New computer but win 7 or 8

On 4/12/2013 4:29 PM, mick wrote:
On 4/11/2013 6:02 PM, mick wrote:
I have a friend who is asking me to help him choose a new desktop computer. He has an very old
machine running win xp, he does not do much other than email, internet, a bit of video editing and
photograph editing. He is also not that computer literate, I have to walk him through most basic
things much of the time.

Choosing a computer to suit his needs is not much trouble but I am stuck on whether to advise win7
or win8. at I will be sticking with for quite a long time.

Oh, what to do :-?


...32-bit or a 64-bit version of Windows?
And, if he is using Outlook Express on his XP machine?

64 bit OS.
MS Office will be installed, so Outlook will be the email client of choice with which he is
familiar with.


That will make the transition much easier.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:58:53 +0100, mick wrote:

On 4/11/2013 4:02 PM, mick wrote:
I have a friend who is asking me to help him choose a new desktop
computer. He has an very old machine running win xp, he does not do
much other than email, internet, a bit of video editing and photograph
editing. He is also not that computer literate, I have to walk him
through most basic things much of the time.

Choosing a computer to suit his needs is not much trouble but I am stuck
on whether to advise win7 or win8. I know a lot about win7 and can help
him to easily get to grips with understanding it, but if I go for win8 I
know it will be more difficult, as I do not have that here at home to
play with when he asks the inevitable help questions over the phone.

The new computer will be between 4 and 8gb, no gaming, no touch screen.
I don't want to appear selfish from my point of view and help him spend
his money by buying an already oldish win7 when the newer win8 is widely
advertised as the next best thing since sliced bread if you see what I
mean.

As to myself, I have three machines here with win7 and cannot ever see
me upgrading to win8 as all the reports I have read so far just don't
convince me it is better. I had vista on a couple of machines awhile
back and although it worked well(for me), win 7 just blew it out of the
water and that is what I will be sticking with for quite a long time.

Oh, what to do :-?

Well you have had some very nice and well thought out responses. I was too
lazy.

What are you going to recommend??

Decisions, decisions, god knows LOL
What is apparent from much of the good advice posted here is for me to
stand back a little and let my friend decide what he thinks he will
like and then for me to help after he has made his choice.
Maybe I will have to learn win8 pretty damn quick. LOL
What makes things a little harder with my friend is that he is French,
talks English OK but doesn't always understand it :-)

OK, you have to learn French.

Probably on top of a new OS as well, the mind boggles at the thought
LOL

It'll even be OK if you talk French OK but don't always understand it...

I get in a mucking fuddle as it is trying to decipher broken English
:-)

--
mick

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:44:22 -0400, chicagofan wrote:

Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Thu, 11 Apr 2013 21:06:38 -0400, chicagofan wrote:
As someone who recently converted to Win7 [from XP] with a new laptop
purchase, I would strongly advise going with Win7 versus Win8, because
that will be enough of a change to deal with. I am still wishing I had
XP back, and may buy Win7 Pro, just so I can get a better simulation of XP.

There are some free virtual machines available (I know of VMware Player
and Oracle VirtualBox) that do a decent job, so if you already have a
valid XP license, you can get there for free, rather than buying a 7 Pro
license.

Thanks, Gene... I sure wish I had known about that before I gave that
laptop to my daughter! I think it's too late to get it back now.

BTW, I was not happy with the Windows XP Mode. I wanted XP for a couple
of legacy programs, and they didn't both work OK with XP mode, so I went
back to VMware.

That's what worries me about all the alternatives I read about now. I
fear I'll go to all that trouble and some of my old programs still won't
work. However, I will do anything to avoid updating to Win8 in the
future.
bj

Think of it as being an experimenter. Then it's all fun even when it
doesn't work.

Actually, I sometimes do that. I have tried all three alternatives above
trying to run XP, and I used the VMware and Oracle VMs to install a
trial beta of Win 8.

For XP, I had the best luck on VMware, and IIRC, Oracle was better for
W8.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 22:45:10 +0100, mick wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:58:12 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 20:44:59 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

On 12/04/2013 20:27, Ken Springer wrote:
Not so great if you can't run your favorite software on a new o/s!

How does this differ from not being able to use your favorite Windows
software in the Windows OS?

It doesn't differ at all, except perhaps in degree.

And I can't speak for everyone's experience, but *I* can continue to
run all my favorite software in Windows 8, and I also did in Windows
7, Windows Vista,Windows 2000, Windows XP, WFWG 3.11, Windows 3.1, and
Windows 3.0 (I skipped Windows Me, so I can't speak for that).

One reason I switched back to Windows from the Mac a few years ago was
that some of the Windows software I had been using was not available in
OS X, so I ran XP in a VM on the Mac.

SO I got a PC with Vista and discovered that some of the Windows
software I had been using was not compatible with Vista, so I ran XP in
a VM on the PC.

Good thing I can laugh at myself...

I have used Macs at work but never had that much interest to buy one
probably because there is just so much software available for windows
orientated PC's (and of course price). Having said that a few people
from work have bought into Mac's and then all they do is run windows on
them. :-?

