On 5/12/2016 6:03 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
Don Y writes:

On 5/11/2016 12:09 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
It appears they have cut all XP users off from even the old updates ... I

Support has officially ended for XP. That means: no NEW patches and
OLD patches are available only at *their* convenience.

had to reinstall XP Pro in one of my laptops , and have been unable to get
the updates they used to have from before they dropped support .

Yes, you should have been maintaining your own *personal* copy of
the updates, drivers, etc. I copy the entire support page for each
of my computers onto "local media" so I can have access to those
files after the vendor decides to render them obsolete.

I agree. Anyone who wants to maintain an antique computer or antique
software needs to first make sure they have everything they will need
for the foreseeable future. That kind of planning and preparation should
have started years ago.

The problem is that "antique" is a handful of years. If you want any
real control over your environment, you have to be proactive in monitoring
the "support" that is available (as it varies over time -- old updates
are no longer available, etc.)

My oldest "PC" is a Compaq Portable 386 (lunchbox) -- from the late 80's.
http://www.thecomputerarchive.com/thearchive/Computers/PC%20portables/Compaq%20Portable%20386.PDF
A dog by today's standards. But, gives me an ISA box (I have the optional
expansion chassis installed) as well as 5" floppy capabilities. *But*,
I've made a conscious effort to have all of the files needed to rebuild
the machine available (e.g., the "setup" mode is performed from floppies,
not some hot key at POST).

My oldest Sun box is a Voyager:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/RARE-Sun-Voyager-Sparc-Station-Model-146-NOT-WORKING-/230512938375
(Hmmm... for $500, I'd consider selling mine -- and mine actually WORKS!)
Again, it's imperative to have squirreled away the various bits of software
to make it *usable*!

Is this yet
another move to force us to use their latest crap OS ?

You can update to Vista or 7even (or even 8/8.1) -- if you don't like 10.

Windows has improved over the years in some ways, so the latest versions
may be attractive to some people. (I'd say that 7 is better than XP in
almost every way, and I'm not even a fan of Windows.)

I have a 7even laptop as well as a Vista laptop (and a W2K and an XP).

I tried 7even on one of my workstations and found it more sluggish
than XP -- esp at application startup. I've noticed that FrameMaker
likes to hang when run on the Vista laptop (haven't tried it on the
7even laptop/desktop).

Yet another incentive to NOT upgrade...

On 05/11/2016 04:16 PM, dpb wrote:

[snip]

Did you get what you needed? I'm pretty sure I've got the SP3 download
still on the machine here (and yes, I'm still on XP, too, with no plans
to change to any newer MS OS--when this machine finally dies, I'll go
either Mac or a --ix flavor instead). If you didn't find it, post back
and I'll do some more serious searching...

SP3 won't install unless you have one of the other service packs
already installed. Unless your XP disk has SP1 or SP2 already on it,
you'll need that one too.

I recently installed XP. Then SP2 and SP3, then the updates. I was using
Autopatcher, and kept the directory from the last time MS had new
updates for XP.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

| I agree. Anyone who wants to maintain an antique computer or antique
| software needs to first make sure they have everything they will need
| for the foreseeable future. That kind of planning and preparation should
| have started years ago.
|

While you're teasing people about antiques, be
sure you download Win7 SP1. There's no reason to
count on anything from Microsoft. Broken links is
almost an industry for them. They often rework
things in an attempt to coerce their customers.

(I happen to be writing this on my home-built,
6 month old, 8-core XP rocketship. I have a Win7
computer but it's too slow and naggy for regular
use.

On 05/12/2016 8:43 AM, Don Y wrote:
....

My oldest "PC" is a Compaq Portable 386 (lunchbox) -- from the late 80's.
http://www.thecomputerarchive.com/thearchive/Computers/PC%20portables/Compaq%20Portable%20386.PDF
....

I spent a memorable summer lugging one of those back and forth between
Oak Ridge and Raleigh developing code for online coal elemental S
analyzer--we were using the NCSU NE department's high-intensity neutron
source for the developmental work; the analyzer was a gamma-spec device
destined for power plant emissions monitoring control...

While the laptop belonged to the company was consulting through, I had
to add the '387 coprocessor on my own in order to be able to get a
spectrum fit and peak-stripping computation done in under minutes in
order to have any chance whatever of getting anywhere--they were too
cheap to buy a second actual hardware system and the other developer
doing the user-interface commandeered it 'cuz had to have access to the
actual hardware while I did the physics end...

Oh, the memories...

--

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:25:57 PM UTC-5, Terry Coombs wrote:

ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:09:31 PM UTC-5, Terry Coombs wrote:

It appears they have cut all XP users off from even the old updates
... I had to reinstall XP Pro in one of my laptops , and have been
unable to get the updates they used to have from before they dropped
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
support . Is this yet another move to force us to use their latest
crap OS ? Is there anywhere else these updates can be gotten ?

Snag


Just wake up from a coma? There haven't been any updates
in a long time.

Really ? I knew there were no NEW updates , but until recently all the
existing updates were available . Take a class in reading comprehension ,
you obviously did not understand what I wrote .

Snag


Take a class in not being an asshole and you'd know that
Microsoft ceased support for XP over a year ago. Doesn't
matter about updates, new or old, you're just setting
yourself up to be hacked. But as ill-mannered as you are
you probably deserve it.

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:54:25 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:

"Terry Coombs" writes:

Uhhh , maybe because the business community is still heavily invested in
XP ?

