On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 19:05:40 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/29/2017 5:54 PM, wrote:


Then again, correct me if I'm wrong, since I have never bought a new
computer from a store (or anywhere else). But lets say I went to Walmart
and bought a new computer with Win10 already installed. Isn't all the
validation done at the factory, so when I take it out of the box, it's
ready to be used without me having to do anything except plug it in and
connect the keybd, mouse and monitor cords?

I would think it would be ready to go right out of the box, but I am
only guessing....

Yes, but from a big box store it may be loaded with a lot of freeware
crap on it.

Run JRT (junkware removal tool) or Decrapifier?

https://www.malwarebytes.com/junkwareremovaltool/

https://www.pcdecrapifier.com/

Credits to Todd and Monster :-)

I prefer to do a clean install without all the crap.

Roger Blake wrote:
On 2017-01-29, Diesel wrote:
internet content? Which codecs and/or protocols specifically are you
writing about that are not available/not supported under XP?

Some sites don't work well in older browsers. The only current one I
know of that still works with XP is Mozilla Firefox.


I use Opera , it plays nicely with XP . I suggest a minimum of 2+ Ghz
processor and 3 Gb of RAM .
--
Snag

On 01/29/2017 01:53 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 13:33:12 -0500, Al Dente
wrote:

On 1/29/2017 1:09 PM, Newgene McMensa wrote:
Is Win 7 any easier to use than 8.1? If the way you interface is more like 8.1 than XP, then I will install XP on it.
`
Snuffy


If ease of use is your goal, consider Microsoft Bob Desktop running on Windows for Workgroups 3.11

As long as you don't need internet access. 7 or 10 - forget anything
in between - and except for special apps forget XP - and regardless,
forget anything earlier.

Windows for Workgroups sort of knew about networks or at least LANs. For
3.1 you could get a socket stack from Trumpet. Not that Trumpet, damn it:

http://www.trumpet.com.au/index.php/downloads.html

I don't know how many people got on the 'net because of Peter Tattam but
like Bram Moolenaar an Vim he certainly didn't become a Bill Gates
Billionaire.

http://thanksfortrumpetwinsock.com/

if you want to buy him a Foster's for old times sake.

On 01/29/2017 02:19 PM, Diesel wrote:
Why forget XP? Is it security concerns or lack of upcoming
software/driver support? If the latter, I can understand your
position, if the former, I'd say you've been drinking a lot of scare
mongering MS based koolaid. XP hasn't magically opened the barn door
and let all the horses out just because MS no longer supports it.

If you're running XP and it does what you want there is no problem with
it. I still have an XP machine at work that is one of my build boxes.

BUT a lot of software will no longer install on it if you need a new
version for any reason. 32-bit machines are becoming problematic
regardless of the OS. The last 32-bit Chrome version was released a
while back. It works as well as it ever did but it's also the end of the
line.

On 01/29/2017 11:41 AM, Terry Coombs wrote:
7 is a lot like Vista , I personally prefer XP Pro ... I have no
experiencewith anything newer but I hear 10 invades your privacy
significantly - and by default puts all your stuff in the cloud . I prefer
to store my stuff right here at home .

No, 7 actually works... I had very few dealing with Vista but those
were painful. Luckily our clients skipped it completely just like they
skipped 8. MS has a reputation among IT professionals that you're
better off skipping every other release. They've clouded that pool with
the Windows 10 Forever scheme. Now you don't know which update is going
to hose your machine.

On 01/29/2017 11:51 AM, Oren wrote:
She will get a new system with Win 10 in a few weeks.

You may want to consider separate vacations and take yours about then.
It's not that it's a bad OS but many of the things she is used to don't
work that way anymore. They're still there once you learn how to find them.

On 01/29/2017 03:38 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
I think W7 is way ahead of 8.1 unless you have a touch screen. But
telling someone to use W7 is hopeless. They'll be on W10 before they
know it.


I'm crossing my fingers but I disabled updates on my 7 laptop when MS
was force-feeding 10. I've re-enabled them after the 'free' upgrade
ended and so far it's not nagging me or downloading 10 just in case.

One thing to watch out for is they backported the customer telemetry
crap to 7. You can turn all of it off but them might turn it back on
again with the next 'important' update. They use the Pelosi technique --
install it to find out what is in it.

On 01/29/2017 04:12 PM, philo wrote:
That said I do not try to force others to use it because if one
absolutely needs Win apps such as Photoshop, it's not going to work.
Not too many are going to want to deal with GIMP but I got used to it.

