"sctvguy1" wrote in message ...

Leave him to his Windows or Mac, you are only poking a bear.
I, myself, use PCLinuxOS, have since 2008. Before that, OS/2,
never Windows. You're ****ing in the wind with this guy.

Am I supposed to demonstrate my intelligence and wisdom by publicly announcing
that I will abandon Windows on the basis of statements from people who know
ever so much more than I do?

I have yet to hear a /good/ reason why I should switch to Linux (or the Mac,
for that matter). And I mean a /good/ one. If Linux is categorically better
than Windows or the Mac OS, you should have no difficulty convincing me and
others.

I can just imagine your reaction if I visited your homes and suggested you
throw out whatever speakers you currently own and buy QUADs or Martin-Logans.

On 02/12/2013 21:45, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"sctvguy1" wrote in message ...

Leave him to his Windows or Mac, you are only poking a bear.
I, myself, use PCLinuxOS, have since 2008. Before that, OS/2,
never Windows. You're ****ing in the wind with this guy.

Am I supposed to demonstrate my intelligence and wisdom by publicly
announcing that I will abandon Windows on the basis of statements from
people who know ever so much more than I do?

I have yet to hear a /good/ reason why I should switch to Linux (or the
Mac, for that matter). And I mean a /good/ one. If Linux is
categorically better than Windows or the Mac OS, you should have no
difficulty convincing me and others.

I can just imagine your reaction if I visited your homes and suggested
you throw out whatever speakers you currently own and buy QUADs or
Martin-Logans.

Or, to improve the analogy slightly, Bose.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

"John Williamson" wrote in message ...
On 02/12/2013 21:45, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"sctvguy1" wrote in message ...

I can just imagine your reaction if I visited your homes and suggested
you throw out whatever speakers you currently own and buy QUADs or
Martin-Logans.

Or, to improve the analogy slightly, Bose.

That destroys the analogy.

"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
On 02/12/2013 21:45, William Sommerwerck wrote:
I can just imagine your reaction if I visited your homes and suggested
you throw out whatever speakers you currently own and buy QUADs or
Martin-Logans.

Or, to improve the analogy slightly, Bose.

:-) Now they *should* be free like Linux :-)

Trevor.

On 12/2/13 15:45 , William Sommerwerck wrote:
"sctvguy1" wrote in message ...

Leave him to his Windows or Mac, you are only poking a bear.
I, myself, use PCLinuxOS, have since 2008. Before that, OS/2,
never Windows. You're ****ing in the wind with this guy.

Am I supposed to demonstrate my intelligence and wisdom by publicly
announcing that I will abandon Windows on the basis of statements from
people who know ever so much more than I do?

I have yet to hear a /good/ reason why I should switch to Linux (or the
Mac, for that matter). And I mean a /good/ one. If Linux is
categorically better than Windows or the Mac OS, you should have no
difficulty convincing me and others.

I can just imagine your reaction if I visited your homes and suggested
you throw out whatever speakers you currently own and buy QUADs or
Martin-Logans.


I'm forever amazed by these kinds of ****ing contests. Reminds me of
the Ford/Chevy bareknuckle brawls that used to erupt in my neighborhood
in the 50s/60s. My old man stopped speaking to the guy next door over
it. And this kind of crap went on for 30 years. There never seems an end
to it.

He never said a word to me about my Studebaker, though.

First sign of wisdom I'd seen from the man.


You know, you likes what you likes. You uses what you uses. Sometimes
the reasons are logical. Sometimes they're not. And rarely does it matter.

Geez.

Better, faster, smoother, cleaner. User friendly, technically
advanced. Cures frustrations, cancer, baldness, hot checks and door to
door salesmen.

Really.

The only thing that matters is the purpose for which an OS is
selected, and the effectiveness in the hands of the person driving the bus.

Any opinions, recommendations, insistences, condemnations,
verifications, or screaming fits of cannabinol induced engineering are
only so much noise.

Seriously. Mac-Windows-Ford-Chevy-infinity. Dr. Casey, you may open. I
bid 4 no trump.



And for the record, I have Altec-Lansing A7's, 846's, 503's, 105's,
JBL L200T3's, Klipsch 1.5's, Heresy II's, KP-250's, and Apogee Duettas.
I don't care for Martin Logans in theatre applications.

And I use Shure SE846 in-ears when I'm working. Or mowing the lawn.

