Windows 10

[Handley_Page]

How to count to 10 in Microsoft Speak/language....
1
2
3
3.1
3.11
95a
95b
98
98SE
NT
Me
2000
XP
Vista
7
8
8.1
10
Hope that clarifies how to count to 10

 

[Zeb_Carter]

How to count to 10 in Microsoft Speak/language....
1
2
3
3.1
3.11
95a
95b
98
98SE
NT
Me
2000
XP
Vista
7
8
8.1
10
Hope that clarifies how to count to 10

Purely my opinion as I have used all of the above except where noted...

1 - Did this really exist?
2 - Same for this.
3 - from 1 to here, I never used these.
3.1 - here is where my windows life started. (buggy, prone to crashing)
3.11 - not much better, but it was all we had.
95a - finally a real windows OS. Prior to this windows was an application that ran on DOS 3.1
95b - This broke windows 95
98 - installed this on my work machine. Formatted the hard drive and re-installed win 95a
98SE - used on someone else machine...it blew up when I clicked on the word icon.
NT - This was actually a good OS and is the base for all the future windows OS's
Me - junk the last windows OS based on the win 95 code
2000 - this too was not a bad OS. more business oriented.
XP - one of the best MS ever produced.
Vista - bloated but was actually pretty good once you turned off all that extra junk MS thought you needed.
7 - on par with XP. So far no crashes, no problems running software no matter when it was produced.
8 - Tiles? WTF?
8.1 - A little better, but still more orientated to touch screens and phones.
10 - Haven't used it yet, haven't seen it in action yet. I will reserve my judgement until I have. But, I don't know about you, I use a PC because I like the control I have about what gets installed, updated, etc. and when all that happens. I don't think MS should have that kind of power over my machine.

 

[Handley_Page]

Purely my opinion as I have used all of the above except where noted...

1 - Did this really exist?
2 - Same for this.
3 - from 1 to here, I never used these.
3.1 - here is where my windows life started. (buggy, prone to crashing)
3.11 - not much better, but it was all we had.
95a - finally a real windows OS. Prior to this windows was an application that ran on DOS 3.1
95b - This broke windows 95
98 - installed this on my work machine. Formatted the hard drive and re-installed win 95a
98SE - used on someone else machine...it blew up when I clicked on the word icon.
NT - This was actually a good OS and is the base for all the future windows OS's
Me - junk the last windows OS based on the win 95 code
2000 - this too was not a bad OS. more business oriented.
XP - one of the best MS ever produced.
Vista - bloated but was actually pretty good once you turned off all that extra junk MS thought you needed.
7 - on par with XP. So far no crashes, no problems running software no matter when it was produced.
8 - Tiles? WTF?
8.1 - A little better, but still more orientated to touch screens and phones.
10 - Haven't used it yet, haven't seen it in action yet. I will reserve my judgement until I have. But, I don't know about you, I use a PC because I like the control I have about what gets installed, updated, etc. and when all that happens. I don't think MS should have that kind of power over my machine.

1. I think is was an operating system called, by it's inventors, 'Vulcan'.
It was bought by Bill Gates to sell to IBM for their PC.
2. The very early Disk Operating System for the PC
Gary Kildall, had also done one, called CP/M.
3. From here on, things got a lot less 'buggy.'
Actually, DOS got to v 6.24 and that was damned good
Then the fools decided to introduce a WIMP system (Window, Icon, Mouse, Pointer) and produced a version for IBM's OS/2.
Win 3.11 seemed to work - most of the time, given that the user was roped into a system which had no way of the user doing something for himself.
95 and later - slow and of poor quality.
NT - damned good.
XP - I still use it.

My old PC does not have a touch screen, or multiple processors (hang on, I think it has 2 cores requiring a 64 bit software thing, for which Bill want an egregious sum of money), is only recently been left connected to the 'net. I don't have a "Systems Administrator" (that term really bugs me).
I don't want my stuff connected to the 'cloud', whatever that is.
I want my stuff on my box and nowhere else, thank you.

There's more, but I'd better stop now.

 

[rjordan]

Purely my opinion as I have used all of the above except where noted...