I use Gimp as an example of how not to design a UI but, not having
Photoshop, I do use it. Some people like it but I'm not a fan of
littering the desktop with about 15 different windows.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 18:44:42 -0700, rbowman
wrote:

On 01/29/2017 11:51 AM, Oren wrote:
She will get a new system with Win 10 in a few weeks.

You may want to consider separate vacations and take yours about then.
It's not that it's a bad OS but many of the things she is used to don't
work that way anymore. They're still there once you learn how to find them.


I'm letting her spend her money. If it means I don't have a bother,
I'll be happy for now. Taint no way will I teach her another OS. She
don't want to know, "Just do this" is her mantra.

My neighbor teaches her about her smart phone :-\

On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 12:09:54 PM UTC-6, Newgene McMensa wrote:

Is Win 7 any easier to use than 8.1? If the way you interface is more like 8.1 than XP, then I will install XP on it.
`
Snuffy


You do know there is no support from MSN now for XP, correct?

On 01/29/2017 02:19 PM, Diesel wrote:
Otherwise, it's lazy programmers who just don't want to deal with XP
users anymore. In fact, some actually had to add more code to detect
XP vs another NT based OS and refuse to run if it's detected. Not
because XP couldn't run the code mind you, but, because the author
decided they didn't want their program running on XP anymore.

Speaking as a programmer, we tell our clients that if they want to run
XP, so far our software will run on it but there are no guarantees that
will be the case with new releases.

The problem comes with having to test an entire software suite with an
OS that even the manufacturer doesn't support. The Android products are
the same. We're not going to lock ourselves into six year old code just
because a few people still have 2.3 devices. I do a special build so I
can run on my old 4.0.4 tablet and it more or less works. However we
can't ship something more or less.

philo writes:

That said I do not try to force others to use it because if one
absolutely needs Win apps such as Photoshop, it's not going to work.

A quick look at:

https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManag...ication&iId=17

says Photoshop 2017 is rated Gold. So looks like you can use Photoshop
under Linux.

Not too many are going to want to deal with GIMP but I got used to it.

There are a lot of online tutorials.

--
Dan Espen

On 01/29/2017 02:19 PM, Diesel wrote:
Sadly, for the most part, that's the authors personal lazy choice.
Aside from a few API calls which are new/altered, there's no real
reason to deliberately force your binary not to run under Windows XP.


If you use new API call, the app isn't going to run. No reason to force
anything. It's no different than if I add a new call to one of our
dll's. Older software that doesn't depend on the new call still works.
New software linked against the new lib won't run with the old dll.

It's not a lazy choice. The world moves on. We're not going to use
multiple source branches, builds, documents, and test protocols to
support those living in the past.

On 01/29/2017 02:19 PM, Diesel wrote:
internet content? Which codecs and/or protocols specifically are you
writing about that are not available/not supported under XP?

I'm developing a browser based map that will not run on XP. The base
maps are content provided by ESRI and to render the map functions are
called that are not available on XP. I believe it has to do with OpenGL
acceleration but I would have to look at the error to refresh my memory.

In this case ESRI is the content provider and there is nothing I can do
to make it work.

I believe IE can be upgraded to some extent but I'm not going to limit
myself because a prehistoric IE version can't handle modern Javascript.
I don't use IE so I may have the versions wrong but either 6 or 7 had a
pitiful engine that would take 20 times as long to render a page a
Chrome or Firefox. To put that in real terms, the user experience really
sucked. The new Chakra engine is competitive but you're not going to see
than on XP.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 15:50:48 -0600, wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 13:14:57 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:


I don't know that you can say that nothing goes to the cloud.
Search queries using Edge for example? You can't stop the
cloud from seeing what you want to search for, and maybe not
from using it for their own purposes either. But if you mean
your typical saved word files, excel stuff, that doesn't
automatically go to the cloud on Win 10, AFAIK anyway.

I only have one question. Lets say someone buys a computer with Win10,
and only buys it to run office software, or they design graphics, or use
it to operate a DJ music service, etc. and does NOT connect it to the
internet at all.

Nothing can go to a cloud, MS cant spy on anyone, etc. Will Win10 even
function without an internet connection?