Discuss.



p

On 12/2/13 15:59 , John Williamson wrote:
On 02/12/2013 21:45, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"sctvguy1" wrote in message ...

Leave him to his Windows or Mac, you are only poking a bear.
I, myself, use PCLinuxOS, have since 2008. Before that, OS/2,
never Windows. You're ****ing in the wind with this guy.

Am I supposed to demonstrate my intelligence and wisdom by publicly
announcing that I will abandon Windows on the basis of statements from
people who know ever so much more than I do?

I have yet to hear a /good/ reason why I should switch to Linux (or the
Mac, for that matter). And I mean a /good/ one. If Linux is
categorically better than Windows or the Mac OS, you should have no
difficulty convincing me and others.

I can just imagine your reaction if I visited your homes and suggested
you throw out whatever speakers you currently own and buy QUADs or
Martin-Logans.

Or, to improve the analogy slightly, Bose.




Buy

Other

Sound

Equipment.


memberfdic

On 12/2/13 16:31 , Trevor wrote:
"John Williamson" wrote in message
...
On 02/12/2013 21:45, William Sommerwerck wrote:
I can just imagine your reaction if I visited your homes and suggested
you throw out whatever speakers you currently own and buy QUADs or
Martin-Logans.

Or, to improve the analogy slightly, Bose.

:-) Now they *should* be free like Linux :-)

Trevor.





Even then, they'd be overpriced.

In "D. Peter Maus" writes:

You know, you likes what you likes. You uses what you uses. Sometimes
the reasons are logical. Sometimes they're not. And rarely does it matter.

I couldn't care less what people use at home, it's when they drag
these systems into the workplace it becomes my problem. Apple and
Microsoft are not professional products. They're fine for the home,
and I wish to hell they'd stay there.

I don't care for Martin Logans in theatre applications.

Martin-Logan original CLS in a non-theater application. Luv 'em.

And I use Shure SE846 in-ears when I'm working. Or mowing the lawn.

Discuss.

Western Electric 509W's with Sennheiser drivers, the original
fiddly bits carefully preserved.

--
--------------------------- Tim Mullen ---------------------------
Am I in your basement? Looking for antique televisions, fans, etc.
finger this account or call anytime: (212)-463-0552
----------- Living in the future, playing in the past ------------

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ...

You know, you likes what you likes. You uses what you uses. Sometimes the
reasons are logical. Sometimes they're not. And rarely does it matter.

Agreed. And I didn't start this particular urinary exchange.


And for the record, I have Altec-Lansing A7's, 846's, 503's, 105's, JBL
L200T3's, Klipsch 1.5's, Heresy II's, KP-250's, and Apogee Duettas. I don't
care for Martin Logans in theatre applications.

That's really an eclectic mixture. (I assume you aren't mixing Apogee and
Klipsch in the same system.)

"Tim Mullen" wrote in message ...

I couldn't care less what people use at home, it's when they drag
these systems into the workplace it becomes my problem. Apple
and Microsoft are not professional products. They're fine for the
home, and I wish to hell they'd stay there.

I don't understand what you mean by "drag into the workplace". Are you talking
about people using their own computers and the security/maintenance problems
this causes? Or something else?

On 12/03/2013 04:23 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ...

You know, you likes what you likes. You uses what you uses. Sometimes
the reasons are logical. Sometimes they're not. And rarely does it
matter.

Agreed. And I didn't start this particular urinary exchange.


Actually, you did. This is your thread, William. I vote for Cambridge
Audio Model Six.

"dave" wrote in message
m...
On 12/03/2013 04:23 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ...

You know, you likes what you likes. You uses what you uses.
Sometimes the reasons are logical. Sometimes they're not.
And rarely does it matter.

Agreed. And I didn't start this particular urinary exchange.

Actually, you did. This is your thread, William.

I didn't start the argument about the superiority of one OS over another. I am
no more responsible than the people who build highways are for auto accidents.


I vote for Cambridge [SoundWorks] Model Six.

Henry was clever, wasn't he? I have not only the original KLH Model 11 FM, but
the sourceless recreation of it, the Cambridge SoundWorks Model 11. I'm
currently restoring a pair of original Advents. It's probably the "biggest
bang for the buck" speaker ever, and certainly one of the most-"listenable".

On 12/2/13 18:57 , Tim Mullen wrote:
In "D. Peter Maus" writes:

You know, you likes what you likes. You uses what you uses. Sometimes
the reasons are logical. Sometimes they're not. And rarely does it matter.

