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 |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
In . 97.131,
DanS wrote: "BillW50" wrote in : In , Tom Lake wrote: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message ... In message , Mortimer writes: No, I would say it _is_ Microsoft's, for making an OS (or OS variant) which can't use older drivers. Why should hardware manufacturers have to keep producing new drivers (especially for kit they no longer make - don't know if that's the case in this case)? Why should MS (or ANY OS maker) support all old hardware ad infinitum? In order to advance the OS, keep it able to use the latest hardware and keep it secure, some things must be left behind or you'd end up with a huge, ungainly mess. If the manufacturer doesn't support the newest OS, then MS certainly doesn't have the resources to write drivers for every piece of obsolete equipment out there. Tom L In the early days, an OS was screwed big time if it didn't support the legacy factor. You can have the world's greatest OS ever seen, but it is totally worthless if it doesn't support the past. Same is true today. If you burn bridges as you go, you will always lose. "In the early days"....of what... teletypes and ASCII only printers ? Do today's printers even have an ASCII mode anymore whe copy file.txt lpt1 actually prints the text file ? Who's burning bridges here ? The printer mfg's, not MS. Actually Microsoft is burning bridges here. There is no good reason why you can't use a Windows 95 printer driver under Windows 7. Have you ever written a printer driver for Windows before Dan? I have. And in the past, Microsoft didn't break older printer drivers. But those were people at Microsoft who had learned those hard lessons before. Nowadays Microsoft has new programmers who are naive about such lessons. Since most of the old people at Microsoft has retired. The new replacements just don't know any better. And I see Microsoft getting into trouble because of this. Even Microsoft had to layoff people in recent times because of this (the first time in history). I'm sure the layoffs were just like every other company on Earth, the economy..... In today's world, people can't live without computers. Far different than just a few decades earlier. And computers are not going away soon. And if Microsoft can't convince the masses that newer is better, then they have to have layoffs. Just the same as it was decades ago. Remember WordStar and Lotus? The economy was great back then but they couldn't convince the masses either. ....not anything to do with whatever you're going on about above....or below. Everything to do with it actually. As Microsoft had to learn the lessons of becoming successful just like everybody did, or die. And Microsoft learned and survived. Although they have retired and now there is a bunch of new people who are clueless about being successful. And if they don't learn the lessons quick, they will drive Microsoft into the ground. And it isn't going to get better for Microsoft until they relearn this lesson. And if they don't... well either Linux or the Mac (or something unknown to us today) will just take over. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2 Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3 |
Ads |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
In ,
Gene E. Bloch wrote: On 12/01/2011, SC Tom posted: "BillW50" wrote in message ... In , Tom Lake wrote: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message ... In message , Mortimer writes: No, I would say it _is_ Microsoft's, for making an OS (or OS variant) which can't use older drivers. Why should hardware manufacturers have to keep producing new drivers (especially for kit they no longer make - don't know if that's the case in this case)? Why should MS (or ANY OS maker) support all old hardware ad infinitum? In order to advance the OS, keep it able to use the latest hardware and keep it secure, some things must be left behind or you'd end up with a huge, ungainly mess. If the manufacturer doesn't support the newest OS, then MS certainly doesn't have the resources to write drivers for every piece of obsolete equipment out there. Tom L In the early days, an OS was screwed big time if it didn't support the legacy factor. You can have the world's greatest OS ever seen, but it is totally worthless if it doesn't support the past. Same is true today. If you burn bridges as you go, you will always lose. Since most of the old people at Microsoft has retired. The new replacements just don't know any better. And I see Microsoft getting into trouble because of this. Even Microsoft had to layoff people in recent times because of this (the first time in history). And it isn't going to get better for Microsoft until they relearn this lesson. And if they don't... well either Linux or the Mac (or something unknown to us today) will just take over. I don't think Linux or Mac (or something unknown) will ever displace Microsoft in my lifetime, but I'm sure someday in the future, it may be replaced as the top dog. Years ago (many, many), I tried OS/2 Warp for a little while. After installing it and rebooting, I no longer had a CD-ROM drive. No OS/2 drivers for it, and none from (IIRC) Panasonic either. The only drives that were native in OS/2 were Matsu****a and a couple of others, and even though they own Panasonic now, they either didn't then or the two drives weren't close enough for the Matsu****a drivers to work with my drive. I