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 | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Win XP to Win 10?
Was just curious how many had taken the plunge and were happy about it. I
don't have any experience with Windows 10, but from what I can gather, you "just" have to get used to its new interface, the use of "apps" (which I assume are nearly the same thing as what we used to call programs), the forced MS updates, and that many of the older programs can't be successfully imported. Oh, and that you can get a classic start menu without tiles. (I'm not sure what the distinction is between apps and programs on Windows 10). Is all that about correct? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Win XP to Win 10?
Bill in Co wrote:
Was just curious how many had taken the plunge and were happy about it. I don't have any experience with Windows 10, but from what I can gather, you "just" have to get used to its new interface, the use of "apps" (which I assume are nearly the same thing as what we used to call programs), the forced MS updates, and that many of the older programs can't be successfully imported. Oh, and that you can get a classic start menu without tiles. (I'm not sure what the distinction is between apps and programs on Windows 10). Is all that about correct? You can't do an Upgrade install over top of WinXP. Win10 can upgrade over: Win7 SP1 Win8.1 Another Win10 Just grab a copy and install. You don't need a license key to trial it. If your CPU is too old, it'll tell you at some point (no, the traditional Upgrade Advisor is not available). https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/soft...load/windows10 Note that the web page is context sensitive. If you use WinXP and a browser, or you use Linux and a browser, you will be given a direct link to a 3.5GB or a 2.5GB ISO9660. If you use Win7/Win8/Win10, you will instead be offered a copy of the .NET based MediaCreationTool.exe . That will do a download for you from your W7/W8/W10 setup. Windows 10 has mis-detection for at least one Intel processor, where the installer tells the user the hardware is not suitable, when in fact the hardware is fine. This is an error in some output coming from the processor, where the Intel particulars do not match the behavior and capabilities of the actual silicon. You're unlikely to have that processor. If the software actually ran SQRT(2) on the machine, instead of checking for some table that tells you whether SQRT() exists, this sort of thing would not happen. The very last generation of P4 *might* be able to run Windows 10, but I don't think any "P4 people" have wandered by to make such a claim. The majority of P4 processors aren't good enough. Only the very last ones (2MB cache???) would be potentially a candidate. A Core2 or better would be a better choice. ******* Another way to run it. Use VirtualBox. 5.2.22 is the last version that will run on WinXP. You can run a 64 bit guest if the CPU supports 64 bit, even though the WinXP OS hosting Virtualbox is 32 bit. https://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads Then, you grab a pre-installed guest OS of the Win10 persuasion here. I have a Win7 one and a WinXP one, back when those were available. https://developer.microsoft.com/en-u...dge/tools/vms/ It should be possible to select some "sickly" hardware to run WinXP and VirtualBox, such that when the Win10 VM loads, it'll crash :-) I haven't tried to do that, to see how vulnerable it is. By avoiding an installation step using an "appliance" version like this, the OS has no way of preventing you from using hardware that doesn't support Windows 10. When you install on physical hardware, the installer DVD can tell you that the hardware is not a candidate. You're only going to be running this OS for about ten minutes, so I wouldn't be too concerned about "license keys" and "purchasing" :-) Without a license key present, the Settings : Personalize section will not be available for adjustment. Perhaps that prevents you from selecting "Dark Theme" or something. Paul |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Win XP to Win 10?
On 09/01/2019 19:45, Bill in Co wrote:
Was just curious how many had taken the plunge and were happy about it. I don't have any experience with Windows 10, but from what I can gather, you "just" have to get used to its new interface, the use of "apps" (which I assume are nearly the same thing as what we used to call programs), the forced MS updates, and that many of the older programs can't be successfully imported. Oh, and that you can get a classic start menu without tiles. (I'm not sure what the distinction is between apps and programs on Windows 10). Is all that about correct? FWIW, Bill, after using Windows XP for many years, I skipped Vista and bought a new laptop with Windows 7. I had no trouble using it. Back in 2008 I bought an Apple iMac and learned how to use it. I've since used all these operating systems:- Mac OS X Leopard – version 10.5, released to end users on Friday, October 26, 2007 Mac OS X Snow Leopard – version 10.6, publicly unveiled on Monday, June 8, 2009 Mac OS X Lion – version 10.7, released to end users on Wednesday, July 20, 2011 OS X Mountain Lion – version 10.8, released to end users on Wednesday, July 25, 2012 OS X Mavericks – version 10.9, released to end users on Tuesday, October 22, 2013 OS X Yosemite – version 10.10, released to end users on Thursday, October 16, 2014 OS X El Capitan – version 10.11, released to end users on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 macOS Sierra – version 10.12, released to end users on Tuesday, September 20, 2016 macOS High Sierra – version 10.13, released to end users on Monday, September 25, 2017 macOS Mojave – version 10.14, released to end users on Monday, September 24, 2018 I've skipped Windows 8 & 8.1 but now have Windows 10 (as well as a new iMac - well, 12 months old now but with a magnificent 27 inch screen!) I have a friend who I helped upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10 and he manages just fine. He's just had his 91st birthday - on Christmas Eve! If *I* can do these things, so can you! ;-) -- David B. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Win XP to Win 10?