Yres it will function just fine without even a network connection -
muchless an internet connection

I have an XP machine that I use to store data. I have many thousands of
videos and music on it, and I have a backup of all my personal stuff on
it (besides my regular backups). That computer has NEVER been connected
to the internet, nor is it networked to any other computer. Everything I
put on it, is put there using flash drives. I do use it to watch the
videos and play music, but it will NEVER be connected to the internet.
This way I dont have to worry about malware (I scan everything before I
put it on that machine).

Anyhow, it works fine as it is. I installed XP Sp3 initially. I dont
need any upgrades. It works fine as it is, for what I do with it.

But I question if Win10 would work that way? Not that it much matters, I
have no intention to upgrade to 10. I dont want anyting above Win7.

It will work just fine.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 16:51:32 -0500, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/29/2017 4:14 PM, trader_4 wrote:


I don't know that you can say that nothing goes to the cloud.
Search queries using Edge for example? You can't stop the
cloud from seeing what you want to search for, and maybe not
from using it for their own purposes either. But if you mean
your typical saved word files, excel stuff, that doesn't
automatically go to the cloud on Win 10, AFAIK anyway.

Any search engine is taking your inquiries. I use Google on Chrome.


I'm very happy with Win 10, by far the best OS they've produced
yet. The one weak spot is the Edge browser sucks, it can't
manage bookmarks, for example. But I tried it for a few days,
then quickly went to Chrome.


I use IE11 on Win10 Pro. It comes installed but not "enabled". Very
simple to set up - Edge is basically trial-ware - not ready for prime
time yet.

I use Yahoo mail as that is what my ISP uses. With Edge, I cannot reply
to Yahoo mail so I'm sticking with Chrome. I could use another mail
program, but that does not work well as I work from three different
computers.

Google is no less evil than MS or anyone else, but it works for me.
Even simple things like saving a password on one computer makes it
available on others if I'm signed in. My calendar shows appointments my
wife has too so it is easy to void conflicts.
I use Firefox where IE11 does not do the job - I find Chrome to be
bloated.

Some sites don't work well in older browsers. The only current one I
know of that still works with XP is Mozilla Firefox.


It's not all the fault of your browser. There seems to be an abundance
of poorly written websites lately. But once again, it's the same story.
They put so much bloat and crap on the sites that they cant possibly
work properly anymore. The news media sites are the worst of all.

What ever happened to websites that were simply HTML (text) and some
pictures??? It seems like the content has dimninished in favor of flashy
looks and excessive advertising....

Even on my cellphone, I seem to get sites that are completely blank, and
those are the ones that always take the longest to load. That's most
annoying! (Many of them begin with HTTPS too, (secured). I can
understand security on sites where we enter credit cards and so on, but
why sites like Wikipedia are using all HTTPS now, makes little sense to
me.

On 01/29/2017 03:12 PM, philo wrote:
Not too many are going to want to deal with GIMP but I got used to it.

GIMP is a pain in the ass. I use it though. I do ADORE Inkscape.
Use GIMP for screen shots and then paste into Inkscape

On 01/29/2017 05:53 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 01/29/2017 04:12 PM, philo wrote:
That said I do not try to force others to use it because if one
absolutely needs Win apps such as Photoshop, it's not going to work.
Not too many are going to want to deal with GIMP but I got used to it.

I use Gimp as an example of how not to design a UI but, not having
Photoshop, I do use it. Some people like it but I'm not a fan of
littering the desktop with about 15 different windows.

Try Inkscape as a sub for Photoshop

On 2017-01-30, rbowman wrote:
I use Gimp as an example of how not to design a UI but, not having
Photoshop, I do use it. Some people like it but I'm not a fan of
littering the desktop with about 15 different windows.

Newer versions of Gimp have the option of consolidating everything
into a single window.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.)

NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
Don't talk to cops! -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com
Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 01/29/2017 05:50 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 01/29/2017 03:38 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
I think W7 is way ahead of 8.1 unless you have a touch screen. But
telling someone to use W7 is hopeless. They'll be on W10 before they
know it.


I'm crossing my fingers but I disabled updates on my 7 laptop when MS
was force-feeding 10. I've re-enabled them after the 'free' upgrade
ended and so far it's not nagging me or downloading 10 just in case.

One thing to watch out for is they backported the customer telemetry
crap to 7. You can turn all of it off but them might turn it back on
again with the next 'important' update. They use the Pelosi technique --
install it to find out what is in it.