tried OS/2 with Windows 3.1 (upgrade) thinking that might solve the problem, but no joy there either. Another bad point was that I had an IBM Big Blue thermal printer, and I couldn't get either version of OS/2 to recognize it either. IBM OS won't print to an INM printer? What's up with that? After a couple on months of searching and using it (it was stable and speedy. No wonder; it had no drivers taking up memory), I finally went back to Windows. I've tinkered with other OSes over the years, but have never left Windows for good. Works fine for me. If there's something about it I don't like (and believe me, there's plenty), I can usually figure out a workaround or find a third party app to get 'er done. I once worked on some software for OS/2. Someone else was the video expert writing drivers for a few video cards; this was before the card manufacturers provided drivers. I suggested to an appropriate person that IBM should be supporting some other video cards ('twas a long time ago, so I've forgotten the details). The reply was "We're not in the business of providing drivers for non-IBM cards". I said no more... And OS/2 has evaporated. BTW, I did get to see a demo of some media-like software running under that system; IIRC, it was really beautiful. I know a great deal about IBM's OS/2. That problem was only the tip of the iceberg. IBM hated Microsoft for not trying to make all IBM clones obsolete (as that would cut Microsoft's own throat as well as all third parties). And IBM had to pay Microsoft for each OS/2 copy they sold (IBM even lied to Microsoft about how little they sold when they were bragging far higher numbers to others). Microsoft had taken them to court and IBM had to pay Microsoft the bragging numbers they were saying. Oh course IBM was really ticked. And they were hell bent on removing all Microsoft code within OS/2 (so they didn't have to pay Microsoft a dime). The problem was they broke OS/2 severely at any attempt to put their own code in. And this is the biggest reason among a few others why OS/2 had failed. And IBM failed to remove all of the Microsoft code in OS/2. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2 Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3 |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
In ,
SC Tom wrote: "BillW50" wrote in message ... In , Tom Lake wrote: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message ... In message , Mortimer writes: No, I would say it _is_ Microsoft's, for making an OS (or OS variant) which can't use older drivers. Why should hardware manufacturers have to keep producing new drivers (especially for kit they no longer make - don't know if that's the case in this case)? Why should MS (or ANY OS maker) support all old hardware ad infinitum? In order to advance the OS, keep it able to use the latest hardware and keep it secure, some things must be left behind or you'd end up with a huge, ungainly mess. If the manufacturer doesn't support the newest OS, then MS certainly doesn't have the resources to write drivers for every piece of obsolete equipment out there. Tom L In the early days, an OS was screwed big time if it didn't support the legacy factor. You can have the world's greatest OS ever seen, but it is totally worthless if it doesn't support the past. Same is true today. If you burn bridges as you go, you will always lose. Since most of the old people at Microsoft has retired. The new replacements just don't know any better. And I see Microsoft getting into trouble because of this. Even Microsoft had to layoff people in recent times because of this (the first time in history). And it isn't going to get better for Microsoft until they relearn this lesson. And if they don't... well either Linux or the Mac (or something unknown to us today) will just take over. I don't think Linux or Mac (or something unknown) will ever displace Microsoft in my lifetime, but I'm sure someday in the future, it may be replaced as the top dog. The if the old people were still at Microsoft, I too feel the same way. But they left and have long retired. Now Microsoft has new people who have to learn all of the old lessons or die. Just like so many other companies in the past had too. If the new people are really smart and learn very fast, they will do just fine. If not, well then what can save them? Years ago (many, many), I tried OS/2 Warp for a little while. After installing it and rebooting, I no longer had a CD-ROM drive. No OS/2 drivers for it, and none from (IIRC) Panasonic either. The only drives that were native in OS/2 were Matsu****a and a couple of others, and even though they own Panasonic now, they either didn't then or the two drives weren't close enough for the Matsu****a drivers to work with my drive. I tried OS/2 with Windows 3.1 (upgrade) thinking that might solve the problem, but no joy there either. Another bad point was that I had an IBM Big Blue thermal printer, and I couldn't get either version of OS/2 to recognize it either. IBM OS won't print to an INM printer? What's up with that? After a couple on months of searching and using it (it was stable and speedy. No wonder; it had no drivers taking up memory), I finally went back to Windows. I've tinkered with other OSes over the years, but have never left Windows for good. Works fine for me. If there's something about it I don't like (and believe me, there's plenty), I can usually figure out a workaround or find a third party app to get 'er done. Don't get me started about IBM's OS/2! I know all about OS/2 far more than I even want to admit too. Talk about waving a carrot on a string. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2 Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3 |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