It's not. XP has a miniscule share of the business community. They're
primarily on windows 7.


Thank you. I work for a global company with 10 of thousands
employees and last year we were told to upgrade to W-7 or
you're on your own. No upgrades, no support, and no whining
if you don't upgrade and are hacked.

On 2016-05-12, wrote:

I know M$ is not making any money on me but I don't care. They are not
providing anything I want.

Have you tried Linux?

nb

ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:25:57 PM UTC-5, Terry Coombs wrote:

ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:09:31 PM UTC-5, Terry Coombs wrote:

It appears they have cut all XP users off from even the old updates
... I had to reinstall XP Pro in one of my laptops , and have been
unable to get the updates they used to have from before they
dropped
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
support . Is this yet another move to force us to use their latest
crap OS ? Is there anywhere else these updates can be gotten ?

Snag


Just wake up from a coma? There haven't been any updates
in a long time.

Really ? I knew there were no NEW updates , but until recently all
the existing updates were available . Take a class in reading
comprehension , you obviously did not understand what I wrote .

Snag


Take a class in not being an asshole and you'd know that
Microsoft ceased support for XP over a year ago. Doesn't
matter about updates, new or old, you're just setting
yourself up to be hacked. But as ill-mannered as you are
you probably deserve it.

You should talk about being an asshole ... M$ has said that the existing
updates will still be available , and they are thru a 3rd party . But they
are making it as difficult as they can to get them ... and I believe it's
because they want everybody to move over to their newest revenue generator ,
W10 .
I choose not to update , too many chances for snooping into what's none of
their (or your) business with the new OS , not to mention that their new
business model is to "rent" applications .
The wife has a "new" laptop running W7 , which as far as I can tell is
just Vista - the lousiest OS they ever made - with a new wrapper .
--
Snag
If you don't like what I say
don't read it .

wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 08:54:30 -0400, Bud Frede
wrote:


Refresh cycles in business for desktops and laptops is 5 years or
less from what I've seen. Businesses will have done at least a
couple of refreshes since 2001, so they're likely to have moved on
from XP already. If they didn't, then it's their own fault. Who
would expect Microsoft to support an OS for business use for even as
long as they did?


Business use is where you want a stable platform that does not change
that much over time. Retraining your staff and recreating business
records for new systems that have marginal improvements in
functionality is simply wasting money. That is why the POS business
stayed with XP as long as it did. Running a string of cash registers
is essentially the same operation as it has been for 100 years. They
don't need "pinch" and they really try to avoid "swipe". ;-)

Touch screen support itself has been in the hardware for over 30
years, running on DOS machines.

Last time I was there , the chinese restaurant I used to deliver for was
still using W2K in their POS terminal ... if it works , don't **** with it !
And that's why I will stick with XP as long as possible . And when I move
, it'll be to one of the Linux-based OS's . M$ is getting pretty good at
taking our money for little to no benefit to the end user .
--
Snag

notbob wrote:
On 2016-05-12, wrote:

I know M$ is not making any money on me but I don't care. They are
not providing anything I want.

Have you tried Linux?

nb

I have (Ubuntu) , but the wife "couldn't understand it" and refused to
learn . I don't think Facecrook (shudder) cares what OS you're using , nor
do the card games/whatever that she plays .

--
Snag

On 2016-05-12, Terry Coombs wrote:

Last time I was there , the chinese restaurant I used to deliver for was
still using W2K in their POS terminal ... if it works , don't **** with it !

......or put it on the internet.

M$ is getting pretty good at taking our money for little to no
benefit to the end user .

What do you mean, "getting"? They wrote the book, yrs ago. Bill got
his $$$$ and split. Now they're going down that Autodesk/Adobe road.
No buy, merely lease.

nb

On 2016-05-12, Terry Coombs wrote:

I have (Ubuntu) , but the wife "couldn't understand it" and refused to
learn . I don't think Facecrook (shudder) cares what OS you're using , nor
do the card games/whatever that she plays .

I've been using Linux since W98SE. I still have a fairly new XP
netbook (eee). Never hurts to have a M$ operating system (OS),
around. But, I NEVER take it online! That is, unless I have a "live"
Linux flash drive to go online, with.

With a "live" Linux flash drive, I never use XP online. I use Linux.
Jes plug the flash drive into a USB port and turn on yer box. With a
"live" Linux flash drive plugged into a USB socket, the XP OS will
never boot. It's Linux only. And when you turn off yer desk/laptop
and unplug yer flash drive, it will be like Linux never existed. No
trace will remain on yer XP computer.

NOTE: yer computer must be new enough (about circa 2000) to be able to
"cold boot" from a flash drive.

In fact TAILS....

https://tails.boum.org/

.....actually ask you if you want a Windows XP desktop (or used to).
If you choose the XP desktop, TAILS boots up with a --for all
practical purposes-- XP desktop. Hit the visible IE icon in the XP
taskbar and Firefox will fire up. Looks like XP, but it's Linux!

IOW, if you know how to use Linux, you could make a desktop that yer
wife would think is Windows. Besides, ppl are NOT born with an innate
knowledge of Windows. Like Linux, it must be learned. Tell yer wife
to open her mind and try and learn something new, instead of merely
advancing her "make yer life a living Hell" skills.

Also, try Mint Linux. It's based on Ubuntu, but is even more
Windows user friendly.

nb

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 10:37:16 AM UTC-4, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:54:25 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:

"Terry Coombs" writes:

Uhhh , maybe because the business community is still heavily invested in
XP ?

