of yourself....? Just goes to show you that nobody has the corner on stupidity. ;-D -- best regards, Neil |
#168
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
On 10/7/2014 3:30 PM, Caver1 wrote:
On 10/07/2014 07:40 AM, Neil Gould wrote: Caver1 wrote: On 10/04/2014 06:01 PM, Neil wrote: On 10/4/2014 11:13 AM, Caver1 wrote: (Much snipped for brevity) MS has lost nearly $2 billion on the Surface since it has been on the market. MS is hoping to turn that loss into aleast a break even. Perhaps their vision is larger than that. The Surface introduced the idea of a Windows-based tablet that offered features beyond those available from iStuff and Androids. Now, Windows-based tablets are coming onto the market at very low prices, for example the Winbooks that run from $99 for a 7" basic tablet to $199 for a 10" full version. Something had to kick-start that market, and since MS' main business is the software, once could see the investment in the Surface as a marketing expense that will be recouped by the sales of other products running Windows OS and software. Just like MS to sell at a loss to try to capture the market. Don't think it will work this time. My daughter paid $219 for a 10" Asus Android tablet. $199-$219 not a big difference. She does her office work, manipulates images and more with it without unlocking. Unlock it and you can install anything you want and have complete control. Can't unlock Windows and have control. The number of Windows users that have ever wanted to "unlock" the OS is not worth caring about. For most Windows users the primary requirement for those users is that they can get work done efficiently. Managing an "unlocked" system is contrary to that requirement. I do believe that unlock was in reference to Android not Windows. Yes, you were referring to Android users, and I was pointing out the irrelevance of such a thing to Windows users. Why is it irrelevant? It was a comparison. You cannot have control of your Windows phone or tablet. You can with Android and Apple. Android is one thing, but what kind of "control" can you have with iStuff that you can't have with Windows? My point was that having the ability to do something that you don't want to do anyway isn't all that important. In other words you can control whether or not an app can't send your personal information back to their servers or not. Not with most Android or iStuff apps, you can't, and I'd say that no typical user could do that at all, because they can't maintain a rooted device. [...] You can also get rid of factory installed apps that you don't want. You can't with Windows. Again, I don't care if WordPad is on a system, whether or not I use it. I haven't tried uninstalling the games on this computer, because I don't have to look at them and they don't interfere with my work, so why should I care that they're on the machine? [...] Then again most users don't need the total functionality of MSOffice. Business or personal. Agreed, but they do need the basics to work right or at least as the instructions say they do, and in the open-source apps that I have tried (or still use to help support folks), that is a problem. You didn't choose the right programs. I select programs based on need and the ability to communicate -- e.g. exchange functional files -- with colleagues. There are very few Linux-based apps that even begin to approach the level of sophistication that I need, and those that do aren't directly compatible with the apps used by colleagues. Linux is just as functional and reliable as Windows and in several case more so. It's not about the OS, it's about the apps. See above. Most of the recovery cds for troubled Windows systems are Linux based. I've managed without any of that for about 30 years of Windows use... I think I'll be OK for a while, yet. ;-) If Linux software is so unusable why is it used by business, governments, militaries, NASA, scientific and medical research... Do you really think that they would use software that doesn't really work? There are niche software apps that are entirely functional and capable with ANY OS, including Raspberry and other off-the-beaten-path options. Until my clients start using them, I don't need them, and at any rate, none of that is an argument against the usefulness of Windows apps. -- best regards, Neil |
#169
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 10:27:46 -0600, Ken Springer
wrote: No one ever seems to have an answer to my question of "What if the internet goes down?" Last night's Scorpion series on CBS had a plot line where that internet situation came into play. One of Tom Clancy's novels (sorry, can't remember the name), included a similar situation. Earlier today someone pointed out that "the cloud" doesn't have to mean an Internet-based cloud. You're free to have a cloud in your own home. |
#170
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
Ron explained on 10/6/2014 :