On 12/1/2011 8:21 AM, Wolf K wrote:
On 01/12/2011 3:45 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , Mortimer writes: [] In most respects, Windows 7 works perfectly for me. (For the month or two I had a 7 machine to play with, I found I disliked it a lot less than I was expecting to: I think it's a "good" Windows, on the whole. I even understood what they were trying to do with libraries [basically, make links work properly, like they did in Unix], though some of the implementation needs tweaking.) The only downsides a - no 64-bit driver is available for my Epson 1200 scanner so I need to keep an XP machine for this Actually, that's Epson's fault, not Microsoft's. True. No, I would say it _is_ Microsoft's, for making an OS (or OS variant) which can't use older drivers. Why should hardware manufacturers have to keep producing new drivers (especially for kit they no longer make - don't know if that's the case in this case)? [] This argument was beaten to death on a Linux group (very few mfrs provide drivers for Linux). The real issue is lack of standards. We're well past the time that printers should be plug'n'play, and I don't mean that the OS installs a driver when you plug in the printer. It's bizarre that one needs different drivers for different printers made by the same manufacturer. Etc. In the 80's there was an attempt at setting a standard for computers both in hardware and software, it was called MSX. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSX The concept was that any product that had the MSX logo on it would be compatible with any other MSX branded product regardless of who manufactured it. The system gained popularity in Japan, Europe, and South America but failed miserably in the US and Great Brittan. -- Roy Smith Windows 7 Home Premium 64-Bit Thunderbird 8.0 Thursday, December 01, 2011 7:30:09 PM |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
Roy Smith wrote in
: On 12/1/2011 8:21 AM, Wolf K wrote: On 01/12/2011 3:45 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote: In message , Mortimer writes: [] In most respects, Windows 7 works perfectly for me. (For the month or two I had a 7 machine to play with, I found I disliked it a lot less than I was expecting to: I think it's a "good" Windows, on the whole. I even understood what they were trying to do with libraries [basically, make links work properly, like they did in Unix], though some of the implementation needs tweaking.) The only downsides a - no 64-bit driver is available for my Epson 1200 scanner so I need to keep an XP machine for this Actually, that's Epson's fault, not Microsoft's. True. No, I would say it _is_ Microsoft's, for making an OS (or OS variant) which can't use older drivers. Why should hardware manufacturers have to keep producing new drivers (especially for kit they no longer make - don't know if that's the case in this case)? [] This argument was beaten to death on a Linux group (very few mfrs provide drivers for Linux). The real issue is lack of standards. We're well past the time that printers should be plug'n'play, and I don't mean that the OS installs a driver when you plug in the printer. It's bizarre that one needs different drivers for different printers made by the same manufacturer. Etc. In the 80's there was an attempt at setting a standard for computers both in hardware and software, it was called MSX. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSX The concept was that any product that had the MSX logo on it would be compatible with any other MSX branded product regardless of who manufactured it. The system gained popularity in Japan, Europe, and South America but failed miserably in the US and Great Brittan. This sentence was interesting...... "It is said that Microsoft led the project as an attempt to create unified standards among hardware makers." |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
In message , Roy
Smith writes: On 12/1/2011 8:21 AM, Wolf K wrote: [] This argument was beaten to death on a Linux group (very few mfrs provide drivers for Linux). The real issue is lack of standards. We're well past the time that printers should be plug'n'play, and I don't mean that the OS installs a driver when you plug in the printer. It's bizarre that one needs different drivers for different printers made by the same manufacturer. Etc. At least basic common features: once one printer from that manufacturer can be driven, using another should work for common features. If the second one has additional features (higher resolution, ability to print to the edge or double-sided, a stapler, ...) that the first one didn't, then it is reasonable for those not to work without requiring extra support. In the 80's there was an attempt at setting a standard for computers both in hardware and software, it was called MSX. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MSX The concept was that any product that had the MSX logo on it would be compatible with any other MSX branded product regardless of who manufactured it. The system gained popularity in Japan, Europe, and South America but failed miserably in the US and Great Brittan. Unfortunately, such standards go one of two ways: either they are fairly sophisticated and set a baseline only a few of the available machines can reach, so they get ignored because the market share is too small; or, they become a "lowest common denominator", and are ignored by all but the users of the most basic machines. UK people may remember "BASICODE" ("The Chip Shop, with Barry Norman"), which was a sort of common BASIC programming: some software was even broadcast on (IIRR) Radio 4 at closedown! (We're talking tape interfaces here!) Unfortunately, this used the "lowest common denominator" approach - "make your BBC Micro behave like a ZX81", as its critics called it. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf On the other hand, you have different fingers. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
