IE11 is still one of the most reliable and compatible browsers in the
PC world. Particularly with it's built-in compatability mode. I have
not found a webpage I could not access with IE11.
Firefox is a very close second, with Chrome and Safari for Windows
lagging well behind the pack.
IE9 was a disaster, from what I remember.
On 02/21/2016 02:37 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
poor it would take 25 to 30 seconds to render a page that was almost
instantaneous on Chrome or Firefox. The Chakra engine in IE9 was better
and has been improved over the years. With many sites now using
something even if they are allergic to anything with 'java' in the name.
In my case, I have tens of $K invested in software.
I don't want to "have to update" JUST BECAUSE THE OS
DOESN'T WANT TO "play nice" -- with a program that has
been working JUST FINE on an earlier OS.
That's a waste of money (buying a new license), time
(installing the new version), experience (RE-learning
a product that has been working fine) AND potential
risk (how many new bugs will I have to discover??).
"What is this going to *buy* me? Why do I want to take
on those COSTS if there isn't something to offset it??"
Granted, some apps work better in a 64b playing field.
So, I'll install them -- and JUST THEM -- on a 64b machine!
No need to bear the costs for moving all of these other
apps that are perfectly happy (and already configured!)
where they are!
Does having multiple cores help me write prose faster?
Will it help me come up with an engineering solution
faster ("meatware accelerator")? Does moving the start
menu to a different place make me more productive
(esp if you reflect the cost of adjusting to that change)?
Or, supporting transparency in the window manager??
Or, is all of this just "change for the sake of change"?
So nobody is stopping you from installing the 32 bit version of
windows, either 7, 8, or 10, on your new machine. The license key for
64 bit works just fine to install the 32 bit version.
I downgrades a pile of Win7-64 pro machines to win7-32 pro because we
had a lot of legacy scanners that were not supported on the 64 bit
platform, and we were not about to spend $2400 each to replace 20-some
A few have been "upconverted" back to 64 bit since the scanners have
taken themselves out of service.
On 2/21/2016 2:49 PM, email@example.com wrote:
Why do I want to move to 7even (or 8 or vista or...) when those other
apps are working fine under XP? Moving all the other apps brings
up licensing issues (hardware locked) for them, risks compatibility
problems, means the new machine has to support the old interfaces
(e.g., serial and parallel ports, PCI-X slots), etc.
Instead, move *just* what "needs" to be moved. An extra machine is
a small price to pay for NOT having to migrate all the WORKING
and PROPERLY CONFIGURED software!
Generally I also look at a computer as a "tool" and as long as it
isn't broken it's not obsolete. Just because you can make holes with a
laser doesn't make a drill obsolete, but if and when the time comes
you need to drill holes that are not round, getting a laser (or a cnc
mill) might become a good idea.
And when you start having to change bits on the drill on a regular
basis, upgrading to a good keyless chuckon the old drill can improve
it's functionality significantly without having to replace it.
And yes, there are times when a second drill is a good tool to have at
your disposal - even if it is a hand cranked one.
On 2/22/2016 5:52 AM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
This is an excellent analogy! I will steal it! :>
Yes -- so long as you're not buying one just to keep up with the
guy down the street!
Almost everything that I use a computer for is "meatware limited".
A faster computer, newer OS, etc. just means the machine waits
for me, more (relatively speaking).
When I got started in this business, if you were LUCKY, you could
do TWO iterations of the edit-build-test cycle in an 8 hour shift.
The tools were SO slow and the technology so inflexible, that
you spent a lot of time waiting for the tools *or* performing
"acts of contrition" to appease the silicon gods and coerce them to
honor your prayers.
So, you learned how to better "schedule" your efforts. Anticipate
the next problem when solving the current one. I.e., don't just
install the "fix" for the current problem but also install
any stubs, etc. to let you get a headstart understanding/verifying
the behavior of the NEXT thing you'll be testing.
[fix first problem, build new system, test]
"Great, that works!"
[create test conditions for next step, build new system]
"Hmmm, that's a problem..."