On 10/6/2014 1:55 AM, Ed Propes wrote: After serious thinking Roderick Stewart wrote : On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:35:40 -0400, Ron wrote: I worked with about 600 people, each had at least one desktop and a laptop. The maintenance people had lots to repair every day. A very common problem was people spilling drinks on their laptop or desktop keyboard. My company wouldn't put up with that. There would be a no drink and/or food at your desk policy. Most places I've worked at had a policy like that, but nobody paid any attention. If the companies had tried to enforce it they'd have had hardly any workers left. Rod. I worked for a chemical supply company that had a no food or drink policy except for the break rooms. People paid attention because not doing so could cause a multitude of health problems. I worked there 78 years and can't remember seeing more than a half dozen violations of said policy. But that is an environment different from almost all others. 78 years?????? Sorry about that! Should have been 7 years. -- Ed Propes |
#171
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
"...winston?" wrote :
Ed Propes wrote: After serious thinking Roderick Stewart wrote : On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:35:40 -0400, Ron wrote: I worked with about 600 people, each had at least one desktop and a laptop. The maintenance people had lots to repair every day. A very common problem was people spilling drinks on their laptop or desktop keyboard. My company wouldn't put up with that. There would be a no drink and/or food at your desk policy. Most places I've worked at had a policy like that, but nobody paid any attention. If the companies had tried to enforce it they'd have had hardly any workers left. Rod. I worked for a chemical supply company that had a no food or drink policy except for the break rooms. People paid attention because not doing so could cause a multitude of health problems. I worked there 78 years and can't remember seeing more than a half dozen violations of said policy. But that is an environment different from almost all others. Apparently your working career with that company predates the Fair Labor Standards act passed in 1938 that regulated age and hours of work for children. If you worked for them that long you must be retired for at least a few years too. Just guessing but if you started at age 10 yrs old, worked 78 years, retired 5 yrs ago you'd be 93. If you started at 16 you'll soon be 100 and possibly the oldest person on Usenet! Sometimes I feel like I am g. I actually worked there 7 years before an injury forced me to retire. I must have been suffering from fat fingers the day I typed that. Oh well, I'm sure I gave someone a chuckle. -- Ed Propes |
#172
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
On 10/7/2014 11:05 PM, Ed Propes wrote:
"...winston?" wrote : Ed Propes wrote: After serious thinking Roderick Stewart wrote : On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:35:40 -0400, Ron wrote: I worked with about 600 people, each had at least one desktop and a laptop. The maintenance people had lots to repair every day. A very common problem was people spilling drinks on their laptop or desktop keyboard. My company wouldn't put up with that. There would be a no drink and/or food at your desk policy. Most places I've worked at had a policy like that, but nobody paid any attention. If the companies had tried to enforce it they'd have had hardly any workers left. Rod. I worked for a chemical supply company that had a no food or drink policy except for the break rooms. People paid attention because not doing so could cause a multitude of health problems. I worked there 78 years and can't remember seeing more than a half dozen violations of said policy. But that is an environment different from almost all others. Apparently your working career with that company predates the Fair Labor Standards act passed in 1938 that regulated age and hours of work for children. If you worked for them that long you must be retired for at least a few years too. Just guessing but if you started at age 10 yrs old, worked 78 years, retired 5 yrs ago you'd be 93. If you started at 16 you'll soon be 100 and possibly the oldest person on Usenet! Sometimes I feel like I am g. I actually worked there 7 years before an injury forced me to retire. I must have been suffering from fat fingers the day I typed that. Oh well, I'm sure I gave someone a chuckle. So your injury was "fat fingers"? |
#173
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
On 10/7/2014 11:02 PM, Ed Propes wrote:
Ron explained on 10/6/2014 : On 10/6/2014 1:55 AM, Ed Propes wrote: After serious thinking Roderick Stewart wrote : On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:35:40 -0400, Ron wrote: I worked with about 600 people, each had at least one desktop and a laptop. The maintenance people had lots to repair every day. A very common problem was people spilling drinks on their laptop or desktop keyboard. My company wouldn't put up with that. There would be a no drink and/or food at your desk policy. Most places I've worked at had a policy like that, but nobody paid any attention. If the companies had tried to enforce it they'd have had hardly any workers left. Rod. I worked for a chemical supply company that had a no food or drink policy except for the break rooms. People paid attention because not doing so could cause a multitude of health problems. I worked there 78 years and can't remember seeing more than a half dozen violations of said policy. But that is an environment different from almost all others. 78 years?????? Sorry about that! Should have been 7 years. I got a good laugh out of it. |
#174
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
Ed Propes wrote:
"...winston?" wrote : Ed Propes wrote: After serious thinking Roderick Stewart wrote : On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:35:40 -0400, Ron wrote: I worked with about 600 people, each had at least one desktop and a laptop. The maintenance people had lots to repair every day. A very common problem was people spilling drinks on their laptop or desktop keyboard. My company wouldn't put up with that. There would be a no drink and/or food at your desk policy. Most places I've worked at had a policy like that, but nobody paid any attention. If the companies had tried to enforce it they'd have had hardly any workers left. Rod. I worked for a chemical supply company that had a no food or drink policy except for the break rooms. People paid attention because not doing so could cause a multitude of health problems. I worked there 78 years and can't remember seeing more than a half dozen violations of said policy. But that is an environment different from almost all others. Apparently your working career with that company predates the Fair Labor Standards act passed in 1938 that regulated age and hours of work for children. If you worked for them that long you must be retired for at least a few years too. Just guessing but if you started at age 10 yrs old, worked 78 years, retired 5 yrs ago you'd be 93. If you started at 16 you'll soon be 100 and possibly the oldest person on Usenet! Sometimes I feel like I am g. I actually worked there 7 years before an injury forced me to retire. I must have been suffering from fat fingers the day I typed that. Oh well, I'm sure I gave someone a chuckle. I thought it might be a typo which we're all prone to do...but it was fun trying to calculate if you might be joining the centenarian club soon. -- ....winston msft mvp consumer apps |
#175
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 22:02:45 -0500, Ed Propes
wrote: 78 years?????? Sorry about that! Should have been 7 years. I bet you wish their Accounts Department had make the same mistake, and were paying you for 78 years... :-) Rod. |
#176
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
On 10/07/2014 04:59 PM, Neil wrote:
On 10/7/2014 3:30 PM, Caver1 wrote: On 10/07/2014 07:40 AM, Neil Gould wrote: Caver1 wrote: On 10/04/2014 06:01 PM, Neil wrote: On 10/4/2014 11:13 AM, Caver1 wrote: (Much snipped for brevity) MS has lost nearly $2 billion on the Surface since it has been on the market. MS is hoping to turn that loss into aleast a break even. Perhaps their vision is larger than that. The Surface introduced the idea of a Windows-based tablet that offered features beyond those available from iStuff and Androids. Now, Windows-based tablets are coming onto the market at very low prices, for example the Winbooks that run from $99 for a 7" basic tablet to $199 for a 10" full version. Something had to kick-start that market, and since MS' main business is the software, once could see the investment in the Surface as a marketing expense that will be recouped by the sales of other products running Windows OS and software. Just like MS to sell at a loss to try to capture the market. Don't think it will work this time. My daughter paid $219 for a 10" Asus Android tablet. $199-$219 not a big difference. She does her office work, manipulates images and more with it without unlocking. Unlock it and you can install anything you want and have complete control. Can't unlock Windows and have control. The number of Windows users that have ever wanted to "unlock" the OS is not worth caring about. For most Windows users the primary requirement for those users is that they can get work done efficiently. Managing an "unlocked" system is contrary to that requirement. I do believe that unlock was in reference to Android not Windows. Yes, you were referring to Android users, and I was pointing out the irrelevance of such a thing to Windows users. Why is it irrelevant? It was a comparison. You cannot have control of your Windows phone or tablet. You can with Android and Apple. Android is one