Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Martin_1962]

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/home/howtobuy/choosing2.mspx

A few there remote desktop, multiprocessor (my next will be).

Also I can connect it to the office network if necessary

[TheBoy]

ALL of our customers are sticking to XP, some are still 98 but our latest software runs on XP and 2000. The same OSes run our DOS software fine, with no real issues apart from the clock going into sleep when a DOS programme is in background.

In our office mainly XP, 1 2000, 2 98 - I have 98 and XP under my desk.

One customer tested Vista but found XP preferable to use and they have their own IT department, they tried our latest software and we were blocked on registry, the other company they used (on one site didn't work at all).

Vista is basically an answer without a question.

As to software programmes do not get written overnight, our just ending life cycle software lasted for 14 years, the windows software has taken 3 years so far and is still being added to. There are loads of vertical market software solutions of a great age, this is how it goes.

Of course we could all outsource to programmer farms in India - but then what is the point of being in business.

What is interesting is that it is only the PC market which forces frequent rewrites, whereas not much changes on minis and mainframes.

Trouble with XP, is its old. 7yrs old. Way past retirement. And written in a bad era for MS, where market pressures force them to release prematurely.  The primary reason Vista was late was to fix XP as best they could (XP2 is a major, major update, and hence should not be installed on a used system, but put on clean).  In an effort to make it more Win9x (supposed to be merged with W2K, but couldn't get it working in time), its severely kludged, and suffers from thread races.

If your software is getting stopped at registry, you have been poorly programming - you need to brush up on the right places to store data .  All but one of my apps I've written has not issues, as I follow the rules (the one that doesn't follow the rules, I modify registry permissions to that part of registry).

Nobody, but nobody should be using anything earlier than Windows XP in any environment now.


Minis aren't really that popular any more - Vax was probably the last of the true minis, and don't exist anymore.  I guess AS400 might almost be considered a mini  :-/. Things tend to stay more stable in the server market, though there have been changes that can break things in most OSes.  Novell is the only really big shifter, going from the horribly fludged NetWare core to Suse.

As for other desktops, Windows is relatively stable. Macs have gone through massive changes, from 68000 to PowerPC to i386/x64, and from Mac OS to OSX, each requiring big rewrites (the emulators did a reasonable job though)...

[Dave-C]

Thanks or all your help with XP but i am after help with Vista

Read the top link - you need to upgrade, there is a comparison there between Vista and its replacement

for every link you can find from the xp fanboys (who normally think its clever to knock vista (and xp when that came out), in same way that people who don't understand Linux reckon thats a better desktop) i can find dozens more to show why vista is so much better.

Assuming you are running modern hardware, vista is hard to beat for businesses - and i assume you are as you're running xp pro, so are reliant on active directory (may as well run home if not using AD).

As for non business owners, UAC on its own is enough to recommend vista, as many home users think running with admin rights all the time is some kind of penile extension.  Unfortunately, Windows' biggest flaw is all the 3rd party developers out there too stupid to program correctly, hence constantly hitting the UAC prompt, though this is improving now.


Don't knock Vista, simply as you don't know how to use it - and remember its proved reliable and stable even before sp1.

There are other reasons to run XP Pro not just Active Directory - just can't remember what.

Anyway XP works, quite well, no need to replace.

ANyway how do you do full screen DOS in VIsta?

No other reason to run XP Pro other than AD.

As for DOS. Why the hell is anyone still running 16bit crap in this day and age?

XP is obviously fine for you.  IIRC, you run an old slowish P4?  XP is probably better for that as its quite an old system.

DOS apps - there are still thousands out there - they work and work well - why replace with software which doesn't do the job, we have replaced windows software as late as last year with DOS software and the users got a lot better system, just because it is not using the Windows API does not make it obsolete.

Since we have not yet converted some of our apps to Windows we are still installing DOS apps this week.

So what if some of our competitors are all Windows? so what if their pricing is less flexible, so what if the first run we got 5% less waste on a run (the optimiser core code is identical DOS & Windows).

Like most small software houses our systems evolve, and our first windows apps are already out of date, but will be replaced before some of the DOS sections.

Our windows conversion is taking so long as we are converting the best DOS app in our industry.

Our windows version we feel will be interim until we move to a .net platform.

As our office manager notived at a hotel - they were using what looked and felt like a DOS Clipper application, newish computers but software which does the job

I see loads of DOS applications on my travels is some very big organisations too....

Amazing!

[bigphil1]

No-one got any clues what to do then

Leave well alone mate ive had my pc for 2 years havent defragged once still works as new.  If it works dont touch

[supermop]

Take the computer back and ask them to put a real operating system on it. Like Windows XP or similar.

To be perfectly honest if the computer is new, it really shouldn't need defragging. The file systems these days are pretty good at keeping files continuous (i.e. not fragmented, which causes file access slowdown).

That said, I haven't a clue why defrag wouldn't show an interface, since you can't exactly work on the computer while it defrags, so something's definately up!