[fix second problem, build new system, test]
"Great, that works!"
[fix first problem, create test conditions for next step, build, test]
"Great, that works! But, there's a problem with..."
[fix second problem, create test conditions for next step, build, test]
"OK, that's fixed! Now there's a problem with..."
If you keep this sort of mindset, you're always a step ahead of
the guy who relies on a faster machine to just keep "throwing darts"
at his perceived problems: "Hmmm... that didn't work, let's TRY this..."
And, less needing of the latest and greatest (speed, etc.)
"Go do something else while you're waiting for the machine"
"Buy a faster machine so you're not waiting as much"
No need for a criminal record over it - I've offered that one MANY
times in the past. Feel free to use it - just preface it with "a smart
fellow I met on the internet said-------"
Buying a laser or mill to make round holes that you've made for
decades with a drill is not buying tools, it's buying TOYS.
Now, if all your drills break or wear out and you expect to be making
fancy not-round holed, PERHAPS buying a mill instead of a drill might
make sense. Unless the work is too fine for a mill, buying alaser is
STILL buying a toy if you don't have a clear requirement for it.
A faster machine just allows you to make more mistakes in the same
period of time.
On Sunday, February 21, 2016 at 10:25:19 AM UTC-5, Mayayana wrote:
I have IE 11 running on Win 7-64. Installed with no drama at all.
Overall, Win 7 has been a very stable platform for me, at least
as good as XP was. Explorer does sometimes close and reload some
pages, IDK what that's all about. It didn't seem to do this in
previous versions, but there were some other changes I made
I've heard *that* before.
No guarantee, but why would they commit suicide?
If I'm on-line, I assume the spooks and marketeers have plenty of
methods of "collecting" my habits without the aid of MS.
So what? I suppose I could distrust Comcast too.
Probably an issue with how the OS handles memory in relation to the
app. I've run into that before.
I'm also resistant to change when the ROI is wrong. But I've had no
issues with Win10. It so happened that I put together a new box when
Win10 came out.
Footprint is somewhat important to me because I image quite
often (cold image) and it's less time consuming.
Of course I'm only dealing with home machines.
I can restore this machine in under 5 minutes.
How is it suicide? If MS decides to charge you by the hour to run
your PC, what options do you have? Try to fish your old PC out
of the trash? Live with unmaintained OS? Learn a FOSS OS??
Even if they aren't the 800 pound gorilla they used to be, they
still are, pretty much, the only game in town! Even if you found a
manufacturer willing to build a machine that used *old*, existing
drivers, you wouldn't legally be able to acquire new (older OS)
licenses to run on that machine!
And, MS wouldn't be doing anything illegal *or* immoral (you pay for
minutes on your phone; aren't you paying or a service? isn't your
OS providing a service to you??)
I've a friend who claims he has nothing to hide.
I mentioned to him that his bank statements come in envelopes,
instead of on the back of postcards. And, I notice that he picks
them up off the table and "hides them away" before we sit down.
Hmmm... I wonder what he's HIDING??
I am overly sensitive to privacy issues as I see how easy it is
to play the big data game and generalize observed behaviors
("Hey, the 9/11 perps were *all* arabs so we should be suspicious
In automating the house, I had to think hard about what data I
wanted to risk "leaking" to the outside world. Surely, no one
would care about BATHROOM HABITS! Or, how often the refrigerator
is opened. Or, how much laundry we do.
Or, would they?
Wanna bet that if it was easy for <someone> to collect this
data, they'd *find* a use for it? Just by running the "big numbers"
and seeing what unexpected patterns emerge! Wanna bet there's a
buttload of information to be had in telephone "metadata"?
No doubt more bang for buck (byte) than in actually listening
to all those calls!
"Gee, this phone only gets used twice a month and always on these
days for about 3 minutes. Isn't that unusual when compared to the
'norm' defined by these hundreds of millions of OTHER phones users??"
