John Cartmell wrote:

Avoid Microsoft. Their OSs are designed to make you have to upgrade at
too-short intervals. I'm using a 10+ year old computer. It has had a new
processor, new hard drives, more memory and OS upgrades. I've added the means
to allow networking, USB, &c. But in that time you'll have purchased 4-6 new
Windows machines at far greater expense. I'm limited by speed (though it went
far faster than the equivalent Windows machines when new and when it had a new
processor added) and by colours/resolution (32 thousand colours is its maximum
at a reasonable resolution). But it still runs all the software of the last 10
years. Of course I now have an upgrade - but that also runs all the old
software even if some has to be done through a form of emulation - and the two
will happily run in parallel. I have no expectation of the old machine being
pensioned off for another 3-5 years (or more). That may be exceptional; but
your expectation of PCs is exceptionally bad.

You are not really comparing like with like. Your old system is no
longer leading edge. If you thrust software on it that required 10 times
the CPU performance to even work, it would not hack it at anything
approaching a suitable speed. That was what Grunff was attempting to
maintain.

I still use a 10 year old platform for email and other tasks. It does
them as well as it ever did and never suffers problems with the usual
Wintel malware but I can hardly claim it is in any way comparable to
modern hardware performance wise in spite of having a hugely efficient
multi tasking OS.




--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/