David B. wrote:
On 09/01/2019 19:45, Bill in Co wrote: Was just curious how many had taken the plunge and were happy about it. I don't have any experience with Windows 10, but from what I can gather, you "just" have to get used to its new interface, the use of "apps" (which I assume are nearly the same thing as what we used to call programs), the forced MS updates, and that many of the older programs can't be successfully imported. Oh, and that you can get a classic start menu without tiles. (I'm not sure what the distinction is between apps and programs on Windows 10). Is all that about correct? FWIW, Bill, after using Windows XP for many years, I skipped Vista and bought a new laptop with Windows 7. I had no trouble using it. Back in 2008 I bought an Apple iMac and learned how to use it. I've since used all these operating systems:- Mac OS X Leopard – version 10.5, released to end users on Friday, October 26, 2007 Mac OS X Snow Leopard – version 10.6, publicly unveiled on Monday, June 8, 2009 Mac OS X Lion – version 10.7, released to end users on Wednesday, July 20, 2011 OS X Mountain Lion – version 10.8, released to end users on Wednesday, July 25, 2012 OS X Mavericks – version 10.9, released to end users on Tuesday, October 22, 2013 OS X Yosemite – version 10.10, released to end users on Thursday, October 16, 2014 OS X El Capitan – version 10.11, released to end users on Wednesday, September 30, 2015 macOS Sierra – version 10.12, released to end users on Tuesday, September 20, 2016 macOS High Sierra – version 10.13, released to end users on Monday, September 25, 2017 macOS Mojave – version 10.14, released to end users on Monday, September 24, 2018 I've skipped Windows 8 & 8.1 but now have Windows 10 (as well as a new iMac - well, 12 months old now but with a magnificent 27 inch screen!) I have a friend who I helped upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10 and he manages just fine. He's just had his 91st birthday - on Christmas Eve! If *I* can do these things, so can you! ;-) OMG. Well, now you've slapped down a gauntlet. What will poor Bill do ??? Maybe Bill will humor us, with a count of how many PCs he owns... Paul |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Win XP to Win 10?
Paul wrote:
David B. wrote: On 09/01/2019 19:45, Bill in Co wrote: Was just curious how many had taken the plunge and were happy about it. I don't have any experience with Windows 10, but from what I can gather, you "just" have to get used to its new interface, the use of "apps" (which I assume are nearly the same thing as what we used to call programs), the forced MS updates, and that many of the older programs can't be successfully imported. Oh, and that you can get a classic start menu without tiles. (I'm not sure what the distinction is between apps and programs on Windows 10). Is all that about correct? FWIW, Bill, after using Windows XP for many years, I skipped Vista and bought a new laptop with Windows 7. I had no trouble using it. Back in 2008 I bought an Apple iMac and learned how to use it. I've since used all these operating systems:- snipped long list for brevity I've skipped Windows 8 & 8.1 but now have Windows 10 (as well as a new iMac - well, 12 months old now but with a magnificent 27 inch screen!) I have a friend who I helped upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10 and he manages just fine. He's just had his 91st birthday - on Christmas Eve! If *I* can do these things, so can you! ;-) OMG. Well, now you've slapped down a gauntlet. What will poor Bill do ??? Maybe Bill will humor us, with a count of how many PCs he owns... Paul I just had some concerns, as echoed above, and was just looking for some specific feedback regarding those questions or concerns. :-) As far as "upgrading" is concerned, I think my stuff is too old for that. I've got one desktop computer (Win XP), which I use almost all the time. And just as a backup, I have two old used eBay laptops (one with Win XP, one with Windows 7), which I rarely use.. If I ever went out and bought one of these nice new svelte laptops, like I've seen on display at some stores here, I'd probably just scrap the latter two. I wonder if anybody gets so used to a laptop that it ends up replacing their desktop for almost everything they need to do (for home or limited work use, I mean). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Win XP to Win 10?