More physical memory in the laptop than in the machine on which I normally
use the tool. Laptop hangs indefinitely. In my book, that's called
a bug. A bug that wasn't present in XP or W2KS. A bug that directly
interferes with my productivity (I have to restart the app -- after
killing it via task manager -- then recreate everything that *it*
lost since my last "backup")
And, I want this behavior because it is offset by WHAT feature,
I built an HTPC last month. Installed XP on it. Boots in 30 seconds
and has video available within 10 seconds after that. Would it
be any better with 7even? Or W10? Doubtful.
I've got a LOT invested in software -- both in terms of license costs
and "experience". So, an OS *really* needs to show me that it can do something
THAT I WANT in a better/faster/more accurate/robust/reliable manner than
what I have already.
E.g., it takes me several days to reinstall (from scratch)
everything on *one* of my workstations. Then, a few more
days to install the tools for the *other* (different tools)
I have a shoebox of 80G drives in this desk -- one for each of my
machines. On it are images of the "system" for a particular
machine at different points in the installation process:
- after windows
- after drivers
- after updates
- after basic utilities (WinZIP, PowerToys, UltraISO, EMACS, etc.)
- after basic tools (Acrobat, Tbird, Ffox, etc.)
- after custom tools (whatever the workstation is intended to do)
Each image is compressed so takes very little space, compared to
the original; and, "empty space" doesn't need to be stored in the
image at all!
The real pigs are some of the tools that have huge "libraries".
E.g., my multimedia authoring station has ~250GB of "stuff"
that is useful in creating a MM presentation but takes a
really long time to reinstall.
On the student machines, I create a bogus partition to hold the
image and a special boot script that lets them invoke that
process automatically. That way, they don't have to keep track
of "restore disks" (nor expect *me* to do so!)
But, those images are tiny: the OS, Tbird, FFox, a few utilities
and MSOffice. So, there's little reason NOT to "restore" if something
seems to be wonky.
Then why don't they do it? Why don't they charge by the hour?
Because they're benevolent? Because they're generous?
Why on earth don't they charge by the hour or minute of use?
You tell me. I say it would be suicide. Linux would then become
the main consumer operating system. Free.
And MS could no longer sell an OS to the masses, as it now does.
Did you ever get your walls painted with anti-RF paint?
I had an app (Ghost) that hung doing a simple directory look-up on a
machine after I added 8gb of memory. It never hung until I added the
8 gig. At first I thought it was a permanent hang, but found that it
took a full 2 minutes to resolve its answer. Every time.
I quit using it when I found a suitable replacement.
Well, my Win10 machine boots in 25 seconds. So there. (-:
I never reinstall anything. Just recover an image.
Yes, that's a lot of data to install. But I would image it at today's
| >And, MS wouldn't be doing anything illegal *or* immoral (you pay for
| >minutes on your phone; aren't you paying or a service? isn't your
| >OS providing a service to you??)
| Then why don't they do it? Why don't they charge by the hour?
They are doing it. Office 365 is subscription by the
month. Adobe has gone the same way with Creative
Suite. They pretend the programs are online "cloud apps"
to justify subscription, but they install locally just like
anything else. Subscription is what this whole thing
is about. It's the reason for free Win10 updates from 7/8.
Why Office 365 and CS? Because those are monopoly
products that are critical to business. They can afford
to get a bit pushy. Your Windows PC itself may end up
being subscription at some point. Like an addicted
Facebookie complaining about ads and spying, it will
probably be too late for you to pull yourself away at
that point. That's because they won't do it until it *is*
at that point.
Microsoft started with ads in the OS and attempts at
online services way back in Win98. They've been very
gradually pulling the rug out ever since: locking down
options, creating online services, trying to lead people
into those services by pushing them to do things like
get a "Microsoft ID". (And remember Passport before that?
MS was hoping to have a lock on online wallets. The only
problems were that nobody wanted an online wallet and
no one trusted Microsoft.) Vista was originally supposed
to be a locked down system based on .Net. (Look up
"Longhorn".) If it had worked that would have closed
the door to 3rd-party programmers who wanted to have
system access. Only sandboxed software would have
been possible, and MS probably could have started their
online "store" to take a cut of software sales, like they're
now doing with tablet apps.