I couldn't care less what people use at home, it's when they drag
these systems into the workplace it becomes my problem. Apple and
Microsoft are not professional products. They're fine for the home,
and I wish to hell they'd stay there.

I don't care for Martin Logans in theatre applications.

Martin-Logan original CLS in a non-theater application. Luv 'em.

And I use Shure SE846 in-ears when I'm working. Or mowing the lawn.

Discuss.

Western Electric 509W's with Sennheiser drivers, the original
fiddly bits carefully preserved.


Now, THAT's something I've not tried.

Interesting.

On 12/3/13 06:23 , William Sommerwerck wrote:
"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ...

You know, you likes what you likes. You uses what you uses. Sometimes
the reasons are logical. Sometimes they're not. And rarely does it
matter.

Agreed. And I didn't start this particular urinary exchange.


And for the record, I have Altec-Lansing A7's, 846's, 503's, 105's,
JBL L200T3's, Klipsch 1.5's, Heresy II's, KP-250's, and Apogee
Duettas. I don't care for Martin Logans in theatre applications.

That's really an eclectic mixture. (I assume you aren't mixing Apogee
and Klipsch in the same system.)


Um....No. The Apogees are in their own, acoustically modified room.

dave wrote:

On 12/01/2013 03:15 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

dave wrote:

On 11/26/2013 01:37 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

dave wrote:

On 11/25/2013 04:18 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:


Are you always like this?


Yes. You've shown your ass several times, so it's no holds barred. I
use Window. I use Linux. I just bought a second Android tablet. The
first was defective, and died after a few weeks. I've used operating
systems you've never seen or heard of. The first was over 30 years ago.
The company that created that OS and built the hardware was out of
business. We had $60,000 tied up in the two systems, so I fixed both
hardware and software problems for the next three years. They bought new
computers after I quit. How many 8" single sided floppy disk drives have
you repaired or replaced?

I worked out of Blue Cross in Phoenix. We had hard disk drives the size
of washing machines, IBM punch cards (along with the room full of ladies
to keypunch them). 2 inch magnetic tape was another favored portable
mode of data transportation. As I recall the 8" [truly] floppy was still
in the lab stage at that point.

It took two stories of equipment to print a blue lock box full of
medical bills.

I was curious about the crude language, do you have anger issues?


Crude? Are you a Nun?



--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

In "William Sommerwerck" writes:

"Tim Mullen" wrote in message ...

I couldn't care less what people use at home, it's when they drag
these systems into the workplace it becomes my problem. Apple
and Microsoft are not professional products. They're fine for the
home, and I wish to hell they'd stay there.

I don't understand what you mean by "drag into the workplace". Are you talking
about people using their own computers and the security/maintenance problems
this causes? Or something else?

Something else, something far more insidious -- the belief that because
their chosen platform works fine for them at home, it oughta be just peachy
in any enviroment. It becomes tiring explaining to bean counters that, yes
you can buy 3TB disk drives for $100, no they won't work here and the ones
I need are a lot more expensive. Yes, Netgear switches are a tenth the
cost of a Cisco, no we can't get by with Netgear.

It's as if people believed Yugos, Ferraris, and Mack trucks were all
the same because they all have four wheels.

Developers are just as bad. The application worked fine on their garage
peecee, why is it a problem that it only runs on a Mac? Well, I need my
machines to play well with others, and Macs don't. Certain applications
now only run under MacOSX 10.7. I run a CXFS shop. CXFS5.7 doesn't support
MacOSX 10.7. So now I have to upgrade a core infrastructure of 40 machines
just because of one developer.

--
--------------------------- Tim Mullen ---------------------------
Am I in your basement? Looking for antique televisions, fans, etc.
finger this account or call anytime: (212)-463-0552
----------- Living in the future, playing in the past ------------

On 12/03/2013 12:59 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

dave wrote:



I was curious about the crude language, do you have anger issues?


Crude? Are you a Nun?


(As if nuns are notoriously prudish or something.) I like to think as
professionals we should exhibit a modicum of common decency and show
some respect for the craft and the readers and each other. I'm not
trying to go all Clifton Webb on you or anything, but as a talk show
host from before the mandatory dump button I still get an epinephrine
jolt when somebody lets a "7 deadly" (or something close) fly.

If that is your custom I apologize for misunderstanding your culture.

I'm going to hang-up on myself now.