On 10/01/2019 03:16, Bill in Co wrote:
[....] I just had some concerns, as echoed above, and was just looking for some specific feedback regarding those questions or concerns. :-) As far as "upgrading" is concerned, I think my stuff is too old for that. I've got one desktop computer (Win XP), which I use almost all the time. And just as a backup, I have two old used eBay laptops (one with Win XP, one with Windows 7), which I rarely use.. If I ever went out and bought one of these nice new svelte laptops, like I've seen on display at some stores here, I'd probably just scrap the latter two. I wonder if anybody gets so used to a laptop that it ends up replacing their desktop for almost everything they need to do (for home or limited work use, I mean). What you might like to consider, Bill, is a brand new iPad Pro and detachable keyboard. After many years of persuasion I got one for my sister about 14 months ago (she's just passed her 82nd birthday!). She had NEVER used a computer of any sort nor ever used a Smartphone. She's taken to it like a duck to water! I'm an hours drive away from her but have been in touch regularly to provide a kind of help-desk facility free of charge! ;-) If you have an Apple store near you, I encourage you to visit to ask for a demonstration and hold the magic in your hands! You might enjoy watching this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzHHxlpOaw8 = Things for me are not always straight-forward! :-( I'm now faced with a problem set out here (following the recent update of my Windows 10 laptop) Now I'm getting: error: unknown filesystem. grub rescue https://askubuntu.com/questions/1195...own-filesystem Perhaps Paul can recommend HIS preferred solution? -- David B. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Win XP to Win 10?
On 10/01/2019 03:16, Bill in Co wrote:
Paul wrote: David B. wrote: On 09/01/2019 19:45, Bill in Co wrote: Was just curious how many had taken the plunge and were happy about it. I don't have any experience with Windows 10, but from what I can gather, you "just" have to get used to its new interface, the use of "apps" (which I assume are nearly the same thing as what we used to call programs), the forced MS updates, and that many of the older programs can't be successfully imported. Oh, and that you can get a classic start menu without tiles. (I'm not sure what the distinction is between apps and programs on Windows 10). Is all that about correct? FWIW, Bill, after using Windows XP for many years, I skipped Vista and bought a new laptop with Windows 7. I had no trouble using it. Back in 2008 I bought an Apple iMac and learned how to use it. I've since used all these operating systems:- snipped long list for brevity I've skipped Windows 8 & 8.1 but now have Windows 10 (as well as a new iMac - well, 12 months old now but with a magnificent 27 inch screen!) I have a friend who I helped upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10 and he manages just fine. He's just had his 91st birthday - on Christmas Eve! If *I* can do these things, so can you! ;-) OMG. Well, now you've slapped down a gauntlet. What will poor Bill do ??? Maybe Bill will humor us, with a count of how many PCs he owns... Paul I just had some concerns, as echoed above, and was just looking for some specific feedback regarding those questions or concerns. :-) As far as "upgrading" is concerned, I think my stuff is too old for that. I've got one desktop computer (Win XP), which I use almost all the time. And just as a backup, I have two old used eBay laptops (one with Win XP, one with Windows 7), which I rarely use.. If I ever went out and bought one of these nice new svelte laptops, like I've seen on display at some stores here, I'd probably just scrap the latter two. I wonder if anybody gets so used to a laptop that it ends up replacing their desktop for almost everything they need to do (for home or limited work use, I mean). I continued to use my Win XP PC until last year when it was clear its days were numbered and I then bought a modestly priced laptop running Windows 10. Windows 10 is mostly fine, it works very well and I can easily take the laptop into any room in the house. Now taken with reading my emails over breakfast! I kept the old PC as a backup for now. Two things to keep in mind. I don't like the new Start Menu much so I installed Classic Start Menu which provides an easy way to set things the way I like them. Some old programs and hardware will no longer work properly. It is quite easy to find (free) replacements for most of the programs but I also installed the free VirtualBox. The laptop now runs a Win XP virtual machine which I can use for various ancient things such as Outlook Express or my Agfa scanner which I bought when I was running Windows 98! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
laptops (was: Win XP to Win 10?)
