A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

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.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Microsoft Windows 7 » Windows 7 Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

No sense in reviving old computers



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #46  
Old February 19th 17, 11:42 AM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Springer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,817
Default No sense in reviving old computers

On 2/19/17 12:57 AM, David B. wrote:
On 19/02/2017 04:53, Mike Easter wrote:
I've had online newsgroup conversations with those who have weak
connectivity at home and travel to the nearest library for broadband.


That sounds like something for President Trump to fix to help "Make
America great again"! ;-)


It is. As well as all the politician's before him.

The government used to do things like this, many of them done during the
depression to create some job. Such as all the dams that were built
that make an attempt to control flooding (although the Oroville dam is
having problems, but I don't know the construction date there) and the
Rural Electrification Program which brought electricity to just about
everywhere.

IMO, it's what the federal government is legally bound to do.


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.11.6
Firefox 51.0.1 (64 bit)
Thunderbird 45.7.1
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"
Ads
  #47  
Old February 19th 17, 12:01 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mr. Man-wai Chang
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,941
Default No sense in reviving old computers

On 19/02/2017 7:02 AM, philo wrote:

Correct, but any of the current browsers require SSE2 I would have
needed an older version of the browser.

I tried an AMD Athlon and Sempron and the machine was just too slow.
Any P-4 should still be good


Per another reply, try older versions of Firefox...

Your hardware is no longer supported
https://support.mozilla.org/t5/Insta...ted/ta-p/39389

If your computer has a processor older than Pentium 4, Firefox version
53 and above is no longer supported.

Like many programs, newer versions of Firefox require a processor that
supports Streaming SIMD Extensions 2 (SSE2) for better performance. We
recommend a computer with a Pentium 4 or newer processor that supports
SSE2 to use the latest version of Firefox, which has more features,
stability and security.

Firefox Extended Support Release (ESR) will continue to work with older
processors but will not receive updates beyond ESR version 52. Firefox
ESR version 59, scheduled for release in March 2018, will no longer be
supported.

--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa
  #48  
Old February 19th 17, 02:42 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mike Easter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,064
Default No sense in reviving old computers

Ken Springer wrote:
Mike Easter wrote:


For connectivity, I jumped more or less directly from Atari ST with
dialup modem for BBS to a built Win95 and RoadRunner cable connectivity,
so I've had broadband 'forever'.


I've owned numerous pieces of Atari equipment. Loved them. Still have
a working Hades060 clone and a couple other pieces. Remember the 10 MB
floppy unit from Supra?

I went from one Atari ST 1040 w/ B&W monitor to 3 of them, 2 networked
by their midi ports in an office setting, and then on to the mega ST
using the Supra hdd. I never had any STE, Falcon, TT, or low res color
monitors and I never played any Atari games. It was all productivity,
utilities, and telecom. I don't know what 10 MB floppy means. I just
know the little Supra hard drives, mine was 20 meg.

Most of the time I used the Atari, everything was running in ram, either
1 meg or 4 megs, the floppy storage wasn't actually used much except for
saving some doc.

The main reason for needing the supra hdd was a database program called
Zoomracks (and II) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoomracks

Zoomracks was text based instead of GEM and I found it very powerful.


--
Mike Easter
  #49  
Old February 19th 17, 03:58 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
philo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,807
Default No sense in reviving old computers

On 02/18/2017 08:40 PM, Ken Springer wrote:



snip
Hi, philo,

This thread has been an interesting read, from my perspective. I not
only learn quite a bit, but I also learn tidbits about those who take
the time to post.

This thread is one of those where I learn about the posters. And
please, no one should take what I write from this point as any kind of
personal attack on any individual. Just observations about their
computing environment.

Not a single person mentioned anything about older computers being
equipped with a modem. LOL And that is still a needed piece of
hardware in many areas. There are places where that's their only
option. Even satellite companies can't see their location.

That just leaves dial-up. And even that can be rather strange. The big
name local phone company tells a friend they cannot offer dial up
service to him. (I'm not sure he understood what they were telling him,
though.) Yet, he's been connecting via AOL dial-up service for years.



LOL that was another giveaway that the machine I had been working on was
old...it had a modem in it!

After cleaning up his old XP system, and turning off automatic updates
which was slowing the system to a super crawl, it's a snappy little system.

Most importantly, he knows how to use it.

His sister just gave him a Windows 10 laptop. And the Windows 10 UI has
him baffled. Plus, he obviously cannot connect to the internet. So,
for the moment, he has to drive 15 miles to the library to use it on the
internet. We have not investigate the external dial up modem
possibility. If one exists, and you can't connect to it wirelessly, it
would limit the portability of a laptop.