thing, but what kind of "control" can you have with iStuff that you can't have with Windows? My point was that having the ability to do something that you don't want to do anyway isn't all that important. I didn't say you should. You should be able to do what you want. The capability is there for those that want to. It's called jailbreaking on Apple devices. You can jailbreak Istuff to have complete control you can not with Windows. It's can be more important than you think. In other words you can control whether or not an app can't send your personal information back to their servers or not. Not with most Android or iStuff apps, you can't, and I'd say that no typical user could do that at all, because they can't maintain a rooted device. If you unlock your device you can change any of the permissions of any app on that device. Some permissions in some apps it is not advisable to do so. What is difficult about maintaining a rooted device. All it does is gives you Admin/root privileges. Doesn't change functionality or manageability, just lets you manage more. Lets you decide what is happening with your device and personal information, not someone you don't know. [...] You can also get rid of factory installed apps that you don't want. You can't with Windows. Again, I don't care if WordPad is on a system, whether or not I use it. I haven't tried uninstalling the games on this computer, because I don't have to look at them and they don't interfere with my work, so why should I care that they're on the machine? So don't do it. Some people do care. Look at the above response. Phones and tablets have finite storage. The user may have to remove some default apps to install all that the user does want. The user may want to just remove an app that is not used instead of changing it's permissions. [...] Then again most users don't need the total functionality of MSOffice. Business or personal. Agreed, but they do need the basics to work right or at least as the instructions say they do, and in the open-source apps that I have tried (or still use to help support folks), that is a problem. You didn't choose the right programs. I select programs based on need and the ability to communicate -- e.g. exchange functional files -- with colleagues. There are very few Linux-based apps that even begin to approach the level of sophistication that I need, and those that do aren't directly compatible with the apps used by colleagues. As I said you didn't choose the right program. Just like in Windows. For a given task there are programs available that give you more or less sophistication, capabilities. If you are talking about compatibility with proprietary software there may or may not be any support. You have the same type of problems with some Windows programs. Linux is just as functional and reliable as Windows and in several case more so. It's not about the OS, it's about the apps. See above. When discussing programs and you are comparing the differences between programs. And say either with Windows/Linux you are still talking about the capability of the apps. Less typing then saying Windows/Linux programs each time. Common practice. Most of the recovery cds for troubled Windows systems are Linux based. I've managed without any of that for about 30 years of Windows use... I think I'll be OK for a while, yet. ;-) That's great. Must be a common problem as they are available for both Windows and Linux. I have never needed them for myself Windows or Linux. If Linux software is so unusable why is it used by business, governments, militaries, NASA, scientific and medical research... Do you really think that they would use software that doesn't really work? There are niche software apps that are entirely functional and capable with ANY OS, including Raspberry and other off-the-beaten-path options. Until my clients start using them, I don't need them, and at any rate, none of that is an argument against the usefulness of Windows apps. This discussion starting comparing what was achievable with the Linux, Windows, Apple OSs. Evidently because of the switching to Linux because it is more stable, secure,customisability, or capable in areas needed, is about the capabilities of the Windows environment. Never said that Windows programs weren't useful nor implied it. Windows and Linux programs over all are good for what they do. If the capabilities were only with niche usage schools, businesses or any other entity would not be switching from one OS to another. If it was only off the beaten path options then the usage would be whichever OS for those processes that are better severed by whatever OS and its programs and the one you liked/were use to for everything else. Enjoy and keep using what you prefer. -- Caver1 |
#177
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