On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 05:50:20 -0800, dave wrote:

On 11/26/2013 05:58 PM, Trevor wrote:
"dave" wrote in message


If there is a task there is an application for it.

Agreed, unfortunately they are often rather poor for consumer applications,
and drivers for a lot of hardware in current use by consumers is often
lacking also.
For server use Linux is king, for consumer applications, definitely not.
I've been hoping for a decade or two that will change, still waiting
unfortunately.
No one is stopping you using whatever you like though, but your fear of
Windows is not shared by everyone.


I don't fear Windows, I refuse to pay for an operating system, without
which a computer is not really a computer. Microsoft has all the charm
of an East German policeman in 1979. I have an XP netbook. I am going to
get a refurb Win7 box when XP support goes away in March. Just to
program my iPod, if nothing else. It would be way too sluggish for my
social routine, however.

The Kernel has thousands of drivers already installed. Please name a
consumer device (other than Apple) that you would like to use with Linux
that had a driver issue. I have found Linux to be way more plug-and-play
than Windows, and this has been getting moreso in the past few years.
Usually you need to boot a CD to install something to Windows; virtually
unheard of in Linux.

I have occasional issues using Linux with the very latest video cards,
iPods (for obvious reasons) and weird industrial connectivity (serial
usually TIA-485) cards. Other than that linux is very plug and play, and
has very noticeably better support for legacy printers and some scanners.

MS is currently getting serious about abandoning ALL older devices. It
may be enough to drive industrial use to linux.

?-)

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 14:24:09 +1100, "Trevor" wrote:


But I do
encounter this a lot with companies who claim to support Linux but don't
really. (Not that a lot of the same companies also fail to support their
Windows stuff as well.)

True, but anyone who argues there is *more* support for Linux is a liar.

Not really a liar, but not looking at it the same way. Linux support does
seem to expect some contribution to the solution from the user, unlike the
MS world where they cannot trust the user to plug in the stuff. More a
different world view than a comparable situation. Such is FOSS vs M$
viewpoint.

?-)

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 14:29:28 +1100, "Trevor" wrote:


"dave" wrote in message
...
http://www.camerahacker.com/Digital/..._example.shtml

http://www.softpedia.com/reviews/lin...ew-49016.shtml

Color me unimpressed with all Linux photo apps compared to PS/Lightroom.
Most Linux apps are good value for money though :-)

Trevor.

There is some truth in that, however i use a windows port of Irfanview in
the workplace on a regular basis.

YMMV

?-)

On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 04:37:07 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

PC makers include Windows because Microsoft used monopolistic
methods to crush any competition.

This was true in the days of MS-DOS, when Microsoft obliged computer makers to
put DOS on all their machines, if they wanted a license. Microsoft took a lot
of flak for that, and it eventually ended. I don't believe it occurs with
Windows.

Incorrect. I personally got hit with a M$ windows version that refused to
run on top of DRDOS. And the practice continues until today. M$ actually
lost the lawsuit that time because they were too obvious.

?-)

"josephkk" wrote in message
...
Color me unimpressed with all Linux photo apps compared to PS/Lightroom.
Most Linux apps are good value for money though :-)

There is some truth in that, however i use a windows port of Irfanview in
the workplace on a regular basis.

Me too as a simple photo viewer, hardly the same thing though.
And was Irfanview originally ported from Linux to Windows, or vice versa?

Trevor.

On 17 Dec 2013, "Trevor" wrote in rec.audio.pro:

Me too as a simple photo viewer, hardly the same thing though.
And was Irfanview originally ported from Linux to Windows, or vice
versa?

Irfanview is only a Windows program. There is no native Linux port.

"Nil" wrote in message
...
On 17 Dec 2013, "Trevor" wrote in rec.audio.pro:
"josephkk" wrote in message
...
Color me unimpressed with all Linux photo apps compared to PS/Lightroom.
Most Linux apps are good value for money though :-)

There is some truth in that, however i use a windows port of Irfanview in
the workplace on a regular basis.

Me too as a simple photo viewer, hardly the same thing though.
And was Irfanview originally ported from Linux to Windows, or vice versa?
}
} Irfanview is only a Windows program. There is no native Linux port.

So no relevence whatsoever to the dicussion then! There are decent viewers
for Linux of course, but still no decent editors IMO, ony Gimpy ones.

Trevor.