He's also on a fixed income, and it's unlikely the cost of satellite
service, if available, would be an option.

Older systems can be donated to social agencies as well, where they can
be redone and given to families and seniors that in today's world need
to have computers.

If you don't want to deal with XP being unsupported, there's always
Linux, of which I get more and more questions about using. But that's
for another thread.




As to Linux, I have been using it since the year 2000 or so and have set
up several Linux machines for an organization where I had been doing
volunteer work.

No one had any trouble using them, but if given a choice most people do
not want to use Linux so I never try to force it upon them.
  #50  
Old February 19th 17, 04:46 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mike Easter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,064
Default No sense in reviving old computers

David B. wrote:
Mike Easter wrote:
I've had online newsgroup conversations with those who have weak
connectivity at home and travel to the nearest library for broadband.


That sounds like something for President Trump to fix to help "Make
America great again"! ;-)

It isn't up to the president.

It is up to those who would develop tech, such as the various 'atmosat'
approaches, Loon balloon, Aquila solar drone (made in UK), tropopause or
stratospheric Stratobus.

So far, the tech has a long way to go; it seems the developers can't
really decide whether to stay out of the winds by lingering in the
tropopause or to go higher and try to go up and down to catch the
opposing currents to stay in place or float around the world.


--
Mike Easter
  #51  
Old February 19th 17, 04:54 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mike Easter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,064
Default No sense in reviving old computers

philo wrote:
if given a choice most people do not want to use Linux so I never try to
force it upon them.


If given a 'choice' (for some metric of choice), most of those same
people would choose to still be using XP.

The choice would need to include an XP with the capabilities of using a
modern browser.

It is sometimes strange to consider how people's 'choice' is
guided/dictated.

--
Mike Easter
  #52  
Old February 19th 17, 05:08 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mike Easter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,064
Default No sense in reviving old computers

Mike Easter wrote:
It is up to those who would develop tech, such as the various
'atmosat' approaches, Loon balloon, Aquila solar drone (made in UK),
tropopause or stratospheric Stratobus.

So far, the tech has a long way to go; it seems the developers can't
really decide whether to stay out of the winds by lingering in the
tropopause or to go higher and try to go up and down to catch the
opposing currents to stay in place or float around the world.


For a glance at the 'ups and downs' of advanced altitude comm tech, one
need look no further than the financial fluctuations of the satellite
radio story prior to the current Sirius XM and the even more devastating
fluctuation of the Iridium debacle, which is currently back in business
big-time launching more sats.

--
Mike Easter
  #53  
Old February 19th 17, 05:10 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
burfordTjustice
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 246
Default No sense in reviving old computers

On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 08:08:23 -0800
Mike Easter wrote:

From: Mike Easter
Subject: No sense in reviving old computers
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 08:08:23 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/45.7.0
Newsgroups: alt.windows7.general

Mike Easter wrote:


Nothing that matters,his big head requires him
to post to himself for attention.
  #54  
Old February 19th 17, 07:02 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Blake[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,221
Default Video resolutions (Was: No sense in reviving old computers)

On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 11:46:55 -0500, Wolf K
wrote:

Fact is, those of us who see the bands are in the minority. Most people
do not see an image, they see the objects that interest them. That's why
they keep taking pictures of Aunt Emily with a light pole growing out of
the top of her head. The same phenomenon accounts for people failing to
see stop signs, etc.



Not to mention failing to see a gorilla walking through a scene.


  #55  
Old February 19th 17, 07:27 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Springer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,817
Default No sense in reviving old computers

On 2/19/17 9:52 AM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2017-02-19 10:54, Mike Easter wrote:
philo wrote:
if given a choice most people do not want to use Linux so I never try to
force it upon them.


If given a 'choice' (for some metric of choice), most of those same
people would choose to still be using XP.

The choice would need to include an XP with the capabilities of using a
modern browser.

It is sometimes strange to consider how people's 'choice' is
guided/dictated.


All choices are constrained. The trick is to see the constraints. All of
us have trouble doing that, since having any kind of choice makes us
feel we can choose anything we want. But you obviously can't choose
what's not available.


Exactly. With Windows and Macs, you have one choice, the current
operating system, and previous systems still on the shelves.

I think there are two issues with new Windows and Mac systems for many
users. The actual complexity of the system, and the complexity of the
UI in accessing the system. I've been helping 3 seniors who are totally
confused with the W10 interface, yet all 3 have used XP systems. Only 1
of the 3 is actually going through what looks to be a very good
beginner's book on using Windows 10.

On a side note, I'm working slowing on some small help documents for
folks in that position, which benefits me in learning W10, as well as a
particular page layout program.