It's not. XP has a miniscule share of the business community. They're
primarily on windows 7.


Thank you. I work for a global company with 10 of thousands
employees and last year we were told to upgrade to W-7 or
you're on your own. No upgrades, no support, and no whining
if you don't upgrade and are hacked.

If you're in that environment, then you should know that Terry
is right and you're wrong. When MSFT discontinues support the
policy always has been and still is, that it means they won't
be doing new updates, new fixes, answering questions, etc. All
the existing updates, right up to the last one, are still available
and that was all that Terry wants. He also confirmed this
because he's now downloading and installing them.

On Thu, 12 May 2016 07:37:11 -0700 (PDT), ItsJoanNotJoann
wrote:

On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:54:25 PM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote:

"Terry Coombs" writes:

Uhhh , maybe because the business community is still heavily invested in
XP ?

It's not. XP has a miniscule share of the business community. They're
primarily on windows 7.


Thank you. I work for a global company with 10 of thousands
employees and last year we were told to upgrade to W-7 or
you're on your own. No upgrades, no support, and no whining
if you don't upgrade and are hacked.

Every new release of Windoze comes with it's own vulnerabilities.
If you are not using some common sense and a 3d party virus product,
you are still at risk. Most of the attacks are through the add ons
anyway. (Flash, active x and Outleak are the worst)

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 8:51:44 AM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote:
"Terry Coombs" writes:
WTF wrote:
On 05/11/2016 01:09 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
It appears they have cut all XP users off from even the old
updates ... I had to reinstall XP Pro in one of my laptops , and
have been unable to get the updates they used to have from before
they dropped support . Is this yet another move to force us to use
their latest crap OS ? Is there anywhere else these updates can be
gotten ?

If you want to run old moldy software, why do you want the newest
updates? Sheeeesh!

Where the **** did you get the idea I wanted the "newest updates" ? I just
want the updates they had before support ended .
I just don't get why so many people are so ****ing negative about me
wanting to run an OS that was functional and easy to use , rather than wade
thru 500 gallons of sewage to find the particular tune I want to play .

It's more your arrogance in thinking that an American corporation owes
you anything at all; I suspect that nobody has a problem with you
running XP, per se.

You could use an operating system for which source is available and
support it yourself unto infinity, should you live that long.

What Terry wants is available and always has been. MSFT policy has
always been that when they discontinue support, all the previous
updates are still available. That's all he wants.

On Thu, 12 May 2016 10:01:16 -0500, "Terry Coombs"
wrote:

notbob wrote:
On 2016-05-12, wrote:

I know M$ is not making any money on me but I don't care. They are
not providing anything I want.

Have you tried Linux?

nb

I have (Ubuntu) , but the wife "couldn't understand it" and refused to
learn . I don't think Facecrook (shudder) cares what OS you're using , nor
do the card games/whatever that she plays .

My wife is getting away from PCs completely. She has a W/7 machine by
her chair but it is seldom turned on. She uses an Android tablet and a
smart phone. That is where this all may be going, hence the W/10
"tablet" release from Microshaft. They have a tall hill to climb to
cut into Android's market share.
I am still running several DOS apps because windoze has never even
come close to matching their features.
If you are just dealing with text and numbers, DOS is king. The best
MP3 player MPXPLAY runs on DOS too although Atilla has rewritten it so
it will run natively on W/XP and, I suppose the follow on OS. If you
are just playing MP3s it is fine if you just load DOS.
The advantage of my DOS based database and accounting programs is they
can just be booted on any machine from a thumb drive and they run
without installing anything.

On 05/12/2016 09:57 AM, Terry Coombs wrote:

[snip]

Last time I was there , the chinese restaurant I used to deliver for was
still using W2K in their POS terminal ... if it works , don't **** with it !
And that's why I will stick with XP as long as possible . And when I move
, it'll be to one of the Linux-based OS's . M$ is getting pretty good at
taking our money for little to no benefit to the end user .


Windows XP is good. It helped me to start using Linux.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Therefore we Christians, in turn, are obliged not to tolerate their
wanton and conscious blasphemy." [Martin Luther,"On the Jews and Their
Lies",1543]

On 05/12/2016 10:01 AM, Terry Coombs wrote:

[snip]

I have (Ubuntu) , but the wife "couldn't understand it" and refused to
learn . I don't think Facecrook (shudder) cares what OS you're using , nor
do the card games/whatever that she plays .


I seldom if ever flay fancy games, but I do like the Spider Solitaire
that came with XP. That runs fine on WINE on Linux. However, lately I
prefer the Linux version.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

On 05/12/2016 10:54 AM, notbob wrote:

[snip]

I've been using Linux since W98SE. I still have a fairly new XP
netbook (eee).

I still have my eee901, with upgraded SSD (the 8G one it came with is
too small). I installed Linux on it (it's only 32-bit).

[snip]

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

On Thu, 12 May 2016 09:18:21 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

What Terry wants is available and always has been. MSFT policy has
always been that when they discontinue support, all the previous
updates are still available. That's all he wants.

...backwards compatibility

On 5/12/2016 7:26 AM, dpb wrote:
On 05/12/2016 8:43 AM, Don Y wrote:
....