1 - Did this really exist?
2 - Same for this.
3 - from 1 to here, I never used these.
3.1 - here is where my windows life started. (buggy, prone to crashing)
3.11 - not much better, but it was all we had.
95a - finally a real windows OS. Prior to this windows was an application that ran on DOS 3.1
95b - This broke windows 95
98 - installed this on my work machine. Formatted the hard drive and re-installed win 95a
98SE - used on someone else machine...it blew up when I clicked on the word icon.
NT - This was actually a good OS and is the base for all the future windows OS's
Me - junk the last windows OS based on the win 95 code
2000 - this too was not a bad OS. more business oriented.
XP - one of the best MS ever produced.
Vista - bloated but was actually pretty good once you turned off all that extra junk MS thought you needed.
7 - on par with XP. So far no crashes, no problems running software no matter when it was produced.
8 - Tiles? WTF?
8.1 - A little better, but still more orientated to touch screens and phones.
10 - Haven't used it yet, haven't seen it in action yet. I will reserve my judgement until I have. But, I don't know about you, I use a PC because I like the control I have about what gets installed, updated, etc. and when all that happens. I don't think MS should have that kind of power over my machine.

My Windows experience goes back that far as well. I skipped 3.0. I was deeply immersed in interfacing PCs to an Autologic typesetter at the time and didn't have the patience to even care about Windows. I vaguely remember that it seemed kind of silly, but as a touch typist, I thought the idea of a mouse when I first say the Mac, was silly. Who would want to keep taking their fingers off the keyboard to do things with a stupid puck when you could just press CTRL-something to do the same thing. I guess, I'm not a good tech visionary.

Never used ME or Vista. Very very happy with XP, and found Windows 7 to be at least as stable, but much prettier.

Never used the tiles in Win 8/8.1. Not ever. I just use the desktop with all my familiar icons. I use Stardock Fences to organize them. I never even see the Tiles. It just boots up with the familiar Windows desktop.

Have not even seen Win 10. I suspect it will turn out like all the others. It comes a certain way and 90% of people think that's how it has to be. With a few spare hours of customizing, we will be able to make it look like anything we want. Just like Win 8. All the howling will disappear and we will be back to using computers for whateve we each use them for.

rj

 

[rjordan]

2. The very early Disk Operating System for the PC
Gary Kildall, had also done one, called CP/M.

I used CP/M on a TRS-80 Mod II with 8" floppies and a Corvus 10 mb hard disk that was about the size of a modern desktop laser printer and cost around $5K in 1980 dollars.

rj

 

[oggbashan]

I used CP/M on a TRS-80 Mod II with 8" floppies and a Corvus 10 mb hard disk that was about the size of a modern desktop laser printer and cost around $5K in 1980 dollars.

rj

I too used CP/M but my first system was an IBM 1401 punch card driven mainframe in the early 1960s. It used a compiler called SPS but it was easier and more efficient to program in 8 bit machine code.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/BRL61-IBM_1401.jpg

 

[rjordan]

I too used CP/M but my first system was an IBM 1401 punch card driven mainframe in the early 1960s. It used a compiler called SPS but it was easier and more efficient to program in 8 bit machine code.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/BRL61-IBM_1401.jpg

In the early 60s I was training with an M1 with 8 serial bits of .30 caliber lead for later use of a 7.62mm 20-bit M14. I didn't care for the life expectancy in that line of work, though there was some all expenses paid foreign travel.

After 3 years, I got into computers in the late 60's working first with analog computers, then with DEC computers. I used punch cards in a couple of programming classes on an IBM at San Jose State in the early 70s, but can't remember the model number.

rj

 

[oggbashan]

In the early 60s I was training with an M1 with 8 serial bits of .30 caliber lead for later use of a 7.62mm 20-bit M14. I didn't care for the life expectancy in that line of work, though there was some all expenses paid foreign travel.

After 3 years, I got into computers in the late 60's working first with analog computers, then with DEC computers. I used punch cards in a couple of programming classes on an IBM at San Jose State in the early 70s, but can't remember the model number.

rj

The IBM was probably a 360 series that replaced the 1401.

http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/images/icp/T114212C01873C04/us__en_us__ibm100__system_360__360genrl__620x350.jpg

 

[trysail]

Windows 10 thread:

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1213479


​

 

[Zeb_Carter]

The IBM was probably a 360 series that replaced the 1401.

http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/images/icp/T114212C01873C04/us__en_us__ibm100__system_360__360genrl__620x350.jpg

This is what I learned on. The Ole 360. 360 Assembler was the best and easy to code in.

Then there was this...the MicroData Reality series...and of course the Prime Computer systems.

http://s7.computerhistory.org/is/image/CHM/500004778-05-01?$re-zoomed$http://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/gallery/ral82/med/r82r3181m.jpg

 

[rjordan]

This is what I learned on. The Ole 360. 360 Assembler was the best and easy to code in.