LOL!

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 22:51:40 +0100, mick wrote:

OK, you have to learn French.

Probably on top of a new OS as well, the mind boggles at the thought
LOL

Good! That's what I wanted!

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:30:38 -0600, gufus
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:15:25 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

But that's not what I meant. I meant that the end of Windows 8 support
will be later than the end of Windows 7 support (April 2014). There's
no maybe about that.

Again.

Maybe, M$ might extend support for W7. (they did with XP.. right?)

EOS for Win7 SP1 is 2020. Which will be extended if there is
an SP2.
So, I wouldn't worry about it. We will probably having
mandatory chips implanted in our brains by then. Think of something, a
Google search will flow into your mind. Filtered, of course. Hail the
future.

[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 22:33:24 +0100, Mike Barnes
wrote:


Except for the desktop picture being different, and my having a gadget
sidebar, yours looks *very* much like mine. I too have the Task Bar on
the left side of the screen. But unlike you, I have the True Launch
Bar on the left side of my second monitor, rather than on the Task
Bar.

That's all very encouraging (especially the bit about your desktop not
having my picture on it).


LOL!


I appreciate it, thanks.


You're welcome. Glad to help.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:27:12 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:10:30 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:


SO I got a PC with Vista and discovered that some of the Windows
software I had been using was not compatible with Vista, so I ran XP in
a VM on the PC.

If it were me, I would have just gotten a newer version of the
software in question.

I would have too.

I'm not as dumb as you're implying here,


I hope you said that tongue in cheek, but if you really felt that was
my implication, my apologies.


but the makers of the programs
are[1]. Nothing for Vista and later was or is available.

[1] OK, they might not be dumb, but they had lost interest in supporting
their products.



I can't remember any specific examples, but the few times that I ran
into a similar situation, I was always able to find a newer, very
similar (perhaps even better) program.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:30:38 -0600, gufus
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:15:25 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

But that's not what I meant. I meant that the end of Windows 8 support
will be later than the end of Windows 7 support (April 2014). There's
no maybe about that.

Again.

Maybe, M$ might extend support for W7. (they did with XP.. right?)


Past the end of extended support for Windows 8?

I suppose that's remotely possible, but it's *highly* unlikely.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:07:01 -0700, Ken Blake
wrote:

Maybe, M$ might extend support for W7. (they did with XP.. right?)

Past the end of extended support for Windows 8?

M$ might extind both..

VBG

--
-gufus
Thou Shalt NOT excessively annoy others or
allow Thyself to become excessively annoyed

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:58:00 -0300, Shadow wrote:

Again.

Maybe, M$ might extend support for W7. (they did with XP.. right?)

EOS for Win7 SP1 is 2020. Which will be extended if there is
an SP2.

Exactly. I rest my case. -

So, I wouldn't worry about it. We will probably having
mandatory chips implanted in our brains by then.

Hehehe...

--
-gufus
Thou Shalt NOT excessively annoy others or
allow Thyself to become excessively annoyed

On 4/12/13 3:45 PM, mick wrote:
On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:58:12 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 20:44:59 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

On 12/04/2013 20:27, Ken Springer wrote:
Not so great if you can't run your favorite software on a new o/s!

How does this differ from not being able to use your favorite Windows
software in the Windows OS?

It doesn't differ at all, except perhaps in degree.

And I can't speak for everyone's experience, but *I* can continue to
run all my favorite software in Windows 8, and I also did in Windows
7, Windows Vista,Windows 2000, Windows XP, WFWG 3.11, Windows 3.1, and
Windows 3.0 (I skipped Windows Me, so I can't speak for that).

One reason I switched back to Windows from the Mac a few years ago was
that some of the Windows software I had been using was not available in
OS X, so I ran XP in a VM on the Mac.

SO I got a PC with Vista and discovered that some of the Windows
software I had been using was not compatible with Vista, so I ran XP in
a VM on the PC.

Good thing I can laugh at myself...

I have used Macs at work but never had that much interest to buy one
probably because there is just so much software available for windows
orientated PC's (and of course price). Having said that a few people
from work have bought into Mac's and then all they do is run windows on
them. :-?

I bought this Mac when my XP computer was trashed by a power supply
failure. I was frustrated with having to deal with viruses and updates
all the time, so went looking as I'd heard the rumor Macs couldn't be
infected. When I went to the Apple Store, the quality of the visual
display was unlike anything I'd seen on a Windows computer. The Windows
units were simply outclassed. Another thing I liked about this Mac was
monitor aspect ratio is 16:10, not the more common 16:9. I learned
early on in my computing life, the more screen real estate plus high
resolution, the better off you are. It's hard to convince people of
that extra vertical unit making much of a difference, but it does.

For the Win 7/8 computer I'm building, I did get a 16:10 monitor, and
the onboard graphics card will match this monitor, 1920 X 1200
resolution. So, it will be an interesting visual comparison.