In message , Bill in Co
writes: [] If I ever went out and bought one of these nice new svelte laptops, like I've seen on display at some stores here, I'd probably just scrap the latter two. I wonder if anybody gets so used to a laptop that it ends up replacing their desktop for almost everything they need to do (for home or limited work use, I mean). I bought my first laptop (W9x era), intending to use it only when travelling or in other situations where my tower machine couldn't be taken. (I also didn't think I'd get on with a trackpad.) It became my main machine - I was going to say rapidly, but it might have been gradually. I have since used laptops for all my computing needs - my desktop machines going initially weeks then months between being turned on, and I think it might be over a year now. (And I have got very used to a trackpad: I have a mouse, but rarely plug it in - of late, mainly for when the trackpad [driver] misbehaves rather than needing the differences.) I'd say my main initial concerns re laptops fell into three areas: limited keyboard, all-in-one-ness, and (in practice) no slots. Limited keyboard - I was fortunate in that my first laptop still had the sixpack; I _did_ find the second laptop irritating in having home and end combined with something else and needing the Fn key. (Fortunately this one has brought them back.) Also the lack of a numeric keypad (you get one on _most_ 15" or more laptops anyway these days) meant I couldn't use the Alt-numpad codes I'd memorised for things like the +/- symbol, but in practice I've found a little utility called AllChars actually easier (the sequences are easier to remember!). All-in-one-ness - i. e. if one part fails, you have to junk the lot. This hasn't been as much of a problem as I thought: things that have failed - disc drive was easy to replace; a screen wasn't _too_ hard; and a wireless card, I just used an external one. (That was on someone else's machine that had lots of USB and she didn't use them anyway; had it been me, I might have replaced the card - fiddly, but not difficult.) The one case that _is_ irritating is where - I think - the internal power supply (that takes the 19V or battery and gives the internal supplies) has failed and thus rendered the laptop dead, whereas I think most of it is actually alive. No slots (I say in practice because, although in theory laptops can have them, [a] many don't [b] the standards for laptop expansion slots change with bewildering rapidity) - I think I was fortunate in that my transition to laptops coincided with a large move of peripherals that had previously used cards, to USB. This has continued, accompanied by changes in desktop slot standards, from PCI (IDE was already dead) to PCI-E and later, as well as graphic card slots. These changes in both laptop and desktop slot standards have mostly _not_ been backward-compatible, unlike USB. My transition has probably also, if I'm honest, accompanied my changing outlook with ageing: I have less _desire_ to use things that need plug-in cards (and aren't available via USB). Another advantage of laptops is that they have a poor man's UPS: brief power outages don't crash them, even if the battery's in a poor state, and can move from room to room without shutting down. I can see that a proper desktop, with a big keyboard and monitor, still holds its attraction for those with a settled lifestyle, _or_ who are willing to switch between devices when they travel or visit. Also, for those needing special machines - number-crunching, gaming, and so on. For me, the ability to now take this my main computer wherever I go (not relying on syncing services) means I can't see me ever going back to a desktop as my main machine: in fact other than lethargy and nostalgia I'm not sure why I keep my desktop. But - this is just me; YMMV, and I'm certainly not saying anyone _should_ change. I just thought I'd answer Bill-in-Co's question from my own experience. JPG --- How about a three-way referendum, allowing second choices? -- Are petitions unfair? See 255soft.uk (YOUR VOTE COUNTS)! [Pass it on.] -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf A man is not contemptible because he thinks science explains everything, and a man is not contemptible because he doesn't. - Howard Jacobson, in Radio Times 2010/1/23-29. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Win XP to Win 10?
Bill in Co wrote:
I have two old used eBay laptops (one with Win XP, one with Windows 7), which I rarely use.. So the Win7 one would be your "trial candidate" for Windows 10. If it's Win7 SP1 x64 Home Premium, try installing Windows 10 x64 Home over it. If it's Win7 SP1 x86 Professional, try installing Windows 10 x86 Pro over it. For a "free" upgrade, the "class" of the install has to match. It's still possible for a CPU on a Win7 box, to not be sufficient for Windows 10, but that's the most likely limiting factor. Both Win7 and Win10 work with 1GB of RAM. The "kernel portion" of the OS (i.e. squeeze out all the fat) is about 350MB or so. Using 1GB of RAM leaves room to work. In terms of "comfort" 1) Single core computer "works", but many common activities might seem slow. Firefox with five processes running, railed while it loads Yahoo News, is going to be slightly worse than it is on Windows 7. This is because Windows 10 has little maintenance things it will be doing in the background. 2) Graphics drivers for Windows 10 are limited by the hardware companies. An FX5200 for example, would be running the Microsoft Basic Display Adapter. My HD6450 PCIe video card got one driver of merit and support has stopped. The card runs at native resolution. When the Microsoft Basic Display Adapter runs the show, you get 1024x768 (even on a 16:9 display). 3) A "best config" would be a quad core processor, to give some bandwidth for the background stuff, and leave a bit for you. You have the materials to test, but it'll be your Win7 laptop as a (possible) candidate with no guarantees. The screen will likely run at 1024x768. ******* On a laptop, when it gets super-thin, there's no cooling fan. The CPU/GPU heat is dumped into the base. The processor then has two limits. It has a "power limiter" that throttles if the electrical demands of the processor are too high. It also has the usual "thermal throttles". It will allow "bursts", so on a single threaded task (with no OS background activity), it might seem fast. But as soon as there is background activity, it's going to disable turbo. There is at least one enthusiast class processor, where the turbo is set up for two cores, which allows some amount of annoying Windows 10 activity, while you "bench" on the other core. With the thermal limiter, you could start a movie transcode, and be doing 60FPS processing for the first 15 seconds, and then the frames per second processed gradually drop to a lower number. The cooler you keep the base, the more the speed can rise again. If the laptop is thicker and has tradition "air cooling", you might have more headroom. Air cooling also allows cheaper competitor CPU choices which happen to not be as efficient. Air cooling should allow a cheaper "performant" laptop to be built. Thin devices used eMMC Flash storage. A device with 32GB of disk space, stores things in a single flash chip. If the flash chip fails, nobody is going to offer you a repair strategy (chip must be un-soldered to replace). A wiser purchase is a machine with at least one bay for a 2.5" drive. Which can take a SATA SSD. And be replaced if there is an issue. HTH, Paul |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Win XP to Win 10?