My oldest "PC" is a Compaq Portable 386 (lunchbox) -- from the late 80's.
http://www.thecomputerarchive.com/thearchive/Computers/PC%20portables/Compaq%20Portable%20386.PDF

....

I spent a memorable summer lugging one of those back and forth between Oak
Ridge and Raleigh developing code for online coal elemental S analyzer--we were
using the NCSU NE department's high-intensity neutron source for the
developmental work; the analyzer was a gamma-spec device destined for power
plant emissions monitoring control...

While the laptop belonged to the company was consulting through, I had to add
the '387 coprocessor on my own in order to be able to get a spectrum fit and
peak-stripping computation done in under minutes in order to have any chance
whatever of getting anywhere--they were too cheap to buy a second actual
hardware system and the other developer doing the user-interface commandeered
it 'cuz had to have access to the actual hardware while I did the physics end...

Oh, the memories...

The plasma display is reminiscent of playing Empire on Plato in the early 70's.

I keep the box as its the smallest ISA machine I had so I can still coax
devices that require ISA slots to work in that box. I've had to do some
surgery over the years (e.g., the "CMOS battery" is a proprietary BIG thing
sourced out of Israel, I think; not the sort of thing I need to keep
"OEM". Likewise, the BIOS ROMs don't support big disks (and no "Type 47"
support) so I had to patch the ROM images and burn new ones to support
the ~600MB disk in there.

The advantage of my DOS based database and accounting programs is they
can just be booted on any machine from a thumb drive and they run
without installing anything.

YEP
this entire concept of INSTALLING software in a registry is an issue.
Individual SW with indiviual .ini files is less prone to big problems.

Thats what the windows registry is, a gigantic .ini file for everything
I think they did it to make it harder for software piracy.

On 5/12/2016 6:10 AM, Bud Frede wrote:
"Terry Coombs" writes:

WTF wrote:
On 05/11/2016 01:09 PM, Terry Coombs wrote:
It appears they have cut all XP users off from even the old
updates ... I had to reinstall XP Pro in one of my laptops , and
have been unable to get the updates they used to have from before
they dropped support . Is this yet another move to force us to use
their latest crap OS ? Is there anywhere else these updates can be
gotten ?

If you want to run old moldy software, why do you want the newest
updates? Sheeeesh!

Where the **** did you get the idea I wanted the "newest updates" ? I just
want the updates they had before support ended .
I just don't get why so many people are so ****ing negative about me
wanting to run an OS that was functional and easy to use , rather than wade
thru 500 gallons of sewage to find the particular tune I want to play .

In my case, I think XP was a downgrade from Win 2K, and MS didn't redeem
themselves until Win 7.

I ran W2KS for a LONG time. It was relatively stable. Though the same
apps running on XP seem even moreso! 7even seems to be a return to
bloat. Perhaps the biggest *win* in 7even is the fact that USB devices
now identify themselves in the "safely remove hardware" wizard.

I also have doubts about how possible it will be to keep an XP system
secure given that there won't be any more security updates. If your XP

I have doubts about how possible it will be to keep a MS system secure
IN SPITE OF SECURITY UPDATES!

system gets infected and starts sending out spam, your problem becomes
our problem. I'd much rather see you upgrade to 7 or 8.x (assuming you
don't want 10).

I've also heard from a lot of people that really like Win 10. I guess
tastes vary.

On Thu, 12 May 2016 12:44:12 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

I have doubts about how possible it will be to keep a MS system secure
IN SPITE OF SECURITY UPDATES!

Hey Dick Tracy. I agree.

On 5/12/2016 7:57 AM, Terry Coombs wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 08:54:30 -0400, Bud Frede
wrote:


Refresh cycles in business for desktops and laptops is 5 years or
less from what I've seen. Businesses will have done at least a
couple of refreshes since 2001, so they're likely to have moved on
from XP already. If they didn't, then it's their own fault. Who
would expect Microsoft to support an OS for business use for even as
long as they did?


Business use is where you want a stable platform that does not change
that much over time. Retraining your staff and recreating business
records for new systems that have marginal improvements in
functionality is simply wasting money. That is why the POS business
stayed with XP as long as it did. Running a string of cash registers
is essentially the same operation as it has been for 100 years. They
don't need "pinch" and they really try to avoid "swipe". ;-)

Touch screen support itself has been in the hardware for over 30
years, running on DOS machines.

Last time I was there , the chinese restaurant I used to deliver for was
still using W2K in their POS terminal ... if it works , don't **** with it !

Exactly. I had a buddy always razing me for being so slow to update
(software, hardware). As if, somehow, all of the work my machines
were doing was "stale" because they weren't 2017 models running
the latest Bugware.

I would calmly reply: OK, let's assume I'm willing to spend the
DAYS (!) reinstalling software, assume there is no learning curve
for the new OS, assume I can move my licenses over to the new machine
without having to repurchase anything (and, that anything I have
to repurchase will NOT introduce new bugs or require a learning
curve)... So, what am I going to *get* for this "investment"?
Let's assume the machine is *10* times faster, overall. Will
it speed up how quickly I decided which key to hit, next? Or,
move the mouse to the desired icon 10 times faster? Or, catch
my typographical errors 10 times faster? Or,...

[I.e., if you're playing GAMES, newer and faster make sense. But,
if you are doing anything meatware limited, the machine is rarely
the problem!]

And that's why I will stick with XP as long as possible . And when I move
, it'll be to one of the Linux-based OS's . M$ is getting pretty good at
taking our money for little to no benefit to the end user .