I blow off all the price comparisons, since most who bring that up do
not go in depth far enough to have a truly valid comparison. I don't
mean one is 500 GB hard drive and the other is 500 GB hard drive. I
mean that one may have a MTBF of 1 million, but the other has an MTBF of
5 million. I've seen the occasion nigh on flame war over this, and when
someone actually has taken the time to research at that level, the
hardware price is not that different.

I ran a lot of MS software originally until I found Mac equivalents.
And for what I do currently, open source more than fills my needs. The
only PC software I use now is PSPad programming editor that I do my
occasional ebay ad with.

From the OS standpoint, I find things in both that I like and dislike.
Sometimes trying to create the same thing on one the other does out of
the box.

I've concluded the biggest thing to be concerned about is how
comfortable a person is with the OS. Hardware is secondary. I
mentioned this aspect to mick in an earlier post.

--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.3
Firefox 20.0
Thunderbird 17.0.5
LibreOffice 4.0.1.2

On 4/12/2013 2:30 PM, mick wrote:
SNIP

Having listened to all the advice so far, the choice (for me) remains
between win 7 and win 8. Win 8 with the add ons as you mention seems to
be the best of both worlds.

(My computer was a Toshiba Laptop with Win7 upgraded to Win8 and
reverted back to Win7 after 5 months.)

Then you need to determine what software he wants to bring over to Win8.
For Example, I wanted to bring MS Office 2000. It won't run in Win8.
I went to Open Source Libre which is good, but their envelope and
label printing left a little to be desired. If I recall MS Streets and
Maps also didn't run. There might have been more but I just don't
remember. The growing bald spot is eroding some gray matter with it.

I was beginning to get used to the inconveniences, but I had one unique
problem to my computer in that 'Restart' would hang up. Software
updates turned into a PITA. Again that was probable only related to my
computer. However, I just recalled, that I found a thread I think on
the Win8 newsgroup that had a fix for the problem. (That means others
also had the problem) I implemented the fix and it totally killed the
computer, DEAD!!! I happened to have a Disk Image saved and via a
recovery disk was able to load my image.

Little things kept on popping up that made Win8 just not worth it. I
reloaded my original Win7 and have been a happy camper ever since.

FWIW, If you go the Win8 route, be sure to save a Disk Image! ASAP.

BTW, Win8 did seem faster. I used START8 for the Win7 desktop and it
was excellent.

All the best with whatever way you go.

On 4/12/2013 2:29 PM, mick wrote:
On 4/11/2013 6:02 PM, mick wrote:


64 bit OS.

MS Office will be installed, so Outlook will be the email client of
choice with which he is familiar with.

Is it a new or old version? I know that Office 2000 will not run in
Win8, but does run in Win7.

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 15:05:15 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:27:12 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 14:10:30 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

SO I got a PC with Vista and discovered that some of the Windows
software I had been using was not compatible with Vista, so I ran XP in
a VM on the PC.

If it were me, I would have just gotten a newer version of the
software in question.

I would have too.

I'm not as dumb as you're implying here,

I hope you said that tongue in cheek, but if you really felt that was
my implication, my apologies.

OK, *my* apologies. I was a too quick on the trigger, or whatever
metaphor I'm supposed to use :-)

but the makers of the programs
are[1]. Nothing for Vista and later was or is available.

[1] OK, they might not be dumb, but they had lost interest in supporting
their products.

I can't remember any specific examples, but the few times that I ran
into a similar situation, I was always able to find a newer, very
similar (perhaps even better) program.

Maybe you need to apologize again :-)

I did not innocently or ignorantly decide that I can't move on.

I have three kinds of old computer programmable remote controls (for TV,
stereo, etc), from Philips and from Universal Remote Corp. These remotes
have room-to-room RF capability.

1. They require their own USB drivers not provided by Windows.

2. The two companies did not update the drivers for Vista and later
versions.

3. Both companies have decided that their remotes are to be programmed
by licensed installers, not by dumb consumers (many of whom are not
dumb, of course), which forces me to continue to use the old software.
This might be caused by lobbying by the professional installers, or
maybe by advice from the lawyers for Philips and URC.

4. To replace the remotes by newer ones from one or both of these
companies would cost in the neighborhood of $1500, maybe more. The new
ones *might* be supported, if I could get bootleg copies of the
software.

5. There are other brands, but experience and documentation of the
Harmony remotes and others indicate that it would be a frustrating, and
maybe ultimately unsuccessful, task to make them work the way I want.

One example (but this is based on older models; the current ones might
be different): AFAICT, the Harmony remotes with RF capability are paired
one remote to one remote receiver, but I want to have several remotes in
different rooms controlling one receiver. I also believe that they must
each be programmed individually, which can be an onerous task. Plus I
want four remotes at $250 or more each :-)

And I'm not even talking about software problems I have had with
Harmony.

Currently, my solution is this (a link to Amazon):
http://tinyurl.com/bo8vmtz

Not easy, but doable. They don't use a computer at all, but once one
remote is fully programmed, you can clone it in its entirety to the
others by IR.

I still use the older remotes to convert commands available in hex
format to IR so I can then transfer them to the URC remotes by IR.

So - aren't you glad you asked? :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)