MikeS wrote:
Two things to keep in mind. I don't like the new Start Menu much so I installed Classic Start Menu which provides an easy way to set things the way I like them. That's fine if that suits you. I intended to do that, but I was surrised to find that the Win10 Start menu was just fine for me. (A lot better then the Win8 start menu -- which didn't exist). Some old programs and hardware will no longer work properly. I've heard such claims, but I haven't run into it myself. I guess I'd already replaced any 16 bit programs I used to use. (Microsoft's 64-bit OSs won't run 16 bit programs, 32-bit OSs will. and device drivers might be a problem if you're making a really big jump, like XP to Win10) There are plenty of things available - including free and/or Open Source programs, and they work just fine - often better than the old ones. It is quite easy to find (free) replacements for most of the programs but I also installed the free VirtualBox. The laptop now runs a Win XP virtual machine which I can use for various ancient things such as Outlook Express or my Agfa scanner which I bought when I was running Windows 98! That's also a good solution. -- Tim Slattery tim at risingdove dot com |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
laptops (was: Win XP to Win 10?)
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote
| Another advantage of laptops is that they have a poor man's UPS: brief | power outages don't crash them, even if the battery's in a poor state, | and can move from room to room without shutting down. | | I can see that a proper desktop, with a big keyboard and monitor, still | holds its attraction for those with a settled lifestyle, _or_ who are | willing to switch between devices when they travel or visit. Also, for | those needing special machines - number-crunching, gaming, and so on. | For me, the ability to now take this my main computer wherever I go (not | relying on syncing services) means I can't see me ever going back to a | desktop as my main machine So you've joined the army of Starbucks secretaries, earnestly staring at screens while they pretend to be drinking coffee? (Or is it earnestly drinking coffee while they pretend to look at screens? I'm just the opposite of what you describe. When I use a laptop I have it plugged in, and I don't move from room to room. I'm also not so sure about "a poor man's UPS". You buy a laptop for maybe $500-1200 and a UPS for $50-80. There's nothing economical about a laptop. Small is expensive. We have a laptop that's only used for one thing: When I go away to the country and want to be able to read articles saved and/or listen to audio talks. No Internet. No typing. Just file storage and display. I find it works OK for that. Otherwise, as far as I'm concerned, life's too short for laptops. Which brings up why tablets are such a bad idea. They're more mobile than a laptop, but with an even smaller screen, even less functionality, and limited file access. I can't put a DVD into a tablet and then use my choice of programs to read the files. But doesn't it depend a lot on how you use it? If you *must* write a report and your only free time is on a plane, then you use a laptop. If you can't stand to go on vacation for a week without having email, then you use a laptop (or cellphone). I don't do either of those things. Sometimes I miss my computer when I go away. I figure that's a good reason not to have access to it. I do a fair amount of writing and reading, as well as software coding, image editing and web design. Sitting at a computer is best in a number of ways, but mainly it's about ergonomics. I can sit up straight, with a proper keyboard and trackball, and a 24" screen. Using a laptop, to me, would be like eating dinner out of a paper cup with a toy fork because I want to be ready to dash out the door if necessary. I'm not that important and my life is not that busy that I need to live uncivilized, "on the edge of my seat". A lot of people don't need to write reports. Many of them wonder why anyone needs something other than a cellphone. That seems to be the most typical that I see now. People have a laptop somewhere, for doing their taxes and such. But mostly they're just Facebookies -- "doing social", texting and shopping on their cellphones. My neighbor, a research biologist, recently called to ask if he could print something. He apparently has a laptop but no printer. He just uses the one at his lab. Most of those people answer email from a phone. It works. But it's fooling oneself to think it's just the same thing made easy. No one writes in any serious way on a cellphone. If they're always on the move so that they can't make a proper response then they're living slapdash. They just don't realize it because they've become so speedy. Like the email I got from a friend yesterday: OK.thx. It's time to stop and regroup when you find you don't have time to type the word "thanks". |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
laptops (was: Win XP to Win 10?)