That's true of most software vendors. I was looking for a file compression
tool and stumbled on WinZIP (again). Version **20**?? Sheesh! What the
hell does it do now that PKZIP didn't do 25 years ago???

On 5/12/2016 12:43 PM, wrote:

The advantage of my DOS based database and accounting programs is they
can just be booted on any machine from a thumb drive and they run
without installing anything.

YEP
this entire concept of INSTALLING software in a registry is an issue.
Individual SW with indiviual .ini files is less prone to big problems.

Thats what the windows registry is, a gigantic .ini file for everything
I think they did it to make it harder for software piracy.

Ah, you completely miss the point of a "registry"!

First, it keeps all of the settings in one place. So, you don't have gobs
of little INI files scattered throughout the file system (in "real" OS's,
you would like to be able to treat portions of the filesystem as read-only;
perhaps even residing on immutable media!).

Second, by gathering all of the settings in one place, you can more
easily support multiple users -- just swap out the "settings file"
(instead of having an INI file for each user for each application!)

Third, it provides a common SERVICE (OS's are all about "services")
so each developer doesn't have to invent his own INI file format/syntax
and write a parser for it (to be able to "read" the INI file).

Fourth, it provides a way to protect those settings (with an INI file
per user per application, you'd have to wade through wherever the
application decided to store its INI files and note that
....\ApplicationName\Don.ini is the INI file for "ApplicationName"
while ...\ApplicationName\Administrator.ini is the INI file for
the Administrator when he opts to use said ApplicationName. *And*,
that Don shouldn't be able to access (read or write) the contents
of ...\ApplicationName\Administrator.ini but that Administrator
AND Don should be able to access ...\ApplicationName\Don.ini
(but, no one else).

Fifth, it has the potential to allow other applications to "see"
information maintained or controlling particular applications
instead of each application having to invent a mechanism to
peek into an INI maintained by some "foreign" app.

I use a full blown relational database in my current project
for these reasons. It lets me create lots of little
"databases" (tables/relations), saves the "user" (program)
from having to know how to parse the data ("This is a number,
this is a date, this is an IP address, etc." -- all defined
by the table itself... no possibility of a date being entered
where an IP address is expected!), lets me control who (applications)
can see and/or alter individual entries and lets me share those
entries without worrying about duplication costs/errors.

E.g., I can have a table called "network interfaces":
interface_name IP_address IP_netmask FDX/HDX NIC_type friendly_name
I can write an application that examines this table and uses the information
it contains to create yet another table called "network statistics":
interface_name octets_in octets_out packets_in packets_out dropped
And, yet another application that uses these two to determine when an
interface appears to have "died" -- to alert the user ("cable unplugged?")

Otherwise, you have to lump all of these things together which means you
make a more complex program AND have to update it for each "new idea"
(instead of AUGMENTING something that already "works perfectly")

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 9:53:24 AM UTC-5, Terry Coombs wrote:

ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:25:57 PM UTC-5, Terry Coombs wrote:

ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:09:31 PM UTC-5, Terry Coombs wrote:

It appears they have cut all XP users off from even the old updates
... I had to reinstall XP Pro in one of my laptops , and have been
unable to get the updates they used to have from before they
dropped
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
support . Is this yet another move to force us to use their latest
crap OS ? Is there anywhere else these updates can be gotten ?

Snag


Just wake up from a coma? There haven't been any updates
in a long time.

Really ? I knew there were no NEW updates , but until recently all
the existing updates were available . Take a class in reading
comprehension , you obviously did not understand what I wrote .

Snag


Take a class in not being an asshole and you'd know that
Microsoft ceased support for XP over a year ago. Doesn't
matter about updates, new or old, you're just setting
yourself up to be hacked. But as ill-mannered as you are
you probably deserve it.

You should talk about being an asshole ... M$ has said that the existing
updates will still be available , and they are thru a 3rd party . But they
are making it as difficult as they can to get them ... and I believe it's
because they want everybody to move over to their newest revenue generator ,
W10 .
I choose not to update , too many chances for snooping into what's none of
their (or your) business with the new OS , not to mention that their new
business model is to "rent" applications .
The wife has a "new" laptop running W7 , which as far as I can tell is
just Vista - the lousiest OS they ever made - with a new wrapper .
--
Snag
If you don't like what I say
don't read it .


Being the asshole that you are, your mama would be proud of
you.

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 10:37:16 AM UTC-4, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
I work for a global company with 10 of thousands
employees and last year we were told to upgrade to W-7 or
you're on your own. No upgrades, no support, and no whining
if you don't upgrade and are hacked.

If you're in that environment, then you should know that Terry
is right and you're wrong. When MSFT discontinues support the
policy always has been and still is, that it means they won't
be doing new updates, new fixes, answering questions, etc. All
the existing updates, right up to the last one, are still available
and that was all that Terry wants. He also confirmed this
because he's now downloading and installing them.


Did you bother to read what you wrote? "When MSFT discontinues support the
policy always has been and still is, that it means they won't
be doing new updates, new fixes, answering questions, etc."

On Thu, 12 May 2016 12:43:36 -0700 (PDT), wrote:


The advantage of my DOS based database and accounting programs is they
can just be booted on any machine from a thumb drive and they run
without installing anything.

YEP
this entire concept of INSTALLING software in a registry is an issue.
Individual SW with indiviual .ini files is less prone to big problems.