In message , Tom Lake
writes: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message ... In message , Mortimer writes: No, I would say it _is_ Microsoft's, for making an OS (or OS variant) which can't use older drivers. Why should hardware manufacturers have to keep producing new drivers (especially for kit they no longer make - don't know if that's the case in this case)? Why should MS (or ANY OS maker) support all old hardware ad infinitum? I didn't say they should. I said they should work with older _drivers_. So it's not "all old hardware" - it's one aspect of the older OS. They do provide (especially recent upgrades, such as XP to Vista to 7) at least some level of compatibility with older _software_: you don't have to replace all your software when you move to 7, you can carry on using quite a lot of it. (Yes, there are versions of - for example - Office that _take advantage of new FEATURES of the new variant: but older versions, at least to some extent, will still _work_ under the new OS.) In order to advance the OS, keep it able to use the latest hardware and keep it secure, some things must be left behind or you'd end up with a huge, ungainly mess. If the manufacturer doesn't support the newest OS, then MS certainly doesn't have the resources to write drivers for every piece of obsolete equipment out there. Tom L I guess we'll just have to agree to differ here. Sure, I can see there are some things that could hold things back (though I think the security card is often overplayed - I can't really see the likelihood of using an old printer driver _realistically_ being much of a security risk: that's not dissimilar to companies who use "health and safety" as a getout for all sorts of things), but equally, it can go too far the other way, making users have to replace all (or most of) their hardware. I would say, it isn't realistic to expect 7 to support all those old "dot matrix" (i. e. impact-through-a-ribbon) printers; however, it does support a surprising number of them! (Assuming your 7 computer has a parallel port that is!) There is clearly some standard protocol that works with them. Maybe it is the industry as a whole that needs to agree on standard printer driving algorithms for more advanced printers (inkjet, laser), rather than each manufacturer (presumably?) having their own way. -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf On the other hand, you have different fingers. |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
"BillW50" wrote in
: In . 97.131, DanS wrote: "BillW50" wrote in : In , Tom Lake wrote: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message ... In message , Mortimer writes: No, I would say it _is_ Microsoft's, for making an OS (or OS variant) which can't use older drivers. Why should hardware manufacturers have to keep producing new drivers (especially for kit they no longer make - don't know if that's the case in this case)? Why should MS (or ANY OS maker) support all old hardware ad infinitum? In order to advance the OS, keep it able to use the latest hardware and keep it secure, some things must be left behind or you'd end up with a huge, ungainly mess. If the manufacturer doesn't support the newest OS, then MS certainly doesn't have the resources to write drivers for every piece of obsolete equipment out there. Tom L In the early days, an OS was screwed big time if it didn't support the legacy factor. You can have the world's greatest OS ever seen, but it is totally worthless if it doesn't support the past. Same is true today. If you burn bridges as you go, you will always lose. "In the early days"....of what... teletypes and ASCII only printers ? Do today's printers even have an ASCII mode anymore whe copy file.txt lpt1 actually prints the text file ? Who's burning bridges here ? The printer mfg's, not MS. Actually Microsoft is burning bridges here. There is no good reason why you can't use a Windows 95 printer driver under Windows 7. I'd assume the difference is the NT kernel vs. 9x which was just really a shell running on top of DOS. Have you ever written a printer driver for Windows before Dan? I have. I have not, however I have written a ton of other software. A lot for personal use..utilities that are fairly specific in nature, so there's no a huge choice, if any, out there to choose from, so I'd have to roll my own. Some was for the places I've worked. Programs distributed to customers, and for internal use, even database programs. These were all done in a variety of programming languages. And in the past, Microsoft didn't break older printer drivers. But those were people at Microsoft who had learned those hard lessons before. Nowadays Microsoft has new programmers who are naive about such lessons. Let's not make this seem like there's