So Microsoft hasn't taken all this time for lack of
trying. They're constantly cooking up new gimmicks.
But there have been various reasons why it hasn't
worked out for them. One is that they're terrible at
doing services. Another reason is because it's only
recently that Internet speeds are fast enough for
services. And even now, something like MS Word *really*
online is a pipedream. It would be too slow. Another
reason is because Microsoft has lost money on
almost everything they've ever done except their
two monopoly products, Windows and Office. So they
see Apple raking in bucks from suckers with iPhones
and they want a piece of that action. But it's a big
risk for them. Services is not their forte. Only greed
is leading them to forego common sense and push into
a market they don't do well. The trick is to get enough
frogs in pans, like you, who don't realize the heat's
being turned up until they're already cooked. :)
| >| >And, MS wouldn't be doing anything illegal *or* immoral (you pay for
| >| >minutes on your phone; aren't you paying or a service? isn't your
| >| >OS providing a service to you??)
| >| >
| >| Then why don't they do it? Why don't they charge by the hour?
| > They are doing it. Office 365 is subscription by the
| We were talking about the OS, not apps.
I'm talking about both. Linux is not going to
replace Windows if it can't run MS Office and
Photoshop. The software is what people use
the OS for. And there's no reason to assume
charging a subscription for the OS won't happen,
either. It's all just a matter of market. MS could
do something like say, "OK, we're going to keep
Windows free, but patches will be on a yearly
subscription basis." That's essentially what they
already do with business licensing. They rent it
on a multi-year basis.
Personally I never believed Adobe would get
away with charging rent on Photoshop, but people
have signed up in droves. They don't think they
have a choice.
Microsoft will do the same. If they can get
away with it, they'll charge. And apologists like
yourself will undoubtedly be the first to rationalize
why it's reasonable.
And, that huge flaw that exposes you to all sorts of hackery
will be deployed to PAYING customers before we "give it
away" (no doubt because we are being forced to do so).
Of course, the new .NET framework that your application
REQUIRES is actually part of the OS so, unless you've a
paid subscription, you're SoL. We *may* make JUST that
component available for a separate fee...
And, of course, the more of a "minority opinion" your
needs become, the less likely we're going to make *any* effort
to cater to them!
Note that they are not *depriving* you of anything that you
*HAD*. Rather, just not granting you anything ADDITIONAL!
(Hey, SOMEONE has to pay for this development work!)
Pay per play on music titles?? WTF?
The Unwashed Masses dictate (by their tolerance of what
you might consider "unreasonable"/outrageous) what we
*all* have to live with!
Because it *is* reasonable! Why should everyone have to pay the
same license fee regardless of how "much" they use it? Or,
how VALUABLE to them it may be? I pay more if I use more
electricity, make more phone calls, use more natural gas,
watch more TV channels, etc.
The problem is one of consumer mindset: you have to condition the
consumer to thinking that this "makes sense" -- even if it ends up
costing them more (because you never TELL them that -- up front!)
My internet connection has no data limits. I can saturate the
link 24/7/365 and pay the same as if it was idle for all of
that time. Other folks have limits on how much data they can
move across the wire. Ages ago, I used UUCP over long distance
phone lines to move traffic to other hosts -- files were "priced"
in terms of the number of LD minutes required to move them!
I pick something that makes sense for *my* needs/usage. But,
if there's only one game in town (e.g., MS), then THEY decide
what their policies will be and I have a choice of accepting them,
or not. If they're the 800 pound gorilla and can convince enough
people to buy in to their practices (even if they don't LIKE it),
then I have no other choice.
At this point you can still buy "perpetual license" versions of both
Office and Adobe's products.
Nobody is forcing you to rent Office 365. You can still buy Office
2016 Home and Student, Home and Business, as well as Professional. in
the retail market.. Sure, professional costs $520 Canadian, while
Personal 365 is only $69 per year or $7 per month. Home and office
2016 is only $260, Home and Student is $150.