My windows machines are in Virtual Machines (VM) (qemu-kvm). Except
for Windows Nein (W10), where I have to see what idiot update is
happening "today", I turn off Windows' Idiot updates. What
an absolute pain-in-the-ass. I keep gold copies of my vm's
in case Windows does the Windows thing. I go love being able
to test some trash out in an VM, then overwrite the VM/s hard
drive with my gold copy.

I surf from my base machine, which is a Red Hat clone. My
VM's have very restrictive Internet access or none at all.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 18:22:30 -0600, wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 17:12:42 -0600, philo wrote:

My first experience with Linux was RedHat 5.2 in those days one could
easily spend all week installing and configuring...I even complied my
own kernel once. It was an attempt to add USB support.
Even though I compiled-in USB support, I neglected to add support for
the add-on USB card so never got USB working until I eventually went
with a later version of Linux.

That said I do not try to force others to use it because if one
absolutely needs Win apps such as Photoshop, it's not going to work.
Not too many are going to want to deal with GIMP but I got used to it.

You must be one of the FEW, if you dont try to force others to use
linux. There are far too many who think linux is the answer too all of
life's problems, and nearly treat it like it's a religion or somthing.

I am not trying to start a flame war, so I am going to just say this and
leave it at that. "I HATE LINUX". That thing nearly drove me to throwing
all my computers into the trash and having an emotional breakdown.
But I stopped there, formatted all the hard drives, and linux bootable
thumb drives. Then I threw all linux CDs or DVDs in the garbage, and
made a promise to myself to never allow linux anywhere near my computers
again. I'm sticking to that for the rest of my life.

And just to be clear, this was not the RedHat nightmare from the 90s (I
tried that too though). My last and final linux try was about 3 years
ago. I tried at least a dozen POPULAR distros, several computers, and
there is not one good thing I can say about linux.

I would like an alternative to Windows too, but linux is NOT the answer.
I dont like the direction Windows has gone. I liked Windows 98, XP and
although I dont own a Win7 machine, I have played with it and know I
could get used to it. I want nothing to do with Win 8.x or 10.

I can only hope, or wish that MS would wise up and support more than
theor latest bloatware, because soem of us like a simpler OS and/or dont
want to keep buy new computers when our older ones still work fine.

-OR-

Someone would create an entirely new OS that's compatible with Windows
software.

But I know that is only a dream, and MS will keep creating their bloated
crap, which does the same thing as their olders OS, with 10X more
complexity and problems, and needing 10x more hardware power.

Then again, I'm old, so I probably wont have to ever use their latest
crap. I do just fine with XP and possibly will one day I get something
with Win7.

I have windows 10 working well on a few machines that came with XP and
were "iffy" with Win7. Boots faster, and works better on the
"marginal" computers - including an Acer NetBook - of all things.

I think the "kernal" is smaller and more efficient on W10 than it was
on 7 when yoiu turn off all the "ET CALL HOME" crap. I wouldn't switch
my home systems back to 7 pro from 10 pro - that is for SURE.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 18:01:09 -0800 (PST), ItsJoanNotJoann
wrote:

On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 12:09:54 PM UTC-6, Newgene McMensa wrote:

Is Win 7 any easier to use than 8.1? If the way you interface is more like 8.1 than XP, then I will install XP on it.
`
Snuffy


You do know there is no support from MSN now for XP, correct?
Don't know when I last needed OS support on XP - so that's not an
issue for myself - but not being able to run the latest browsers, and
a whole ot of incompatabilities with new programs has convinced me. I
still have about 30 XP machines running in the plant (no internet
connection - only dedicated database application - which are being
replaced with win7 machines when they fail. We have a stack of
off-lease Lenovos sitting in wait - some that we bought for the
purpose, and others that came from the plant the company took over and
closed in Toronto.

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 21:22:53 -0600, wrote:


Some sites don't work well in older browsers. The only current one I
know of that still works with XP is Mozilla Firefox.


It's not all the fault of your browser. There seems to be an abundance
of poorly written websites lately. But once again, it's the same story.
They put so much bloat and crap on the sites that they cant possibly
work properly anymore. The news media sites are the worst of all.

What ever happened to websites that were simply HTML (text) and some
pictures??? It seems like the content has dimninished in favor of flashy
looks and excessive advertising....