My interest in Linux came from an effort to find some way to a) prolong
the life of the hardware when nothing was wrong with it, and b) find a
simpler UI/system that was easier to learn for people who were
definitely not computer literate.

That led me to Linux Mint with the Cinnamon desktop. Which, when I've
shown it to people, there's been an overall positive response. We even
set up a system at work for people to see, and when the customer has
been thinking about a different computer, the response has also been
generally positive.

Elementary Linux looks simple, but I've not had the time to play with it.



Etc. the psychology of choice is "poorly
understood", as they say, but the research shows quite clearly that most
of the time choice is just another illusion. "Marketing" is all about
creating that illusion to the seller's advantage.

Have a good day,



--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.11.6
Firefox 51.0.1 (64 bit)
Thunderbird 45.7.1
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"
  #56  
Old February 19th 17, 08:15 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Mike Easter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,064
Default No sense in reviving old computers

Ken Springer wrote:
Only 1 of the 3 is actually going through what looks to be a very good
beginner's book on using Windows 10.


What book is that?

--
Mike Easter
  #57  
Old February 19th 17, 08:47 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
Ken Springer[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,817
Default No sense in reviving old computers

On 2/19/17 12:15 PM, Mike Easter wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:
Only 1 of the 3 is actually going through what looks to be a very good
beginner's book on using Windows 10.


What book is that?


Beginner's Guide to Windows 10, updated to 2017.

It's part of "BDM's Desktop Series".

I didn't find it on Amazon or Barnes and Noble. They bought it at a
Sam's Club.


--
Ken
Mac OS X 10.11.6
Firefox 51.0.1 (64 bit)
Thunderbird 45.7.1
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"
  #59  
Old February 19th 17, 10:54 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default Video resolutions (Was: No sense in reviving old computers)

In message , Wolf K
writes:
On 2017-02-18 19:54, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
[...]
It seems obvious to me that there must be some angle below which the
density of rods and cones in the eye becomes the limiting factor.

[...]

Nope, it's your brain. People see what they pay attention to. If the

[]
No, it's not. I'm perfectly aware of all the psychological arguments
concerning optical matters, and most of them have some validity;
however, I can see no way in which putting more pixels in a display than
the eye can resolve can truly make any difference.

I'll turn it back on you: _knowing_ that the display is HD (or at least
720) might make you _think_ it looks better (-:. In much the same way
that wifi manufacturers succeed in selling ever-faster wifi, despite the
fact that in most cases the external link is the (main!) limiting
factor.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

(Incidentally, it was made in Spain so shouldn't it be a "paella western"?) -
Barry Norman [on "A Fistful of Dollars"], RT 2014/10/4-10
  #60  
Old February 19th 17, 11:47 PM posted to alt.windows7.general
J. P. Gilliver (John)[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,679
Default Video resolutions (Was: No sense in reviving old computers)

In message , Wolf K
writes:
[]
No, it's not. I'm perfectly aware of all the psychological arguments
concerning optical matters, and most of them have some validity;


They're not arguments: they're demonstrated effects. Eerie: we see only
what the brain computes. The computation includes the illusion of
sharply focused detail.


Notwithstanding, though, I see no way increasing resolution beyond what
the eye can resolve making any difference, psychological effects (and I
never said they weren't real) or no psychological effects.
[]
The only way to resolve this is to test it. In any case, I was
referring to banding, which is an effect of the a mismatch between
image and display resolution (and colour range).


Ah, that's a completely different matter; I totally agree, not running
your display at its native resolution (where it has one, which all but
CRTs do) loses out big time.

I'll turn it back on you: _knowing_ that the display is HD (or at least
720) might make you _think_ it looks better (-:.


I'm sure this has an effect. Context affects all our senses. (Context
is the reason for the unseen gorilla). So set up a test.


I CBA, but I'd be very surprised if confirmation bias wasn't found (-:!
[]
Resolution isn't the whole story. Display size and viewing distance


"Display size and viewing distance" takes us back to what I said several
posts ago: angle subtended at the pupil.
[]
I'd say that when your eye cannot physically resolve the dots, the


Yup, that's what I've been saying too (-: [roughly]

image looks sharper. Halftone printing relies on this effect: standard
newspaper screen was 300 (lines/inch) before digital printing. Magazine
halftones had finer screen, sometimes up to 600. That looked needle
sharp compared to a newspaper.


I can remember when newspaper halftoning was a _lot_ coarser than
good-quality magazine printing, by a factor of a lot more than 2:1.

Bottom line: there are lots of unanswered questions.


Indeed!

Have a good day,

You too.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

(Incidentally, it was made in Spain so shouldn't it be a "paella western"?) -
Barry Norman [on "A Fistful of Dollars"], RT 2014/10/4-10
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.