On 10/07/2014 05:15 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 10:27:46 -0600, Ken Springer wrote: No one ever seems to have an answer to my question of "What if the internet goes down?" Last night's Scorpion series on CBS had a plot line where that internet situation came into play. One of Tom Clancy's novels (sorry, can't remember the name), included a similar situation. Earlier today someone pointed out that "the cloud" doesn't have to mean an Internet-based cloud. You're free to have a cloud in your own home. That's another reason to have desktop based programs for needed tasks or storage and not just cloud based. -- Caver1 |
#178
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
Roderick Stewart brought next idea :
On Tue, 07 Oct 2014 22:02:45 -0500, Ed Propes wrote: 78 years?????? Sorry about that! Should have been 7 years. I bet you wish their Accounts Department had make the same mistake, and were paying you for 78 years... :-) Rod. I'll bet you're right! lol ... Knowing the company though they were more likely to pay me .78 years. Ed. -- Ed Propes |
#179
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
Ron formulated the question :
On 10/7/2014 11:05 PM, Ed Propes wrote: "...winston?" wrote : Ed Propes wrote: After serious thinking Roderick Stewart wrote : On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:35:40 -0400, Ron wrote: I worked with about 600 people, each had at least one desktop and a laptop. The maintenance people had lots to repair every day. A very common problem was people spilling drinks on their laptop or desktop keyboard. My company wouldn't put up with that. There would be a no drink and/or food at your desk policy. Most places I've worked at had a policy like that, but nobody paid any attention. If the companies had tried to enforce it they'd have had hardly any workers left. Rod. I worked for a chemical supply company that had a no food or drink policy except for the break rooms. People paid attention because not doing so could cause a multitude of health problems. I worked there 78 years and can't remember seeing more than a half dozen violations of said policy. But that is an environment different from almost all others. Apparently your working career with that company predates the Fair Labor Standards act passed in 1938 that regulated age and hours of work for children. If you worked for them that long you must be retired for at least a few years too. Just guessing but if you started at age 10 yrs old, worked 78 years, retired 5 yrs ago you'd be 93. If you started at 16 you'll soon be 100 and possibly the oldest person on Usenet! Sometimes I feel like I am g. I actually worked there 7 years before an injury forced me to retire. I must have been suffering from fat fingers the day I typed that. Oh well, I'm sure I gave someone a chuckle. So your injury was "fat fingers"? I am going in more trouble in this one thread than I have in 3 years. Better stop before I go any deeper. g Ed. -- Ed Propes |
#180
|
|||
|
|||
Next version of Windows is...
After serious thinking "...winston?" wrote :
Ed Propes wrote: "...winston?" wrote : Ed Propes wrote: After serious thinking Roderick Stewart wrote : On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 15:35:40 -0400, Ron wrote: I worked with about 600 people, each had at least one desktop and a laptop. The maintenance people had lots to repair every day. A very common problem was people spilling drinks on their laptop or desktop keyboard. My company wouldn't put up with that. There would be a no drink and/or food at your desk policy. Most places I've worked at had a policy like that, but nobody paid any attention. If the companies had tried to enforce it they'd have had hardly any workers left. Rod. I worked for a chemical supply company that had a no food or drink policy except for the break rooms. People paid attention because not doing so could cause a multitude of health problems. I worked there 78 years and can't remember seeing more than a half dozen violations of said policy. But that is an environment different from almost all others. Apparently your working career with that company predates the Fair Labor Standards act passed in 1938 that regulated age and hours of work for children. If you worked for them that long you must be retired for at least a few years too. Just guessing but if you started at age 10 yrs old, worked 78 years, retired 5 yrs ago you'd be 93. If you started at 16 you'll soon be 100 and possibly the oldest person on Usenet! Sometimes I feel like I am g. I actually worked there 7 years before an injury forced me to retire. I must have been suffering from fat fingers the day I typed that. Oh well, I'm sure I gave someone a chuckle. I thought it might be a typo which we're all prone to do...but it was fun trying to calculate if you might be joining the centenarian club soon. At the rate I'm going I'm not sure I want to make it to being eligible for entry to that club. g -- Ed Propes |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|