Even on my cellphone, I seem to get sites that are completely blank, and
those are the ones that always take the longest to load. That's most
annoying! (Many of them begin with HTTPS too, (secured). I can
understand security on sites where we enter credit cards and so on, but
why sites like Wikipedia are using all HTTPS now, makes little sense to
me.
HTML5 / CCS3 won't work on early browsers. People use HTML5 and CCS3
on websites to make them work properly on mobile devices like
I-Phones.

trader_4
Sun, 29
Jan 2017 21:30:13 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 4:20:49 PM UTC-5, Diesel wrote:

Sun, 29 Jan 2017
20:53:42 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 13:33:12 -0500, Al Dente
wrote:

On 1/29/2017 1:09 PM, Newgene McMensa wrote:
Is Win 7 any easier to use than 8.1? If the way you
interface is more like 8.1 than XP, then I will install XP on
it. ` Snuffy


If ease of use is your goal, consider Microsoft Bob Desktop
running on Windows for Workgroups 3.11

As long as you don't need internet access. 7 or 10 - forget
anything in between - and except for special apps forget XP -
and regardless, forget anything earlier.

What do you mean as long as you don't need internet access?

What he probably means is that AFAIK, none of the latest, updated
releases of the popular browsers that most people use will run
on XP anymore.

Firefox is still a popular browser. ESR build is still getting
updates on XP.

longer? IF I was going to be browsing, I for sure would not
be installing XP when Win 7 is the other choice.

Well, the thing for me is this...I have vlk edition of XP. I'm not
entirely sure I have what amounts to vlk edition of Windows 7. And,
that makes all the difference in the world for me.


--
Sarcasm, because beating the living **** out of deserving people is
illegal.

rbowman
Mon, 30 Jan 2017 01:34:14 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 01/29/2017 02:19 PM, Diesel wrote:
Why forget XP? Is it security concerns or lack of upcoming
software/driver support? If the latter, I can understand your
position, if the former, I'd say you've been drinking a lot of
scare mongering MS based koolaid. XP hasn't magically opened the
barn door and let all the horses out just because MS no longer
supports it.

If you're running XP and it does what you want there is no problem
with it. I still have an XP machine at work that is one of my
build boxes.

The majority of my workstations have been converted to linux, but, a
few are still Windows based. I do have a Windows 7 and Windows 10
machine on the network, but, neither of them are vlk like. Whereas
the XP machines are. That's important to me. The XP machines are
still doing what I ask of them, but, I realize should one suffer
major hardware failure I likely won't be able to have all the new
components in a new system running under XP. It's possible thanks to
a couple of large driver database packages, but, not guaranteed.

BUT a lot of software will no longer install on it if you need a
new version for any reason. 32-bit machines are becoming
problematic regardless of the OS. The last 32-bit Chrome version
was released a while back. It works as well as it ever did but
it's also the end of the line.

I don't disagree.


--
Sarcasm, because beating the living **** out of deserving people is
illegal.

trader_4
Sun, 29
Jan 2017 23:09:06 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 5:56:50 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 14:17:33 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 4:53:02 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 13:14:57 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:


I don't know that you can say that nothing goes to the cloud.
Search queries using Edge for example? You can't stop the
cloud from seeing what you want to search for, and maybe not
from using it for their own purposes either. But if you mean
your typical saved word files, excel stuff, that doesn't
automatically go to the cloud on Win 10, AFAIK anyway.

I only have one question. Lets say someone buys a computer
with Win10, and only buys it to run office software, or they
design graphics, or use it to operate a DJ music service, etc.
and does NOT connect it to the internet at all.

Nothing can go to a cloud, MS cant spy on anyone, etc. Will
Win10 even function without an internet connection?


From everything I've seen, yes. You may have to connect once
when you set it up, to validate, register your copy of Windows.
But I've had a Win 10 machine that was not connected to the
internet for 6 months and it was still working fine, no
warning messages or anything. Could it have something in
there that will complain to be connected after a year, 5 years,
seems unlikely, but I don't know. Seems unlikely, because I
think it would cause more problems for MSFT with no benefit.


When I installed XP on the computer (which is not connected to
the internet), I just phoned MS to get the validation code. But
Win10 may be different.... (Seems like it would be a major pain
to have to pay for a months ISP service just to validate it (this
is a desktop, not a laptop that could be taken to a WIFI).

Then again, correct me if I'm wrong, since I have never bought a
new computer from a store (or anywhere else). But lets say I went
to Walmart and bought a new computer with Win10 already
installed. Isn't all the validation done at the factory, so when
I take it out of the box, it's ready to be used without me having
to do anything except plug it in and connect the keybd, mouse and
monitor cords?

I would think it would be ready to go right out of the box, but I
am only guessing....