a 100 years of history here. We're talking roughly 20 years of the PC age.... Win 3.1, 16 bit. Win 9x, 32-bit DOS-based. Then NT-based OSs. Did drivers from 16-bit 3.1 work under 32-bit Win9x ? Or driver's for 9x work in NT/XP ? There's a couple breakages right there. With the introduction of Vista, there was changes in the driver model again and security model. And again, going from 32 bit to 64 bit. CPUs with new added instruction sets and other advances in hardware architecture can require changes to take advantages of it. And now with the whole HP printer exploit that's in the news, who knows what's going to go on with printing technologies...maybe there wil be a push just back to dumb peripherals for most. Since most of the old people at Microsoft has retired. The new replacements just don't know any better. And I see Microsoft getting into trouble because of this. Even Microsoft had to layoff people in recent times because of this (the first time in history). I'm sure the layoffs were just like every other company on Earth, the economy..... In today's world, people can't live without computers. Far different than just a few decades earlier. And computers are not going away soon. And if Microsoft can't convince the masses that newer is better, then they have to have layoffs. Just the same as it was decades ago. Remember WordStar and Lotus? The economy was great back then but they couldn't convince the masses either. Sure I remember Wordstar and Lotus, and bunches of other s/w companies, but Wordstar was one of how many word processor packages available ? Yes, they are gone because MS created an Office Suite that was lower cost, that was a viable package for most, so people stopped buying the really expensive 3rd party Word Processors. There are only 3 OSs now that are viable for everyday use.......Windows, Linux and OSX (MAC). The last two releases of Windows...Vista, and 7, sold more copies faster than each preceeding release. MAC is *very* slowly growing, the last couple Linux pushes were commercial failures, and, unfortunately, will continue to be because of the lack of unity among distros, and yes, TOO MANY CHOICES for those that just want to turn the thing on and go. ....not anything to do with whatever you're going on about above....or below. Everything to do with it actually. Still, not really...ALL companies, in ALL industries have gone through the same thing. (Well, mostly all.) ......it was happening because of costs skyrocketing, everything from utility costs, to worker healthcare expenses, sub-contracting, office supplies, bulding supplies...pretty much all expenses.....and instead of taking from the profits to cover these costs, these corporations choose layoffs, which is somewhat wrong, as there should be some type of middle ground. Buy anyway, you have your opinion, I have mine. We can leave it at that. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
In . 97.131,
DanS wrote: "BillW50" wrote in : In . 97.131, DanS wrote: "BillW50" wrote in : In , Tom Lake wrote: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message ... In message , Mortimer writes: No, I would say it _is_ Microsoft's, for making an OS (or OS variant) which can't use older drivers. Why should hardware manufacturers have to keep producing new drivers (especially for kit they no longer make - don't know if that's the case in this case)? Why should MS (or ANY OS maker) support all old hardware ad infinitum? In order to advance the OS, keep it able to use the latest hardware and keep it secure, some things must be left behind or you'd end up with a huge, ungainly mess. If the manufacturer doesn't support the newest OS, then MS certainly doesn't have the resources to write drivers for every piece of obsolete equipment out there. Tom L In the early days, an OS was screwed big time if it didn't support the legacy factor. You can have the world's greatest OS ever seen, but it is totally worthless if it doesn't support the past. Same is true today. If you burn bridges as you go, you will always lose. "In the early days"....of what... teletypes and ASCII only printers ? Do today's printers even have an ASCII mode anymore whe copy file.txt lpt1 actually prints the text file ? Who's burning bridges here ? The printer mfg's, not MS. Actually Microsoft is burning bridges here. There is no good reason why you can't use a Windows 95 printer driver under Windows 7. I'd assume the difference is the NT kernel vs. 9x which was just really a shell running on top of DOS. Dos was a loader for 9x. This is the very same for everything so far. Even OS/2 back in 1990 used a loader. You know why they all needed a loader? Once 9x loaded, no DOS calls could do anything without 9x ok first. People think that DOS had the say so, but that wasn't true. 9x had to go because people couldn't get over that fact. Have you ever written a printer driver for Windows before Dan? I have. I have not, however I have written a ton of other software. A lot for personal use..utilities that are fairly specific in nature, so there's no a huge choice, if any, out there to choose from, so I'd have to roll my own. Rolled your own printer drivers? If so, so you really do know. Some was for the places I've worked. Programs distributed to customers, and for internal use, even database programs. These were all done in a variety of programming languages. And in the past, Microsoft didn't break older printer drivers. But those were people at Microsoft who had learned those hard lessons