"josephkk" wrote in message
news
MS is currently getting serious about abandoning ALL older devices.
It may be enough to drive industrial use to linux.

It's not Microsoft that makes the choice -- it's the manufacturer of the
device that needs a driver. It's annoying to own a product you're fond of,
then discover there's no driver for a new operating system.

If you're going to criticize Microsoft on this point, it should be for its
failure to allow serial devices * to work with USB ports. Oddly, the only
support Microsoft is allowing parallel printers to connect to USB. It requires
a $15 adapter, and works nicely.

* This is assuming the driver will run properly under the new OS.

"josephkk" wrote in message
...

Linux support does seem to expect some contribution to the
solution from the user, unlike the MS world where they cannot
trust the user to plug in the stuff.

Shouldn't /any/ device simply plug in and work, regardless of the expertise of
the user? The computer industry has a long way to go on this.


More a different world view than a comparable situation.
Such is FOSS vs M$ viewpoint.

What's wrong with making money? Profit should be a strong spur to producing
the best-possible product. Of course, that assumes you /want/ to produce the
best-possible product.

"josephkk" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 04:37:07 -0800, "William Sommerwerck"
wrote:

PC makers include Windows because Microsoft used monopolistic
methods to crush any competition.

This was true in the days of MS-DOS, when Microsoft obliged computer
makers to put DOS on all their machines, if they wanted a license.
Microsoft took a lot of flak for that, and it eventually ended. I don't
believe it occurs with Windows.

Incorrect. I personally got hit with a M$ windows version that refused to
run on top of DRDOS. And the practice continues until today. M$ actually
lost the lawsuit that time because they were too obvious.

Windows no longer runs on top of DOS. So how does it still occur?

By the way, I misstated. Microsoft did not require computer makers to put DOS
on all their machines. Rather, they had to pay the licensing fee for every
machine, whether or not it had DOS on it.

Let's not forget that Apple has a monopoly on its hardware and OS.

On 12/18/2013 03:00 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"josephkk" wrote in message


More a different world view than a comparable situation.
Such is FOSS vs M$ viewpoint.

What's wrong with making money? Profit should be a strong spur to
producing the best-possible product. Of course, that assumes you /want/
to produce the best-possible product.

Profit actually forces companies to cut corners, advertise more and
apply the monopolistic pressures described upstream, rather than put
more resources actually into a product.

What is the Windows version of Gparted?

On 12/18/2013 03:07 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:


By the way, I misstated. Microsoft did not require computer makers to
put DOS on all their machines. Rather, they had to pay the licensing fee
for every machine, whether or not it had DOS on it.

Let's not forget that Apple has a monopoly on its hardware and OS.

Apple is a closed garden, complete with fashion police, and a dress
code. They can have their little party. Android is taking over.

"dave" wrote in message
m...
On 12/18/2013 03:00 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"josephkk" wrote in message

More a different world view than a comparable situation.
Such is FOSS vs M$ viewpoint.

What's wrong with making money? Profit should be a strong spur to
producing the best-possible product. Of course, that assumes you /want/
to produce the best-possible product.

Profit actually forces companies to cut corners, advertise more and apply
the monopolistic pressures described upstream, rather than put more
resources actually into a product.

Other than honesty and conscientiousness, how does /not/ making money
encourage someone to produce high-quality open-source software?


What is the Windows version of Gparted?

I used to use Partition Manager. It was bit klunky, but it worked.

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message ...

I used to use Partition Manager.

Whoops. Partition Magic.

On 12/18/2013 06:58 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message ...
I used to use Partition Manager.

Whoops. Partition Magic.


"Partition Magic allows you to create, resize and merge partitions on
your hard drive without destroying data.

Last update 3 Nov. 2011 Licence Free to try | $69.95

OS Support Windows NT, Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows 8

Downloads Total: 4,924,031 | Last week: 11,853

Ranking #1 in HardDisk Tools"

$70?

On 12/18/2013 06:46 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"dave" wrote in message
m...
On 12/18/2013 03:00 AM, William Sommerwerck wrote:
"josephkk" wrote in message

More a different world view than a comparable situation.
Such is FOSS vs M$ viewpoint.

What's wrong with making money? Profit should be a strong spur to
producing the best-possible product. Of course, that assumes you /want/
to produce the best-possible product.

Profit actually forces companies to cut corners, advertise more and
apply the monopolistic pressures described upstream, rather than put
more resources actually into a product.