That level of detail, IDK. Certainly they will work out of the
box, without any internet connection at least for some period of
time. But is the software license registered, validated when the
OEM puts it on the machine?

Yes. I described the process for XP. Windows 7+ isn't that much
different in that respect. It's keyed to an ID string.

have it? IDK? Somehow MSFT has a database of the license, what
machine it's on and a set of info about that machine.

Ehm, not exactly. they have a vendor ID string and a contract with
said vendor. On preactivated copies of Windows running on a name
brand machine, it's keyed to an ID string. They don't keep track of
each make/model in that setup, no.

OTH, If you buy a copy of Windows 7+ and activate it yourself, then,
it will have some information about your hardware as that's used in
the activation process. I do not know if MS actually keeps the
information or not, though.


That's so if I try to take it off my machine and put it on another
machine, MSFT knows the hardware has changed and wants to
revalidate it.

Not exactly. See above. If the vendor ID string is the same on the
other machine, you won't have an activation issue. It'll already be
activated for your convenience. If the vendor ID string no longer
matches, you'll be going through verification, yes.

I know if you put a new copy on a machine it wants to register it
with MSFT, but will delay that, let it continue to work for maybe
a month or so? Question is, a new PC, is that part already done
at the factory or not?

That depends on whether or not the new copy is retail/oem or
'branded/keyed'. You can technically use the same dvd and create
whatever flavor of the aforementioned you need by swapping a few
files out, but.. I digress.

It's been a few years since I bought a new PC, so whatever
went on, I don't remember anymore.

If you bought the PC new and it came with Windows, you most likely
(if it's a name brand box) didn't have to do any activation dance.
It was ready to go when you fired it up. If it's a custom built
clone, it's been preactivated for you, but, since the OS isn't keyed
to the hardware in the name brand way, you can cause the product
activation routines to trip. IE: move your copy of Windows to another
machine. Or, make what it deems are too many hardware changes.

--
Sarcasm, because beating the living **** out of deserving people is
illegal.

rbowman
Mon, 30 Jan 2017 02:02:32 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 01/29/2017 02:19 PM, Diesel wrote:
Otherwise, it's lazy programmers who just don't want to deal with
XP users anymore. In fact, some actually had to add more code to
detect XP vs another NT based OS and refuse to run if it's
detected. Not because XP couldn't run the code mind you, but,
because the author decided they didn't want their program running
on XP anymore.

Speaking as a programmer, we tell our clients that if they want to
run XP, so far our software will run on it but there are no
guarantees that will be the case with new releases.

I understand. At some point, you'll make changes to your codebase
that are no longer compatible with XP. Hopefully the new feature or
way of doing something justifies going that route.

The problem comes with having to test an entire software suite
with an OS that even the manufacturer doesn't support. The Android
products are the same. We're not going to lock ourselves into six
year old code just because a few people still have 2.3 devices. I
do a special build so I can run on my old 4.0.4 tablet and it more
or less works. However we can't ship something more or less.

I understand that pov. I also understand the pov from the other side
of the fence. Take, banking systems for example. The underlying code
base that runs the show is decades older than myself. The interfaces
have been modernized, but, the mainframe is still it's old self. It's
people still manage to support it and ensure whatever new web based
'updates' they roll out for clients/atm machines still talk to it as
needed.

It just depends on what the code is doing/being used for as to you're
willingness to support it for xxx amount of time. Some projects
aren't so easy to port, I'm sure you've been down that road yourself.



--
Sarcasm, because beating the living **** out of deserving people is
illegal.

rbowman
Mon, 30 Jan 2017 02:10:23 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 01/29/2017 02:19 PM, Diesel wrote:
Sadly, for the most part, that's the authors personal lazy
choice. Aside from a few API calls which are new/altered, there's
no real reason to deliberately force your binary not to run under
Windows XP.


If you use new API call, the app isn't going to run.

Possibly. It may not run at all, depending on when you call that api.
Or, it might run upto the point where you reach out to that api.


No reason to
force anything. It's no different than if I add a new call to one
of our dll's. Older software that doesn't depend on the new call
still works. New software linked against the new lib won't run
with the old dll.

Of course. It's been that way for decades. Prior to DLL.

It's not a lazy choice. The world moves on. We're not going to use
multiple source branches, builds, documents, and test protocols to
support those living in the past.

See my other post for more on this.


--
Sarcasm, because beating the living **** out of deserving people is
illegal.