before. Nowadays Microsoft has new programmers who are naive about such lessons. Let's not make this seem like there's a 100 years of history here. We're talking roughly 20 years of the PC age.... Win 3.1, 16 bit. Win 9x, 32-bit DOS-based. Then NT-based OSs. Well it was longer than 20 years, but the last 20 years were the most important. So I am okay with that. Did drivers from 16-bit 3.1 work under 32-bit Win9x ? Yes, 3.1x with Win32 supported both. And 9x also supported 16 and 32 bit. Or driver's for 9x work in NT/XP ? The NT family was a totally different beast. It would be totally understandable if nothing was compatible between the two. But luckily many things were. But NT, Windows 2000, XP, Vista, and Windows 7 are all really NT based. So what is the problem? The old people at Microsoft before they retired could make it work. But the new people at Microsoft can't be bothered. As it is too hard for them. And that is the whole problem. As they are just lazy. There's a couple breakages right there. With the introduction of Vista, there was changes in the driver model again and security model. Why label it as part of the NT family then? As it isn't really of the kind. And again, going from 32 bit to 64 bit. CPUs with new added instruction sets and other advances in hardware architecture can require changes to take advantages of it. OMG! Windows supported 16 bit for almost two decades. Now the move from 32 to 64 bit, it can't be done anymore? With the older Microsoft programmers it would happen. But with the new lazy new programmers, it is not possible. And now with the whole HP printer exploit that's in the news, who knows what's going to go on with printing technologies...maybe there wil be a push just back to dumb peripherals for most. News to me. I plead ignorance here and I must check this out. Since most of the old people at Microsoft has retired. The new replacements just don't know any better. And I see Microsoft getting into trouble because of this. Even Microsoft had to layoff people in recent times because of this (the first time in history). I'm sure the layoffs were just like every other company on Earth, the economy..... In today's world, people can't live without computers. Far different than just a few decades earlier. And computers are not going away soon. And if Microsoft can't convince the masses that newer is better, then they have to have layoffs. Just the same as it was decades ago. Remember WordStar and Lotus? The economy was great back then but they couldn't convince the masses either. Sure I remember Wordstar and Lotus, and bunches of other s/w companies, but Wordstar was one of how many word processor packages available ? Yes, they are gone because MS created an Office Suite that was lower cost, that was a viable package for most, so people stopped buying the really expensive 3rd party Word Processors. No! At the peak, upper management fired all of the programmers because they thought they were big enough they didn't need them anymore. As now they thought they could hire people far cheaper than they had. Like always it didn't work and they went under. There are only 3 OSs now that are viable for everyday use.......Windows, Linux and OSX (MAC). There are many that tried to get into the game. Although I see a big turning point and nobody is giving what people want. So the door is wide open for even a startup to step in. The last two releases of Windows...Vista, and 7, sold more copies faster than each preceeding release. Really? MS Bob and ME were Microsoft's big flops. And I never saw Vista as being very exciting. Filled with bugs and all. And Windows 7 is doing far better being as the Vista bug fixed version. MAC is *very* slowly growing, the last couple Linux pushes were commercial failures, and, unfortunately, will continue to be because of the lack of unity among distros, and yes, TOO MANY CHOICES for those that just want to turn the thing on and go. Yes running Linux doesn't mean you can run any Linux application. What makes Windows different is Windows for the most part means you can run Windows applications. But the new Microsoft, this is changing. And it isn't going to make things better. ....not anything to do with whatever you're going on about above....or below. Everything to do with it actually. Still, not really...ALL companies, in ALL industries have gone through the same thing. (Well, mostly all.) .....it was happening because of costs skyrocketing, everything from utility costs, to worker healthcare expenses, sub-contracting, office supplies, bulding supplies...pretty much all expenses.....and instead of taking from the profits to cover these costs, these corporations choose layoffs, which is somewhat wrong, as there should be some type of middle ground. Buy anyway, you have your opinion, I have mine. We can leave it at that. Lots of company are starving for cash. Microsoft is different since they have billions in the bank. They don't need to sell any stock whatsoever. You can say what you want, but you can't change the truth. And the only danger Microsoft has is they lost all of the programmers who has learned the hard lessons from the past. As the new programmers don't have a clue. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2 Centrino Core Duo T2400 1.83GHz - 2GB - Windows XP SP3 |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
On 01/12/2011 9:10 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