I never got close to the computer at San Jose State. I turned in my card stack at a little window and got it back with results a couple days later.

The DEC computers at my first civilian job were accessible. I did a lot of work on a PDP-8. No monitor or keyboard, just an old oily smelly Teletype machine with a roll of yellow paper in it. We actually had a game on it. Remember Hammurabi?

The boot loader was toggled in by hand, then the FORTRAN Compiler was loaded from fanfold paper tape that loaded at 300 characters per second. Amazing what we could do with 4K of actual magnetic core memory. That little computer cost more than two brand new Datsun 240Z sports cars.

I later worked on PDP-11s with Unix. DEC was a first class company with top-rate equipment.

rj

 

[about_average]

Actually, Microsoft has had three successes, followed just as quickly by disaster.

Windows 95...

Funny. I happened to come across an old issue of Byte that I saved from the mid-90's that had "Laptop OS Shootout", between Win95 and OS/2.
OS/2 won hands down as the best mobile OS.
What was even better, it wasn't OS/2 Connect. Just plain OS/2.
That's how good Win95 was.

Linux doesn't do that. Users seem to take pride in the fact that they have to resort to command lines to do simple things.

Because for most OS related things things the command line is much faster.
Watching young people who learned to use computers with a GUI navigate around a system or network with the mouse is enough to make want me to slap them and yell, "Come on! I haven't got all day for this shit!"
Same with people using notepad to edit files. Takes forever and usually looks like shit when opened with a proper editor.

 

[R. Richard]

I did some work on an old PDP-8, but strictly in assembler. I had to recode a too slow program to get a job done.

 

[rjordan]

Because for most OS related things things the command line is much faster.
Watching young people who learned to use computers with a GUI navigate around a system or network with the mouse is enough to make want me to slap them and yell, "Come on! I haven't got all day for this shit!"
Same with people using notepad to edit files. Takes forever and usually looks like shit when opened with a proper editor.

It's much faster for people who work with the OS every day. It's not as fast for people to whom the OS should be completely transparent--computer users. People who use computers to do things outside the computer world. Artists, writers, engineers. architects, recipe hoarders, web surfers, Lit forum denizens, whatever.

Ordinary people have no more business dealing with the OS than they do opening the hood/bonnet of their car. There's nothing in there they can deal with. There was a time when ordinary people were forced to use an OS command Line. There was a time when ignition spark timing was a control on the steering wheel of their car. Drivers have other uses of their time than fucking with their car's guts. Same with computer users.

That was my only point about Linux. I completely agree with your assessment. It's just that computers are now to the appliance stage where most users are not computer tech enthusiasts, and really don't want to learn to be.

I lost interest in them years ago as tech toys in and of themselves, but I still have an appreciation for what goes on inside. We all have friends that complain that their computer doesn't work. I tell them I'm still in awe that the fucking things work AT ALL considering the billions of things that have to happen exactly right every single time.

rj

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Funny. I happened to come across an old issue of Byte that I saved from the mid-90's that had "Laptop OS Shootout", between Win95 and OS/2.
OS/2 won hands down as the best mobile OS.
What was even better, it wasn't OS/2 Connect. Just plain OS/2.
That's how good Win95 was.


Because for most OS related things things the command line is much faster.
Watching young people who learned to use computers with a GUI navigate around a system or network with the mouse is enough to make want me to slap them and yell, "Come on! I haven't got all day for this shit!"
Same with people using notepad to edit files. Takes forever and usually looks like shit when opened with a proper editor.

And where is OS/2 today? It was that good? I still have a Win95 machine that I use as a file server.

 

[rjordan]

And where is OS/2 today? It was that good? I still have a Win95 machine that I use as a file server.

Yes, but are you using it to run part of one of the largest transit systems in the world? New York City does. Apparently, when 5 million users a day swipe their MetroCard, it it processed by a hundred or so OS/2 machines. I saw a quote where the guy said OS/2 does not crash. It can run a decade without a reboot. However, they did say that they don't use OS/2 because it is superior in any way. It is just reliable and part of a much larger system which is supported along with OS/2. It would cost a lot of money to replace it with something better that would not do the actual job any better.

Are you running a large supermarket operation with it. Safeway uses it for their register check out.

Some ATMs still use it, though they mostly are run by Windows.