Comes down to the old addage -" if you want first quality oats you
need to be willing to pay first quality price. If you are willing to
settle for (or are intent on buying) oats that have already gone
through the horse, those DOcome a little cheaper"
Can't blame Microsoft for responding to market forces that dictate the
lowest price wins, and damn the consequences!!.
Microsoft is attempting to respond to market forces. Vista totally
misread the market and died a very quick death (as well it should
If Americans and Canadians in particular vote with their wallets,
Microsoft will continue in the direction those votes dictate. If you
buy the 365 option, that is the direction Microsoft will continue. If
you shun the "product as a service"model and but the higher priced
perpetual licence products, that is the direction Microsoft will go.
Microsoft has not become the giant it is by continuously misreading
the market or by mis-responding to the market .
What makes you think that's not already in the cards?
I used to buy albums (LP's). Then, the same content
(in a cheaper to produce form) moved to CD for much
MORE money. Now, you *rent* songs (pay per play).
Linux will never be mainstream. Too many technocrats
stroking their egos instead of thinking about the end
user. "Gee, look at this nifty new feature I created...
that *almost* works!" And, it's boring (and hard!)
to make sure it *really* works so they just move on
to the next NNF (Nifty New Feature) to amuse themselves
instead of hunkering down and making a robust, reliable
version of that NNF (assuming, for the moment, that
anyone really *wants* that NNF!)
The same is true of most FOSS projects. Apache, Mozilla
and PostgreSQL are probably the only notable exceptions;
treated as *products* instead of monuments to the developers'
Huh? Why, because they couldn't collect the revenues? The phone
company can't sell to the masses? Nor cable? Nor Apple? They'd
cut a deal with something like PayPal (though MS would have to reinvent
it instead of relying on an existing implementation!) and you'd
sign up just like you sign up for your ISP.
We decided that there was no practical way of *removing* it.
And, any future homeowner would probably not be keen on the
fact that he couldn't use his cell phone indoors.
So, I will live with the RF vulnerability in the prototype
until I can develop a technology that doesn't rely on it.
"Security by obscurity" for the time being.
(Only so many hours in a day)
Moving past the 4G limit means you have introduced a 32/64 bit issue.
Moving from 2G to 3G poses no such problem.
Is your hardware 10 years old? Did it cost you more than $10? :>
Can't recover images when you are moving apps to different
workstations. It is almost impossible for me to use a
single workstation configured with *every* app that I currently
use. The start menu itself would be several layers of cascaded
menus. File associations would be meaningless (as multiple
applications want to claim the same extension for different
purposes -- yet another MS screwup). Startup times would
be horrendous as every add-in initialized itself, etc.
I have three windows workstations each with 1T spinning.
Much of that is "work space". But, a fair bit of it is
"software" (a few hundred MB). Do I want to reimage all
of that each time I make a notable configuration change?
In any of the many applications?
Or, do I want to split the application domains into smaller
pieces that are self-consistent: no need for photo editing
software on a machine that's intended to layout electronic
circuits; likewise no need for audio processing tools on
a machine used to write software!
It doesn't buy you anything. You spend time building the HUGE
images, hoping the media never falters -- all for the potential
of recovering it in a single operation. What happens if you
want to recover it to a machine that has different drivers?
I.e., your windows image isn't compatible with the new hardware.
Trust me, I've been doing this a LONG time. I've learned where the
costs are (for the tools that *I* have) and how best to avoid them.
I have zero desire to spend time maintaining my *purchased* tools
(though obviously have an obligation to maintain my *developed*
tools). So, I look for every economy possible to save labor and
E.g., I have built ISO's of all my CD/DVD media so I don't have
to "feed discs" into a machine -- just mount ISO's. I keep things
like clipart/font libraries offline -- yet have an online
catalogue (so I can preview the clipart and fonts to decide
*which* CD/DVD-ISO I will need to access to retrieve the item).
My heart goes out to IT guys who have to do this stuff day in and day out.
It would feel like digging ditches and refilling them at the end of each
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.