Roger Blake
Sun, 29 Jan 2017
22:45:04 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 2017-01-29, Diesel wrote:
internet content? Which codecs and/or protocols specifically are
you writing about that are not available/not supported under XP?

Some sites don't work well in older browsers. The only current one
I know of that still works with XP is Mozilla Firefox.

I've been happy with firefox for years, I haven't checked to see what
if any other browsers may still work under XP that are still being
updated.

A lot of newer hardware and software is not supported on XP.

I don't dispute that in the least bit. I wasn't able to effectively
plug a new verizon tablet into this machine the other day. The Windows
7 box and the linux boxs had no trouble with it. Hell, linux didn't
even ask to find a driver. lol

So it depends on your needs. FWIW, if I were a Windows user making
this choice I would go with Win7 mainly due to it being currently
supported. The user interface is not all that much different from
XP, the really nasty crap started with Windows 8. (Even that can
be tamed to an extent if you use a 3rd-party program like Classic
Shell.)

Agreed.

--
Sarcasm, because beating the living **** out of deserving people is
illegal.

On 01/29/2017 06:22 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 17:12:42 -0600, philo wrote:


And just to be clear, this was not the RedHat nightmare from the 90s (I
tried that too though). My last and final linux try was about 3 years
ago. I tried at least a dozen POPULAR distros, several computers, and
there is not one good thing I can say about linux.

I would like an alternative to Windows too, but linux is NOT the answer.
I dont like the direction Windows has gone. I liked Windows 98, XP and
although I dont own a Win7 machine, I have played with it and know I
could get used to it. I want nothing to do with Win 8.x or 10.

I can only hope, or wish that MS would wise up and support more than
theor latest bloatware, because soem of us like a simpler OS and/or dont
want to keep buy new computers when our older ones still work fine.

-OR-

Someone would create an entirely new OS that's compatible with Windows
software.

But I know that is only a dream, and MS will keep creating their bloated
crap, which does the same thing as their olders OS, with 10X more
complexity and problems, and needing 10x more hardware power.

Then again, I'm old, so I probably wont have to ever use their latest
crap. I do just fine with XP and possibly will one day I get something
with Win7.





Basically I just use which ever OS that will do the job best for what my
project is.

Probably 80% of what I do can be done fine from Linux but if I need to
use a Windows only app, I do not hesitate to turn on my Windows machine.

Last year I finally got around to scanning all my negatives and slides
and the Windows software that came with my scanner did the best possible
job so I used my Windows machine for several months.

I even have a Mac which occasionally comes in handy

I re-loaded the OS on my wife's old iPhone and if I want a spare
internet device I've now got one

On 01/29/2017 07:53 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 01/29/2017 04:12 PM, philo wrote:
That said I do not try to force others to use it because if one
absolutely needs Win apps such as Photoshop, it's not going to work.
Not too many are going to want to deal with GIMP but I got used to it.

I use Gimp as an example of how not to design a UI but, not having
Photoshop, I do use it. Some people like it but I'm not a fan of
littering the desktop with about 15 different windows.


First time I used GIMP I hated it, but eventually got used to it.

For what I'm doing it works fine but it is not Photoshop

On 01/29/2017 08:09 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
philo writes:

That said I do not try to force others to use it because if one
absolutely needs Win apps such as Photoshop, it's not going to work.

A quick look at:

https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManag...ication&iId=17

says Photoshop 2017 is rated Gold. So looks like you can use Photoshop
under Linux.

Not too many are going to want to deal with GIMP but I got used to it.

There are a lot of online tutorials.




I have Photoshop 7 running in WINE

None of "SE" editions I've tried will install.

No big deal I just have to use Windows then

On 01/29/2017 09:24 PM, T wrote:
On 01/29/2017 03:12 PM, philo wrote:
Not too many are going to want to deal with GIMP but I got used to it.

GIMP is a pain in the ass. I use it though. I do ADORE Inkscape.
Use GIMP for screen shots and then paste into Inkscape

May have to look at Inkscape never even heard of it before

On 01/29/2017 09:28 PM, T wrote:
On 01/29/2017 05:50 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 01/29/2017 03:38 PM, Dan Espen wrote:
I think W7 is way ahead of 8.1 unless you have a touch screen. But
telling someone to use W7 is hopeless. They'll be on W10 before they
know it.


I'm crossing my fingers but I disabled updates on my 7 laptop when MS
was force-feeding 10. I've re-enabled them after the 'free' upgrade
ended and so far it's not nagging me or downloading 10 just in case.