And look:
http://www.os2world.com/

I had NO idea either.

rj

 

[Handley_Page]

Those thinking of using Win 10 AND having children might want to have a think.
The security settings are erased. See HERE.

 

[about_average]

It's much faster for people who work with the OS every day. It's not as fast for people to whom the OS should be completely transparent--computer users. People who use computers to do things outside the computer world. Artists, writers, engineers. architects, recipe hoarders, web surfers, Lit forum denizens, whatever. j

Yes, but Linux is the same in that regard. People who only use it for those things use it pretty much the same way people use Windows.
The command line junkies you were talking about in Linux are command line junkies in Windows too. At least where possible. Too much of windows requires a GUI, unless you use Perl, VB Script or the like.

And where is OS/2 today? It was that good? I still have a Win95 machine that I use as a file server.

At lot more places than you think. I'll admit that IBM's marketing totally sucked. Lee Iacocca really fucked over IBM's software and PC divisions. Or rather let the head of the PC division shoot themselves in the foot.

And I have a server still running OS/2.

 

[rjordan]

Yes, but Linux is the same in that regard. People who only use it for those things use it pretty much the same way people use Windows.
The command line junkies you were talking about in Linux are command line junkies in Windows too. At least where possible. Too much of windows requires a GUI, unless you use Perl, VB Script or the like.

Probably true, esp. now that it has been around for awhile now. I don't know anyone personally that uses it (irrelevant, of course), but the biggest problem I remember when I tried it (Ubuntu and Red Hat, I believe it was called), drivers were a constant problem. Finding them, installing them with procedures that approached witchcraft, etc. Seemed like I was always having to go to the command line.

The last time I was asked to go to the command line in Windows was a week or so ago when a fake Microsoft tech from the Indian subcontinent told me they were detecting frequent errors on my computer that I must correct immediately.

It's been interesting, but Linux v. Windows v. Apple is a Ford v. Chevy v. Chrysler discussion. (Own an F150. Love the new Camaro but too cramped. Most fun car I ever owned was a new 1967 Dodge R/T with 426 Hemi.)

rj

 

[Handley_Page]

It's much faster for people who work with the OS every day. It's not as fast for people to whom the OS should be completely transparent--computer users. People who use computers to do things outside the computer world. Artists, writers, engineers. architects, recipe hoarders, web surfers, Lit forum denizens, whatever.

Ordinary people have no more business dealing with the OS than they do opening the hood/bonnet of their car. There's nothing in there they can deal with. There was a time when ordinary people were forced to use an OS command Line. There was a time when ignition spark timing was a control on the steering wheel of their car. Drivers have other uses of their time than fucking with their car's guts. Same with computer users.

That was my only point about Linux. I completely agree with your assessment. It's just that computers are now to the appliance stage where most users are not computer tech enthusiasts, and really don't want to learn to be.

I lost interest in them years ago as tech toys in and of themselves, but I still have an appreciation for what goes on inside. We all have friends that complain that their computer doesn't work. I tell them I'm still in awe that the fucking things work AT ALL considering the billions of things that have to happen exactly right every single time.

rj

I feel at at this time, we need some differentiation.
There's folk who use the computer simply as a tool to execute some 'routine' tasks.
And then there are those who are interested in the computer for itself.
The former do not, perhaps, need to know anything about what goes on (although I personally feel that they should know Something, if only to prevent the frequent visits by 'maintenance').
The latter do it for the sheer Fun of it.
It's these folk (an earlier generation of them gave us a load of screaming geniuses doing things Now) that are no longer able to do much. Where once I could, at least, try my hand at writing a programme (and running it), it's no longer possible without a great deal of time & money. Even the 'beginners' books are not a lot of help.

Microsoft has forgotten the users who put them there.
"Keyboard Failure: Press F1 to continue"







PS. I think a car driver should be able to do 'basic' maintenance tasks on the car.

 

[R. Richard]

I feel at at this time, we need some differentiation.
There's folk who use the computer simply as a tool to execute some 'routine' tasks.
And then there are those who are interested in the computer for itself.

I was one if those who was interested in the computer for itself. Actually, I was a professional computer programmer and I had to know a great deal about the operation of a computer, in order to do my job.

 

[rjordan]

I think a car driver should be able to do 'basic' maintenance tasks on the car.

I spent more than 3 decades in the automotive and motorcycle industries. I don't think a driver should be able to do any maintenance tasks on a car. They should be familiar with the machine enough to recognize that "something sounds or feels funny...different". Familiar enough to recognize a minor annoyance v. a dangerous situation, but I wouldn't expect most people to be able to fix anything.