In message , Mayayana
writes: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote | Another advantage of laptops is that they have a poor man's UPS: brief | power outages don't crash them, even if the battery's in a poor state, | and can move from room to room without shutting down. | | I can see that a proper desktop, with a big keyboard and monitor, still | holds its attraction for those with a settled lifestyle, _or_ who are | willing to switch between devices when they travel or visit. Also, for | those needing special machines - number-crunching, gaming, and so on. | For me, the ability to now take this my main computer wherever I go (not | relying on syncing services) means I can't see me ever going back to a | desktop as my main machine So you've joined the army of Starbucks secretaries, earnestly staring at screens while they pretend to be drinking coffee? (Or is it earnestly drinking coffee while they pretend to look at screens? (-: [I don't actually go to the expensive coffee-shops.] I'm just the opposite of what you describe. When I use a laptop I have it plugged in, and I don't move Me too. I hardly use it on battery at all. from room to room. I'm also not so sure about "a poor man's UPS". You buy a laptop for maybe $500-1200 and a UPS for $50-80. There's nothing economical about a laptop. Small is expensive. I suppose I meant that the UPS function comes free, as it were, with a laptop, unless the battery's completely shot. We have a laptop that's only used for one thing: When I go away to the country and want to be able to read articles saved and/or listen to audio talks. No Internet. No typing. Just file storage and display. If that's the use - especially the no-typing part -and you're willing to switch between it and your desktop machine, I think a tablet would be better: longer battery life and lighter. I find it works OK for that. Otherwise, as far as I'm concerned, life's too short for laptops. Everyone's M Vs. Which brings up why tablets are such a bad idea. They're more mobile than a laptop, but with an even smaller screen, even less functionality, and limited file access. And for me, no keyboard. As for buying a case for them with a keyboard in it, doesn't that then just turn them into a very inferior laptop! (OK, with longer battery life.) But for your just-reading-and-listening, I'd have thought they're fine. [] But doesn't it depend a lot on how you use it? If you *must* write a report and your only free time is on a plane, then you use a laptop. If you can't stand to go on vacation for a week without having email, then you use a laptop (or cellphone). I don't do either of those things. Sometimes I miss my computer when I go away. I figure that's a good reason not to have access to it. (-: I do a fair amount of writing and reading, as well as software coding, image editing and web design. Sitting at a computer is best in a number of ways, but mainly it's about ergonomics. I can sit up straight, with a proper keyboard and trackball, and a 24" screen. I can sit or lie anywhere with my laptop. (Even on my lap, sometimes!) As long as there's a powerpoint nearby. [] A lot of people don't need to write reports. Many of them wonder why anyone needs something other than a cellphone. That seems to be the most typical that I see now. People have a laptop somewhere, for doing their taxes and such. But mostly they're just Facebookies -- "doing social", texting and shopping on their cellphones. I don't do any of the modern social media (I consider usenet a [very superior of course] social medium, of course). I rarely use my smartphone: I really only bought it as a replacement when my dumbphone died. About the only "app" (I hate that word) I use on it at all regularly is the wifi network grapher. My neighbor, a research biologist, recently called to ask if he could print something. He apparently has a laptop but no printer. He just uses the one at his lab. I don't have a functioning one at the moment; I rarely need to print. I used to do all my printing at work, when I was working. (I'm broken - not working - now.) Most of those people answer email from a phone. It works. But it's fooling oneself to think it's just the same thing made easy. No one writes in any serious way on a cellphone. If they're always on the move Thoroughly agree. [] a friend yesterday: OK.thx. It's time to stop and regroup when you find you don't have time to type the word "thanks". (-: [] -- J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
laptops
On 1/10/2019 8:59 AM, Mayayana wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote | Another advantage of laptops is that they have a poor man's UPS: brief | power outages don't crash them, even if the battery's in a poor state, | and can move from room to room without shutting down. | | I can see that a proper desktop, with a big keyboard and monitor, still | holds its attraction for those with a settled lifestyle, _or_ who are | willing to switch between devices when they travel or visit. Also, for | those needing special machines - number-crunching, gaming, and so on. | For me, the ability to now take this my main computer wherever I go (not | relying on syncing services) means I can't see me ever going back to a | desktop as my main machine So you've joined the army of Starbucks secretaries, earnestly staring at screens while they pretend to be drinking coffee? (Or is it earnestly drinking coffee while they pretend to look at screens? I'm just the opposite of what you describe. When I use a laptop I have it plugged in, and I don't move from room to room. I'm also not so sure about "a poor man's UPS". You buy a laptop for maybe $500-1200 and a UPS for $50-80. There's nothing economical about a laptop. Small is expensive. We have a laptop that's only used for one thing: When I go away to the country and want to be able to read articles saved and/or listen to audio talks. No Internet. No typing. Just file storage and display. I find it works OK for that. Otherwise, as far as I'm concerned, life's