n message , Roy Smith writes: On 12/1/2011 8:21 AM, Wolf K wrote: [] This argument was beaten to death on a Linux group (very few mfrs provide drivers for Linux). The real issue is lack of standards. We're well past the time that printers should be plug'n'play, and I don't mean that the OS installs a driver when you plug in the printer. It's bizarre that one needs different drivers for different printers made by the same manufacturer. Etc. At least basic common features: once one printer from that manufacturer can be driven, using another should work for common features. Yes, and it's surprising how often that is not possible. More than a bizarre design choice: IMO it's insane. If the second one has additional features (higher resolution, ability to print to the edge or double-sided, a stapler, ...) that the first one didn't, then it is reasonable for those not to work without requiring extra support. Most of the features you mention are implemented in the printer's firmwa all you see is a pane on which you can select such features, but the OS doesn't do anything other than pass on the instruction(s). Resolution has to be in the firmware, since the mfr cannot know what software will be used to generate the documents and images to be printed. Inference: standardising printer-computer interactions depends on how the firmware is structured. Current printers are stupid, and leave too much up to the OS, which is odd, since Commodore made smart printers decades ago. What we need are smart printers. Or smarter ones. And we need some standard protocols for presenting document files etc to a printer for printing. Shouldn't be hard to do. From a computer's POV, a printer (or any other peripheral) is really just a data sink: send whatever data the peripheral asks for, and let it deal with it designed. For example, leave the translation of document data into printer data entirely up to the printer. All that would take is a few MB of flashable memory to store translation scripts. Instructions such as "print double sided" would be part of the data stream's header. HTH Wolf K. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
On 01/12/2011 7:19 PM, BillW50 wrote:
[...] Have you ever written a printer driver for Windows before Dan? [...] Yes. I even recall inserting escape sequences (ie "driver" instructions) into text docs so as to make the printer do all kinds of fancy things. Glad those days are gone. Wolf K. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
In message 31, DanS
writes: [] And again, going from 32 bit to 64 bit. CPUs with new added instruction sets and other advances in hardware architecture can require changes to take advantages of it. [] Yes, but _take advantage of_ is the significant phrase. You should still be able to run existing software (in the case under discussion, printer drivers); if it doesn't _take advantage of_ the new features, that's your problem. If I had a car that could do 200 miles per hour, I would accept that I might have to pay for access to places where I could take advantage of that capability; however, I'd be pretty peeved if I _couldn't_ drive it on ordinary roads (and, obviously, I'd accept that I couldn't do 200 on them). -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf On the other hand, you have different fingers. |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message ... In message 31, DanS writes: [] And again, going from 32 bit to 64 bit. CPUs with new added instruction sets and other advances in hardware architecture can require changes to take advantages of it. [] Yes, but _take advantage of_ is the significant phrase. You should still be able to run existing software (in the case under discussion, printer drivers); if it doesn't _take advantage of_ the new features, that's your problem. If I had a car that could do 200 miles per hour, I would accept that I might have to pay for access to places where I could take advantage of that capability; however, I'd be pretty peeved if I _couldn't_ drive it on ordinary roads (and, obviously, I'd accept that I couldn't do 200 on them). Sort of a bad analogy; there are plenty of cars that will go 200MPH, but you can't drive them on regular roads without a lot of modifications (Nascar racers), and some that wouldn't be legal no matter what you did to them (drag racers come to mind). But I get your point :-) -- SC Tom |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
"BillW50" wrote in
: (Note: Any deleted material does not mean I agree with it. And again, going from 32 bit to 64 bit. CPUs with new added instruction sets and other advances in hardware architecture can require changes to take advantages of it. OMG! Windows supported 16 bit for almost two decades. Now the move from 32 to 64 bit, it can't be done anymore? With the older Microsoft programmers it would happen. But with the new lazy new programmers, it is not possible. It wasn't 'lazy programmers', no matter what you say. It was a business decision. You can't support 100% of everything forever. At some point, you have to decide that instead of supporting 100% you can only support 99.9999998% of users(, in relation to this 16-bit issue.) Users are crying about Windows 'bloat', and how do you cut bloat.....by removing things that *virtually noone* uses anymore. And now with the whole HP printer exploit that's in the news, who knows what's going to go on with printing technologies...maybe there wil be a push just back to dumb peripherals for most. News to me. I plead ignorance here and I must check this