"Basic" maintenance, like what, HP? Changing a tire? Changing the oil?

Most tire shops install the lug nuts with an air impact wrench. Your vehicle is usually provided with a little tire iron that would be impossible for most people to use to loosen a lug nut. It's also not a very good idea to attract helpful strangers, particularly if you are a woman alone. That's a job for a cell phone and the auto club.

Oil changes? The engine compartment of most modern cars is so crammed full, it's nearly impossible to reach anything from the top. And cars are so low to the ground to improve gas mileage that it is impossible to crawl underneath. It's also a hot, dirty nasty menial job that can be performed in minutes by professionals that I can't imagine anyone wanting to do it for fun.

Maybe changing light bulbs. Can't do it with a screwdriver anymore. Most cars use torx screws for the lenses. It's an easy job, but again a professional can do it in seconds. Many will replace the bulb free if you buy it from them.

Cars have been through the same cycle as computers are going through now, going from an enthusiast's machine to a daily appliance. And I welcome that. For those who don't care, a computer should be as exciting as a microwave oven which everybody uses and 99% have no idea how it works beyond the front panel buttons.

Years ago, when I had to travel a lot, I rented a car and visited one of my car clients. Just making conversation, he asked what kind of car the agency gave me. The only thing I knew for sure was that it was blue. That's what I told him, "A blue one." That's where I want to see computers in our everyday lives.

 

[desertslave]

I was one if those who was interested in the computer for itself. Actually, I was a professional computer programmer and I had to know a great deal about the operation of a computer, in order to do my job.

I ran a 22-node hospital research department network for two years, wayyyyy back in the day when I had to argue for Ethernet instead of Toke N Ring <snerk> (which the rest of the hospital adopted roughly 6 months later), begged to go with Novell 4.1 instead of 3, and Win95 over DOS. I was a home-bred geek but I read as much as possible and apparently was a bit ahead of the curve at the time. My favorite boss used his IBM AT as a dumb terminal to the primary hospital mainframe.

I taught myself how to access Win3.1 via the Word macro language and the foundation class libraries, then C++ because it just made sense. (My first language was Fortran. After that it was all easy!)

I still hate the Registry. LOL

P.S. to Zeb...you skipped 2./286 and 2./386

 

[AlwaysHungry]

I did the free upgrade to 10 because I figured it couldn't be any worse than 8.1. I found one upside, which is that the Windows Explorer icon in the tray gives you access to recent files and frequently accessed folders, a throwback to more user-friendly versions of Windows. Another unusual change is in the sound reproduction. I'm not sure how a change in OS does this, but whereas listening to music on 8.1 was a disappointment because I could never hear the bass, suddenly the bass is very loud and prominent, almost too much. I also found that I lost one small feature of my music score writing software, although the version I use is about 15 years out of date.

 

[Handley_Page]

Maybe changing light bulbs. Can't do it with a screwdriver any more. Most cars use torx screws for the lenses. It's an easy job, but again a professional can do it in seconds. Many will replace the bulb free if you buy it from them.

Cars have been through the same cycle as computers are going through now, going from an enthusiast's machine to a daily appliance. And I welcome that. For those who don't care, a computer should be as exciting as a microwave oven which everybody uses and 99% have no idea how it works beyond the front panel buttons.

Years ago, when I had to travel a lot, I rented a car and visited one of my car clients. Just making conversation, he asked what kind of car the agency gave me. The only thing I knew for sure was that it was blue. That's what I told him, "A blue one." That's where I want to see computers in our everyday lives.

""Basic" maintenance, like what, HP? Changing a tire? Changing the oil? "

Let's start with something easy, shall we?. How about "topping up" the consumables (Oil & water). I think it's a damned bad show if the driver of something highly technical cannot be bothered to understand something about it and keep it fairly happy. There's no excuse for ignorance, IMO.

I'll pass on changing the oil, filters and so on. I can do it on mine but the modern car seems to run for a long time before it requires an oil change. I used to do it - no problem. These day, however . . .

As for changing a tyre; I'll grant the convenience of a depot, but there are few depots to be found on a country road at 3am. And the extension lever thing to make it an easier 'wrench' is not exactly expensive. The shop air tool is supposed to be set to a particular poundage (can't remember what at the moment), but it's one that makes it possible to release with the provided tools.

Of course, a 3am tyre change is something of a plot bunny. . . .


And now, we return you to the studio. . . .

.