too short for laptops. Which brings up why tablets are such a bad idea. They're more mobile than a laptop, but with an even smaller screen, even less functionality, and limited file access. I can't put a DVD into a tablet and then use my choice of programs to read the files. But doesn't it depend a lot on how you use it? If you *must* write a report and your only free time is on a plane, then you use a laptop. If you can't stand to go on vacation for a week without having email, then you use a laptop (or cellphone). I don't do either of those things. Sometimes I miss my computer when I go away. I figure that's a good reason not to have access to it. I do a fair amount of writing and reading, as well as software coding, image editing and web design. Sitting at a computer is best in a number of ways, but mainly it's about ergonomics. I can sit up straight, with a proper keyboard and trackball, and a 24" screen. Using a laptop, to me, would be like eating dinner out of a paper cup with a toy fork because I want to be ready to dash out the door if necessary. I'm not that important and my life is not that busy that I need to live uncivilized, "on the edge of my seat". A lot of people don't need to write reports. Many of them wonder why anyone needs something other than a cellphone. That seems to be the most typical that I see now. People have a laptop somewhere, for doing their taxes and such. But mostly they're just Facebookies -- "doing social", texting and shopping on their cellphones. My neighbor, a research biologist, recently called to ask if he could print something. He apparently has a laptop but no printer. He just uses the one at his lab. Most of those people answer email from a phone. It works. But it's fooling oneself to think it's just the same thing made easy. No one writes in any serious way on a cellphone. If they're always on the move so that they can't make a proper response then they're living slapdash. They just don't realize it because they've become so speedy. Like the email I got from a friend yesterday: OK.thx. It's time to stop and regroup when you find you don't have time to type the word "thanks". But you can load any file onto a tablet using a free program called "Air Transfer" so CD/DVD not required. iPad is very light and better for travel. Easy to use on airplane. Admit typing vs. laptop not the best. -- Zaidy036 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
laptops
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Bill in Co writes: [] If I ever went out and bought one of these nice new svelte laptops, like I've seen on display at some stores here, I'd probably just scrap the latter two. I wonder if anybody gets so used to a laptop that it ends up replacing their desktop for almost everything they need to do (for home or limited work use, I mean). I bought my first laptop (W9x era), intending to use it only when travelling or in other situations where my tower machine couldn't be taken. (I also didn't think I'd get on with a trackpad.) It became my main machine - I was going to say rapidly, but it might have been gradually. I have since used laptops for all my computing needs - my desktop machines going initially weeks then months between being turned on, and I think it might be over a year now. (And I have got very used to a trackpad: I have a mouse, but rarely plug it in - of late, mainly for when the trackpad [driver] misbehaves rather than needing the differences.) I'd say my main initial concerns re laptops fell into three areas: limited keyboard, all-in-one-ness, and (in practice) no slots. Limited keyboard - I was fortunate in that my first laptop still had the sixpack; I _did_ find the second laptop irritating in having home and end combined with something else and needing the Fn key. (Fortunately this one has brought them back.) Also the lack of a numeric keypad (you get one on _most_ 15" or more laptops anyway these days) meant I couldn't use the Alt-numpad codes I'd memorised for things like the +/- symbol, but in practice I've found a little utility called AllChars actually easier (the sequences are easier to remember!). All-in-one-ness - i. e. if one part fails, you have to junk the lot. This hasn't been as much of a problem as I thought: things that have failed - disc drive was easy to replace; a screen wasn't _too_ hard; and a wireless card, I just used an external one. (That was on someone else's machine that had lots of USB and she didn't use them anyway; had it been me, I might have replaced the card - fiddly, but not difficult.) The one case that _is_ irritating is where - I think - the internal power supply (that takes the 19V or battery and gives the internal supplies) has failed and thus rendered the laptop dead, whereas I think most of it is actually alive. No slots (I say in practice because, although in theory laptops can have them, [a] many don't [b] the standards for laptop expansion slots change with bewildering rapidity) - I think I was fortunate in that my transition to laptops coincided with a large move of peripherals that had previously used cards, to USB. This has continued, accompanied by changes in desktop slot standards, from PCI (IDE was already dead) to PCI-E and later, as well as graphic card slots. These changes in both laptop and desktop slot standards have mostly _not_ been backward-compatible, unlike USB. My transition has probably also, if I'm honest, accompanied my changing outlook with ageing: I have less _desire_ to use things that need plug-in cards (and aren't available via USB). Another advantage of laptops is that they have a poor man's UPS: brief power outages don't crash them, even if the battery's in a poor state, and can move from room to room without shutting down. I can see that a proper desktop, with a big keyboard and monitor, still holds its attraction for those with a settled lifestyle, _or_ who are willing to switch between devices when they travel or visit. Also, for those needing special machines - number-crunching, gaming, and so