Other than honesty and conscientiousness, how does /not/ making money
encourage someone to produce high-quality open-source software?

For the fun of it? To mock Microsoft and Apple? Because they are true
artists? Most of them take donations; some are underwritten.

I like the free software because I enjoy messing with computers and do
not want to beg over the phone for a new 20 digit code every time I
brick one and have to start over.

"dave" wrote in message
...

"Partition Magic allows you to create, resize and merge partitions on
your hard drive without destroying data.

$70?

I paid $50 or so for my copy 15 years ago. When per-byte hard-drive capacity
was far more expensive, that was a reasonable price.

William Sommerwerck wrote:

If you're going to criticize Microsoft on this point, it should be
for its failure to allow serial devices * to work with USB ports.

New to me, I have had three serial somethings on usb-things on cash register
computers.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 03:07:41 -0800, William Sommerwerck wrote
(in article ):

Let's not forget that Apple has a monopoly on its hardware and OS.
------------------------------snip------------------------------

You ever see the Windows Phone, the Surface, or the Surface Pro?

Microsoft has stated in the last year that they're beginning to realize the
value of controlling both the hardware and the operating system, because then
they can tailor each in such a way as to optimize it in every possible way
without regard to weird, off-brand hardware using dodgy components.

An old pal of mine has told me for years that the main computers Microsoft
does use to fine-tune Windows are Dell models. I would consider those the de
facto models to get, almost the "IBM" of today. I never had a problem with
any of the Dells we've bought over the years.

I do think it's problematic to use *any* operating system beyond 7-8 years,
because eventually, you're kind of on an isolated island where you're unable
to upgrade and it gets harder and harder to get support. And when
mission-critical outboard peripherals fail, you eventually get forced into
upgrading both hardware and OS.

--MFW

Peter Larsen wrote:
William Sommerwerck wrote:

If you're going to criticize Microsoft on this point, it should be
for its failure to allow serial devices * to work with USB ports.

New to me, I have had three serial somethings on usb-things on cash register
computers.

Me too, however I have encountered counterfeit FTDI usb-to-serial devices
that were flaky. They did not have genuine chipsets but some cheap knockoff.
You know things are bad when the Chinese are knocking one another off.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Peter Larsen" wrote in message
b.com...
William Sommerwerck wrote:

If you're going to criticize Microsoft on this point, it should be
for its failure to allow serial devices * to work with USB ports.

New to me, I have had three serial somethings on USB-things on
cash register computers.

I apologize for my sloppy writing. I meant "provide a systematic solution".

When I upgraded to a new computer, I found that even the adapters from
reputable companies would not work. The result was that I had to replace three
serial devices with USB equivalents. (Yes, the adapters were correctly
installed.)

The //apparent// reason is that they only work with software that //directly//
addresses the serial port. Stick a driver in there, and all bets are off.

William Sommerwerck wrote:

I apologize for my sloppy writing. I meant "provide a systematic solution".

When I upgraded to a new computer, I found that even the adapters from
reputable companies would not work. The result was that I had to replace three
serial devices with USB equivalents. (Yes, the adapters were correctly
installed.)

I've never seen that happen.

The //apparent// reason is that they only work with software that //directly//
addresses the serial port. Stick a driver in there, and all bets are off.

I would think it would be quite the opposite. The driver causes the port
to appear as a device file, and software that just opens up the device file
and writes to it will be fine.

If you need the device to be COM1: because that is what is hardcoded into
badly-written software, it's possible to do some device mapping to make the
USB device show up under a different name.

The problems would occur when software attempts to talk to the device
directly, which I _hope_ no Windows code would ever do. Old DOS code did a
lot of that, but Windows 95 finally brought I/O management into the 1970s
and removed any benefits to that kind of stuff.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"Marc Wielage" wrote in message
.com...
I do think it's problematic to use *any* operating system beyond 7-8
years,
because eventually, you're kind of on an isolated island where you're
unable
to upgrade and it gets harder and harder to get support. And when
mission-critical outboard peripherals fail, you eventually get forced into
upgrading both hardware and OS.

Well XP is a lot older than that and still fine for most purposes, and still
used by a lot of people. Most people simply upgrade the OS when they buy a
new computer, you won't find a new one with XP on it any more even if you
wanted it. And you probably won't find al the necessary drivers if you did
want to downgrade.
Most people don't necessarily need to race out and upgrade their existing
Windows 7 computers to Windows 8 though.

Trevor.