out. http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/29/9076395- exclusive-millions-of-printers-open-to-devastating-hack- attack-researchers-say Since most of the old people at Microsoft has retired. The new replacements just don't know any better. And I see Microsoft getting into trouble because of this. Even Microsoft had to layoff people in recent times because of this (the first time in history). I'm sure the layoffs were just like every other company on Earth, the economy..... In today's world, people can't live without computers. Far different than just a few decades earlier. And computers are not going away soon. And if Microsoft can't convince the masses that newer is better, then they have to have layoffs. Just the same as it was decades ago. Remember WordStar and Lotus? The economy was great back then but they couldn't convince the masses either. Sure I remember Wordstar and Lotus, and bunches of other s/w companies, but Wordstar was one of how many word processor packages available ? Yes, they are gone because MS created an Office Suite that was lower cost, that was a viable package for most, so people stopped buying the really expensive 3rd party Word Processors. No! At the peak, upper management fired all of the programmers because they thought they were big enough they didn't need them anymore. As now they thought they could hire people far cheaper than they had. Like always it didn't work and they went under. That may be so, but, this article: (About spreadsheets, but the same applies) http://www.utd.edu/~liebowit/book/sheets/sheet.html ....ends with the conclusion of......"The long-term winner in this battle is Microsoft, which can unload Windows plus Excel for such a low site-license price that few companies can resist." It doesn't matter *why* the other the others failed, they failed. Looks like the Lotus failure was just anojther bad business decision.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Software ....."Although SmartSuite was bundled cheaply with many PCs and may initially have been more popular than Microsoft Office, Lotus quickly lost its dominance in the desktop applications market with the transition to 32 bit applications running on Windows 95. In large part due to its focusing much of its development resources on a suite of applications for IBM's then new (and eventually a market failure) OS/2 operating system, Lotus was late in delivering its suite of 32 bit products and failed to capitalize on the transition to the new version of Windows. It now has very little market share.".... There are only 3 OSs now that are viable for everyday use.......Windows, Linux and OSX (MAC). There are many that tried to get into the game. Although I see a big turning point and nobody is giving what people want. So the door is wide open for even a startup to step in. The last two releases of Windows...Vista, and 7, sold more copies faster than each preceeding release. Really? MS Bob and ME were Microsoft's big flops. And this means what, that people dumped MS like hot potato ? Obviously not. And I never saw Vista as being very exciting. Filled with bugs and all. And Windows 7 is doing far better being as the Vista bug fixed version. And that's all I see it as. Buy anyway, you have your opinion, I have mine. We can leave it at that. Lots of company are starving for cash. Microsoft is different since they have billions in the bank. They don't need to sell any stock whatsoever. And so are others..... http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/...rantz/2011-07- 20-companies-with-the-most-cash_n.htm ....and all still laying off people. You can say what you want, but you can't change the truth. And the only danger Microsoft has is they lost all of the programmers who has learned the hard lessons from the past. As the new programmers don't have a clue. Well, I'm assuming by 'programmers' you are talking about the heads of individual programs...the one's that *actually make the decisions* of what is or isn't included in whatever. The people that actually do the programming, do what they are told.....unless you think the 24-year old first year out of college CS graduate is making the decisions of what goes or doesn't go into Windows. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
! Windows 7 Sucks
On 12/02/2011, DanS posted:
And now with the whole HP printer exploit that's in the news, who knows what's going to go on with printing technologies...maybe there wil be a push just back to dumb peripherals for most. News to me. I plead ignorance here and I must check this out. http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/29/9076395- exclusive-millions-of-printers-open-to-devastating-hack- attack-researchers-say One quote from the article: "In that demonstration, a thermal switch shut the printer down – basically, causing it to self-destruct". That tends to destroy the article's credibility for me. In reality, thermal switches, like fuses, *prevent* self-destruction... But that was probably written by the reporter, and he may have been confused. Beyond that, I've been trying to figure out how the exploit can take control of me and cause me to obtain CIA documents & carry them to the printer so they could "...use a hijacked printer as a copy machine for criminals, making it easy to commit identity theft or even take control of entire networks that would otherwise be secure", or cause me to carry copied documents to the post office and mail them to Petrograd. -- Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|