on. For me, the ability to now take this my main computer wherever I go (not relying on syncing services) means I can't see me ever going back to a desktop as my main machine: in fact other than lethargy and nostalgia I'm not sure why I keep my desktop. But - this is just me; YMMV, and I'm certainly not saying anyone _should_ change. I just thought I'd answer Bill-in-Co's question from my own experience. JPG --- How about a three-way referendum, allowing second choices? When travelling, a Chromebook is more than sufficient. No matter what portable computer I take, almost all (perhaps all) of what I need to do while travelling will incur a web browser. E-mail, remoting to work, buying tickets, checking restaurant hours, getting directions and mapping, finding entertainment, ordering stuff, and just about anything I do while travelling is done via a web browser and that's what a Chromebook does. If I don't have the Internet while travelling (via wifi, cable, or cellular data), it doesn't matter what I bring since it won't be usable to me. My choice is one of convenience, not of functionality. I have a laptop, netbook, and Chromebook along with my smartphone and none are convenient nor comfortable nor speedy for entering a lot of text or doing much beyond using a web browser. The human interface of these portable devices suck. You could use a docking station to connect to a better monitor, keyboard, and mouse but that's only needed if you cannot afford a decent desktop PC. At home, the Chromebook collects dust. There is no way it or a tablet or a laptop (even those loaned to me from work) are robust enough in CPU and GPU to do my home-based computer work. I see no reason to struggle to perform compiling, graphics editing, documentation, or other tasks using an underpowered laptop or less. I can afford a robust desktop along with convenient portable computers and a decent smartphone. If you can afford just one choice, what you choose depends on whether you really need to tote something with you when moving around. My smartphone suffices for most portability needs. The Chromebook is for everyone in the group to share and is better for keyboarding than the crappy touch keyboard on a smartphone. On vacation, the resorts have their own computer rooms and you can find lots of Internet cafes or even libraries, so you could afford to forego bringing your own. If you can afford more than one choice for a computing platform, pick those that match your needs under varying conditions, and that likely results in choosing more than one computer. When I'm at home, I use Charmin Ultra Strong in mega rolls. When I'm away from home, I use whatever cheap toilet paper the store, resort, or other place provides. That doesn't mean I prefer the cheap stuff. It's simply convenient but not preferred. Using a Chromebook, laptop, or netbook is like you toting along the cheap toilet paper because it is lightweight (both in weight and in computing power). It is possible to use PCs of others (Internet cafes, libraries, resorts) but that relies on someone else to provide the cheap toilet paper. I could tote a screwdriver in my pocket and use it for various purposes, like as a hammer, pry bar, ice chopper, door wedge, and even as a screwdriver. However, at home I have the proper tools for the jobs. I would hardly equate a single screwdriver to the multitudes of toolboxes, tool cabinets, pegboards, and benches with all my tools. I also carry a couple of Gerber mini-multitools in my pockets. Very handy when away from my cache of tools at home but nowhere near the same functionality. I could use the serrated saw in the minitool to cut a hole in sheetrock but I have much better tools for that at home, or even in my car in a toolbox. I have tools of convenience, tools that are portable, and tools best for the job because I can afford to choose. I'd hate to be so poor as to choose just one and try to use it under all scenarios. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
laptops
"Zaidy036" wrote
| But you can load any file onto a tablet using a free program called "Air | Transfer" so CD/DVD not required. Air transfer from....? You've suddenly brought in a need for a computer and bluetooth in order to read files on this supposedly portable device. What if I have 3 DVDs I want to access? I'm going to load it all via bluetooth onto an overpriced iPad? Wouldn't it be easier to just pack up my computer in styrofoam and take that? And then I can read on a human-sized screen. We actually have an iPad here. I've never really looked at it. I have no reason to research how and if I can shoehorn the file formats I want onto that tiny device and whether I can get good software to open them. My ladyfriend bought the iPad. She uses it only occasionally, to write email when away travelling. | iPad is very light and better for | travel. Easy to use on airplane. Admit typing vs. laptop not the best. | A lot of people seem to agree with you. All I see is a smaller screen with more limited functionality with a lot less control. Even when I travel with a laptop, I'm not carrying it around to coffee shops or using it on planes. I pack it and use it at the other end. So losing a couple of pounds holds no appeal. I once went with a friend to check out tablets. I asked the Apple disciple if I could access the file system on an iPad. He didn't understand. After much conferring he said that, yes, there's an app for that. It's called Exporer! I though it was very telling that he hadn't thought of managing files. Then we went to the Microsoft store. They had tablets with full Windows for about $500. That was impressive. It really was Windows, not just a limited kiosk OS. But then I realized: I could buy the same thing as a desktop or laptop, probably for less money, with a lot better functionality. For me, since I don't have to carry it all day, smaller just means less functional. A tricycle saves on gas, yes, but it doesn't do what a car does. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|