Thats what the windows registry is, a gigantic .ini file for everything
I think they did it to make it harder for software piracy.



It certainly makes it harder to transfer software from one machine to
another or even to back it up without cloning your whole C: drive.

On 05/12/2016 9:57 AM, Terry Coombs wrote:
wrote:
....

Business use is where you want a stable platform that does not change
that much over time. Retraining your staff and recreating business
records for new systems that have marginal improvements in
functionality is simply wasting money. That is why the POS business
stayed with XP as long as it did. Running a string of cash registers
is essentially the same operation as it has been for 100 years. They
don't need "pinch" and they really try to avoid "swipe". ;-)

Touch screen support itself has been in the hardware for over 30
years, running on DOS machines.

Last time I was there , the chinese restaurant I used to deliver for was
still using W2K in their POS terminal ... if it works , don't **** with it !
And that's why I will stick with XP as long as possible . And when I move
, it'll be to one of the Linux-based OS's . M$ is getting pretty good at
taking our money for little to no benefit to the end user .

One of the largest utilities in the US is, to the best of my knowledge,
still using OS/2 on some plant-monitoring systems--although I moved the
application to NT and it's it which they've "rolled out" on systems when
they have died, it was never any cost-benefit to make the change on
every unit until it became/becomes necessary. These are 24/7
background, "slow" real-time plant performance monitoring systems that
are the backbone of the plant heat-rate monitoring which is the key
statistic for reporting when the plant is operating most efficiently (or
conversely, let's operations know when it is markedly off-target).

They do their job...

--

On Thu, 12 May 2016 13:28:15 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 5/12/2016 12:43 PM, wrote:

The advantage of my DOS based database and accounting programs is they
can just be booted on any machine from a thumb drive and they run
without installing anything.

YEP
this entire concept of INSTALLING software in a registry is an issue.
Individual SW with indiviual .ini files is less prone to big problems.

Thats what the windows registry is, a gigantic .ini file for everything
I think they did it to make it harder for software piracy.

Ah, you completely miss the point of a "registry"!

First, it keeps all of the settings in one place. So, you don't have gobs
of little INI files scattered throughout the file system (in "real" OS's,
you would like to be able to treat portions of the filesystem as read-only;
perhaps even residing on immutable media!).

Second, by gathering all of the settings in one place, you can more
easily support multiple users -- just swap out the "settings file"
(instead of having an INI file for each user for each application!)

Third, it provides a common SERVICE (OS's are all about "services")
so each developer doesn't have to invent his own INI file format/syntax
and write a parser for it (to be able to "read" the INI file).

Fourth, it provides a way to protect those settings (with an INI file
per user per application, you'd have to wade through wherever the
application decided to store its INI files and note that
...\ApplicationName\Don.ini is the INI file for "ApplicationName"
while ...\ApplicationName\Administrator.ini is the INI file for
the Administrator when he opts to use said ApplicationName. *And*,
that Don shouldn't be able to access (read or write) the contents
of ...\ApplicationName\Administrator.ini but that Administrator
AND Don should be able to access ...\ApplicationName\Don.ini
(but, no one else).

Fifth, it has the potential to allow other applications to "see"
information maintained or controlling particular applications
instead of each application having to invent a mechanism to
peek into an INI maintained by some "foreign" app.

I use a full blown relational database in my current project
for these reasons. It lets me create lots of little
"databases" (tables/relations), saves the "user" (program)
from having to know how to parse the data ("This is a number,
this is a date, this is an IP address, etc." -- all defined
by the table itself... no possibility of a date being entered
where an IP address is expected!), lets me control who (applications)
can see and/or alter individual entries and lets me share those
entries without worrying about duplication costs/errors.

E.g., I can have a table called "network interfaces":
interface_name IP_address IP_netmask FDX/HDX NIC_type friendly_name
I can write an application that examines this table and uses the information
it contains to create yet another table called "network statistics":
interface_name octets_in octets_out packets_in packets_out dropped
And, yet another application that uses these two to determine when an
interface appears to have "died" -- to alert the user ("cable unplugged?")

Otherwise, you have to lump all of these things together which means you
make a more complex program AND have to update it for each "new idea"
(instead of AUGMENTING something that already "works perfectly")

I see you drank the Kool Ade but I still don't know why an INI for one
particular program should not be with that program. If you have a
suite of interactive programs like Office, all of the INI info should
be in the directory with that suite of programs.
Microshaft simply did not want that to be too easy to copy over to
another machine so they joined it to a particular OS that was hardware
tied to one particular hardware profile.
Probably a good BUSINESS move but not good for the user.

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 4:37:37 PM UTC-4, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 10:37:16 AM UTC-4, ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
I work for a global company with 10 of thousands
employees and last year we were told to upgrade to W-7 or
you're on your own. No upgrades, no support, and no whining
if you don't upgrade and are hacked.

If you're in that environment, then you should know that Terry
is right and you're wrong. When MSFT discontinues support the
policy always has been and still is, that it means they won't
be doing new updates, new fixes, answering questions, etc. All
the existing updates, right up to the last one, are still available
and that was all that Terry wants. He also confirmed this
because he's now downloading and installing them.


Did you bother to read what you wrote? "When MSFT discontinues support the
policy always has been and still is, that it means they won't
be doing new updates, new fixes, answering questions, etc."

Sure I read what I wrote. Terry clearly wasn't asking for MSFT to
create and write new updates. He was asking for the updates to XP
that were issued in the past, which are still available, as they always
have been, even though support has ended. Proof of that is that he
found them, downloaded them and is now installing them. Go back to sleep.

ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 9:53:24 AM UTC-5, Terry Coombs wrote:

ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:25:57 PM UTC-5, Terry Coombs wrote:

ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016 at 2:09:31 PM UTC-5, Terry Coombs
wrote:

It appears they have cut all XP users off from even the old
updates ... I had to reinstall XP Pro in one of my laptops , and
have been unable to get the updates they used to have from
before they dropped
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
support . Is this yet another move to force us to use their
latest crap OS ? Is there anywhere else these updates can be
gotten ?

Snag


Just wake up from a coma? There haven't been any updates
in a long time.

Really ? I knew there were no NEW updates , but until recently all
the existing updates were available . Take a class in reading
comprehension , you obviously did not understand what I wrote .

Snag


Take a class in not being an asshole and you'd know that
Microsoft ceased support for XP over a year ago. Doesn't
matter about updates, new or old, you're just setting
yourself up to be hacked. But as ill-mannered as you are
you probably deserve it.

You should talk about being an asshole ... M$ has said that the
existing updates will still be available , and they are thru a 3rd
party . But they are making it as difficult as they can to get them
... and I believe it's because they want everybody to move over to
their newest revenue generator , W10 .
I choose not to update , too many chances for snooping into what's
none of their (or your) business with the new OS , not to mention
that their new business model is to "rent" applications .
The wife has a "new" laptop running W7 , which as far as I can
tell is just Vista - the lousiest OS they ever made - with a new
wrapper . --
Snag
If you don't like what I say
don't read it .


Being the asshole that you are, your mama would be proud of
you.

My Mama is dead , bitch . And like I said , if you don't like what I say ,
don't read it .

--
Snag

ItsJoanNotJoann wrote:
On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 11:15:50 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 10:37:16 AM UTC-4, ItsJoanNotJoann
wrote:
I work for a global company with 10 of thousands
employees and last year we were told to upgrade to W-7 or
you're on your own. No upgrades, no support, and no whining
if you don't upgrade and are hacked.

If you're in that environment, then you should know that Terry
is right and you're wrong. When MSFT discontinues support the
policy always has been and still is, that it means they won't
be doing new updates, new fixes, answering questions, etc. All
the existing updates, right up to the last one, are still available
and that was all that Terry wants. He also confirmed this
because he's now downloading and installing them.


Did you bother to read what you wrote? "When MSFT discontinues
support the policy always has been and still is, that it means they
won't
be doing new updates, new fixes, answering questions, etc."

Stupid **** , they say they will still supply the updates that have been
made . Now how about crawling back under your rock .

--
Snag

On 05/12/2016 11:18 AM, trader_4 wrote:

[snip]

What Terry wants is available and always has been. MSFT policy has
always been that when they discontinue support, all the previous
updates are still available. That's all he wants.

So you ought to be able to get updates for the DOS-based versions of
Windows (ME and earlier).

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Therefore we Christians, in turn, are obliged not to tolerate their
wanton and conscious blasphemy." [Martin Luther,"On the Jews and Their
Lies",1543]

On 05/12/2016 02:43 PM, wrote:

The advantage of my DOS based database and accounting programs is they
can just be booted on any machine from a thumb drive and they run
without installing anything.

YEP
this entire concept of INSTALLING software in a registry is an issue.
Individual SW with indiviual .ini files is less prone to big problems.

Thats what the windows registry is, a gigantic .ini file for everything
I think they did it to make it harder for software piracy.

I always thought the registry was a bad idea. Programs should keep what
they need in their own directories.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Therefore we Christians, in turn, are obliged not to tolerate their
wanton and conscious blasphemy." [Martin Luther,"On the Jews and Their
Lies",1543]

On Thu, 12 May 2016 16:07:15 -0500, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 05/12/2016 02:43 PM, wrote:

The advantage of my DOS based database and accounting programs is they
can just be booted on any machine from a thumb drive and they run
without installing anything.

YEP
this entire concept of INSTALLING software in a registry is an issue.
Individual SW with indiviual .ini files is less prone to big problems.

Thats what the windows registry is, a gigantic .ini file for everything
I think they did it to make it harder for software piracy.

I always thought the registry was a bad idea. Programs should keep what
they need in their own directories.

As has been stated here, it was Bill Gates' way of making it harder to
copy software from one machine to another. The machine signature
engine is buried in Windows and the software is tied to that
particular version of the OS via the registry.
I suppose if someone was interested enough to track down every
registry entry and move them all when they copied the software it
would work but there are probably 100 entries for something like
Office and they are scattered across almost as many separate paths in
the registry.

On 5/12/2016 2:04 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 05/12/2016 11:18 AM, trader_4 wrote:

[snip]

What Terry wants is available and always has been. MSFT policy has
always been that when they discontinue support, all the previous
updates are still available. That's all he wants.

Really? I think you'll find that MS either removes the updates or
squirrels them away in dark corners.

So you ought to be able to get updates for the DOS-based versions of Windows
(ME and earlier).

Yeah, I need a copy of MS-DOS 3.3 (direct *from* MS)...

On 5/12/2016 1:49 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 12 May 2016 13:28:15 -0700, Don Y
wrote:

On 5/12/2016 12:43 PM, wrote:

The advantage of my DOS based database and accounting programs is they
can just be booted on any machine from a thumb drive and they run
without installing anything.