One thing to watch out for is they backported the customer telemetry
crap to 7. You can turn all of it off but them might turn it back on
again with the next 'important' update. They use the Pelosi technique --
install it to find out what is in it.



My windows machines are in Virtual Machines (VM) (qemu-kvm). Except
for Windows Nein (W10), where I have to see what idiot update is
happening "today", I turn off Windows' Idiot updates. What
an absolute pain-in-the-ass. I keep gold copies of my vm's
in case Windows does the Windows thing. I go love being able
to test some trash out in an VM, then overwrite the VM/s hard
drive with my gold copy.

I surf from my base machine, which is a Red Hat clone. My
VM's have very restrictive Internet access or none at all.



Just for the heck of it I do have several VM's setup:

Ecom Station (OS/2)

XP
Win8
Win98

rbowman wrote:
On 01/29/2017 11:41 AM, Terry Coombs wrote:
7 is a lot like Vista , I personally prefer XP Pro ... I have no
experiencewith anything newer but I hear 10 invades your privacy
significantly - and by default puts all your stuff in the cloud . I
prefer to store my stuff right here at home .

No, 7 actually works... I had very few dealing with Vista but those
were painful. Luckily our clients skipped it completely just like they
skipped 8. MS has a reputation among IT professionals that you're
better off skipping every other release. They've clouded that pool
with the Windows 10 Forever scheme. Now you don't know which update
is going to hose your machine.

I meant to say that it "feels" a lot like Vista .
--
Snag

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 17:12:42 -0600, philo wrote:



I could see win8.1 with a touch screen and I have a few test machines
running Win10. What I hate about Win10 is the forced updates and reboots.
I had to use the Policy Editor to stop that but the average user is
probably not going to want to mess with that.


You can just disable the Windows 10 update service.

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 7:11:52 AM UTC-5, Diesel wrote:
trader_4
Sun, 29
Jan 2017 21:30:13 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Sunday, January 29, 2017 at 4:20:49 PM UTC-5, Diesel wrote:

Sun, 29 Jan 2017
20:53:42 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2017 13:33:12 -0500, Al Dente
wrote:

On 1/29/2017 1:09 PM, Newgene McMensa wrote:
Is Win 7 any easier to use than 8.1? If the way you
interface is more like 8.1 than XP, then I will install XP on
it. ` Snuffy


If ease of use is your goal, consider Microsoft Bob Desktop
running on Windows for Workgroups 3.11

As long as you don't need internet access. 7 or 10 - forget
anything in between - and except for special apps forget XP -
and regardless, forget anything earlier.

What do you mean as long as you don't need internet access?

What he probably means is that AFAIK, none of the latest, updated
releases of the popular browsers that most people use will run
on XP anymore.

Firefox is still a popular browser. ESR build is still getting
updates on XP.


"In approximately March, 2017, Windows XP and Vista users will automatically be moved to the Firefox Extended Support Release (ESR).

Firefox is one of the few browsers that continues to support Windows XP and Vista, and we expect to continue to provide security updates for users until September 2017. Users do not need to take additional action to receive those updates. In mid-2017, user numbers on Windows XP and Vista will be reassessed and a final support end date will be announced."


That doesn't sound very reassuring for a person like the OP, who is
deciding whether to load XP, Win 7 or Win 8 on his machine.





longer? IF I was going to be browsing, I for sure would not
be installing XP when Win 7 is the other choice.

Well, the thing for me is this...I have vlk edition of XP. I'm not
entirely sure I have what amounts to vlk edition of Windows 7. And,
that makes all the difference in the world for me.


I have no idea what vlk edition is or what possible significance it
has for the OP.

Per Ed Pawlowski:
... I'd go with W7. I find it a bit
better than XP.

+1, but with the observation that I have 8.1 on my laptop and, since
installing something called "Start8" and tweaking a few settings, it
looks/feels pretty much like Windows 7 - i.e. it's 100% livable for me.
--
Pete Cresswell

On Monday, January 30, 2017 at 12:06:45 PM UTC-5, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Ed Pawlowski:
... I'd go with W7. I find it a bit
better than XP.

+1, but with the observation that I have 8.1 on my laptop and, since
installing something called "Start8" and tweaking a few settings, it
looks/feels pretty much like Windows 7 - i.e. it's 100% livable for me.
--
Pete Cresswell

Just out of curiousity, why didn't you upgrade to Win 10 when you
could have for free?