YEP
this entire concept of INSTALLING software in a registry is an issue.
Individual SW with indiviual .ini files is less prone to big problems.

Thats what the windows registry is, a gigantic .ini file for everything
I think they did it to make it harder for software piracy.

Ah, you completely miss the point of a "registry"!

First, it keeps all of the settings in one place. So, you don't have gobs
of little INI files scattered throughout the file system (in "real" OS's,
you would like to be able to treat portions of the filesystem as read-only;
perhaps even residing on immutable media!).

Second, by gathering all of the settings in one place, you can more
easily support multiple users -- just swap out the "settings file"
(instead of having an INI file for each user for each application!)

Third, it provides a common SERVICE (OS's are all about "services")
so each developer doesn't have to invent his own INI file format/syntax
and write a parser for it (to be able to "read" the INI file).

Fourth, it provides a way to protect those settings (with an INI file
per user per application, you'd have to wade through wherever the
application decided to store its INI files and note that
...\ApplicationName\Don.ini is the INI file for "ApplicationName"
while ...\ApplicationName\Administrator.ini is the INI file for
the Administrator when he opts to use said ApplicationName. *And*,
that Don shouldn't be able to access (read or write) the contents
of ...\ApplicationName\Administrator.ini but that Administrator
AND Don should be able to access ...\ApplicationName\Don.ini
(but, no one else).

Fifth, it has the potential to allow other applications to "see"
information maintained or controlling particular applications
instead of each application having to invent a mechanism to
peek into an INI maintained by some "foreign" app.

I use a full blown relational database in my current project
for these reasons. It lets me create lots of little
"databases" (tables/relations), saves the "user" (program)
from having to know how to parse the data ("This is a number,
this is a date, this is an IP address, etc." -- all defined
by the table itself... no possibility of a date being entered
where an IP address is expected!), lets me control who (applications)
can see and/or alter individual entries and lets me share those
entries without worrying about duplication costs/errors.

E.g., I can have a table called "network interfaces":
interface_name IP_address IP_netmask FDX/HDX NIC_type friendly_name
I can write an application that examines this table and uses the information
it contains to create yet another table called "network statistics":
interface_name octets_in octets_out packets_in packets_out dropped
And, yet another application that uses these two to determine when an
interface appears to have "died" -- to alert the user ("cable unplugged?")

Otherwise, you have to lump all of these things together which means you
make a more complex program AND have to update it for each "new idea"
(instead of AUGMENTING something that already "works perfectly")

I see you drank the Kool Ade but I still don't know why an INI for one
particular program should not be with that program.

Because programs are immutable objects. I should be able to run
those programs off a CD and *still* be able to make changes to the
"settings" (i.e., the "settings" need to be stored in someplace
that can be written.

In the UN*X world, that's typically /etc -- despite the fact that
the "programs" may reside in /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /opt, /usr/local/bin,
etc.

The "user specific" settings are typically in an ad hoc "rc" file stored
under each user's $HOME.

If you have a
suite of interactive programs like Office, all of the INI info should
be in the directory with that suite of programs.

So, for a machine with 10 users, there should be 10 *sets* of INI
files? Or, perhaps a folder for each user thereunder?

Microshaft simply did not want that to be too easy to copy over to
another machine so they joined it to a particular OS that was hardware
tied to one particular hardware profile.
Probably a good BUSINESS move but not good for the user.

The registry is actually *simpler* for the user.

I've seen all sorts of malformed INI files -- because the developers
didn't understand the concept of "sections". And, the layout of the
files are inherently sequential: if I find an entry called
"colordepth=32", I have to scan BACKWARDS to see if it is in the
"[resolution 640x480]" section or the "[resolution 1600x1200]" section.

And, if one application wants to represent this as a hexadecimal number
while another uses decimal...

And, one application says "background=red" while another equivalently says
"background=FF0000" or even "background=255:0:0".

When I query my RDBMS for a "color" value, I know the result will be in
exactly the same form regardless of WHAT the color pertains to or "who"
set that value. Likewise for an IP address, netmask, filename, date,
time, etc. I know that NOTHING can ever set an IP address of
"257.3.4.5" or "192.X.0.45" or "18".

From the developer;s point of view, it means all value checks are
consistent -- regardless of the application involved. It also
means you don't have to check values that you retrieve (from
*my* RDBMS) for "sanity" -- the RDBMS *guarantees* that a "color"
is always a "color"... even for the user that would LIKE to open a
text editor to manually manipulate an "INI file".
"background=aardvark"
"time=blue"

Dig through your registry (INI files) and see how many different
representations for times you encounter! (time of last update,
installation time, license expiration time, etc.) Quick, what
"time" is "1001"? Is it 10:01AM (on some indeterminate day)?
Is it October 1st? Is it 1001 seconds after the MS epoch?
Or, 1001 seconds after the UNIX epoch? Or, an elapsed time
(since some particular event)?

On Thursday, May 12, 2016 at 6:33:12 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
On 5/12/2016 2:04 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 05/12/2016 11:18 AM, trader_4 wrote:

[snip]

What Terry wants is available and always has been. MSFT policy has
always been that when they discontinue support, all the previous
updates are still available. That's all he wants.

Really? I think you'll find that MS either removes the updates or
squirrels them away in dark corners.


Really? Terry has them and is installing them.
Please don't write a usual encyclopedia in reply, just go back
to sleep. We've got the problem solved.