You tried Microsoft Knowlegdebase? www.microsoft.com/support - despite what you may think, there's some bloody handy info on there.

[cem_devecioglu]

New is new .. :-/

but this intel+microsoft cooperation will make the whole world full of old pc garbage..

even 3 ghz P4 hardware is slow with vista..and I'll stay with xp as long

as possible..

[TheBoy]

Take the computer back and ask them to put a real operating system on it. Like Windows XP or similar.

To be perfectly honest if the computer is new, it really shouldn't need defragging. The file systems these days are pretty good at keeping files continuous (i.e. not fragmented, which causes file access slowdown).

That said, I haven't a clue why defrag wouldn't show an interface, since you can't exactly work on the computer while it defrags, so something's definately up!

You tried Microsoft Knowlegdebase? www.microsoft.com/support - despite what you may think, there's some bloody handy info on there.

The Vista one is more for scheduling, and doesn't have the same graphical interface as the XP one.  In addition, its OK to use computer while its doing it - its more sluggish obviously, but still usable.

I think Vista is the right direction to take Windows, both for businesses and home users.  I agree it takes a bit of getting used to, but after using Vista for 3yrs, I find XP slow, cumbersome, and annoyingly difficult...

[TheBoy]

New is new .. :-/

but this intel+microsoft cooperation will make the whole world full of old pc garbage..

even 3 ghz P4 hardware is slow with vista..and I'll stay with xp as long

as possible..

P4, esp slower ones like 3ghz, are really too old to get the best from Vista.

Comes into its own on Core2 hardware - and to further knock a nail in XP, XP is disappointing running on Core2

[Kevin Wood]

Nobody, but nobody should be using anything earlier than Windows XP in any environment now.

The equipment I develop for uses Windows 2000 and will for several years to come. It's OK saying the above for a server/desktop machine that is throw-away technology after a couple of years but when every new Windows release renders the old hardware scrap and the hardware happens to cost upwards of 200k upgrades aren't going to happen.

.. and that's before we start considering the software that would have to be ported - including a load of device drivers. It was bad enough getting it all to build on .NET 2005 when M$ stopped selling the .NET 2003 dev. env.

The fact is, Windows is the wrong choice for anything more than a basic desktop with web browsing, word processing, groupware, etc. M$ don't consider any other market when deciding when to pull the plug on their support, yet they try and sell it as a one size fits all solution to every computing problem.

Kevin

[TheBoy]

Nobody, but nobody should be using anything earlier than Windows XP in any environment now.

The equipment I develop for uses Windows 2000 and will for several years to come. It's OK saying the above for a server/desktop machine that is throw-away technology after a couple of years but when every new Windows release renders the old hardware scrap and the hardware happens to cost upwards of 200k upgrades aren't going to happen.

.. and that's before we start considering the software that would have to be ported - including a load of device drivers. It was bad enough getting it all to build on .NET 2005 when M$ stopped selling the .NET 2003 dev. env.

The fact is, Windows is the wrong choice for anything more than a basic desktop with web browsing, word processing, groupware, etc. M$ don't consider any other market when deciding when to pull the plug on their support, yet they try and sell it as a one size fits all solution to every computing problem.

Kevin

I was referring to desktops, and esp those desktops connected (directly or indirectly) to wider world.

[cem_devecioglu]

New is new .. :-/

but this intel+microsoft cooperation will make the whole world full of old pc garbage..

even 3 ghz P4 hardware is slow with vista..and I'll stay with xp as long

as possible..

P4, esp slower ones like 3ghz, are really too old to get the best from Vista.

Comes into its own on Core2 hardware - and to further knock a nail in XP, XP is disappointing running on Core2

From my point of view..Vista is even slow on core2..Dont know what kind of code they write in inside..but to slow down these new cpu's , there must be working many million lines ..

[supermop]

MS are bringing out a new operating system in Q2 of 2009. You all might as well bypass Vista entirely and wait for that (like myself and my company are doing).

TB: You do realise that there is a dual-core patch for XP and dual-core optimiser software for AMD X2's?

Dual-core fix for XP
AMD dual core optimizer

The performance increase after installing the multi-cpu fix is amazing. Partcularly in apps/games that heavily utilise CPU (obviously).

[Vmax]

Also make sure nothing else is running in the background.  :-?

[MaxV6]

Hurrry up and buy XP while it is still for sale

 ROFLMAO

go buy a mac.


it's got a proper OS, and does the defrag for you as part of the housekeeping.
(amongst other things... )

but ditto the Symantec advice... avoid like the plague, EVEN on a Mac...  


Runs, gets coat and ducks out the back sharpish

and the only argument i have to face is..........

you cant right click with a mac......

if that's the biggest issue, i can live with that

utter 'dangle berries'.

you can right click, and a shed load more besides

the current std Mac mouse has left click ,  right click, 360 degree scroll ball, Mid squeeze sensors, chording of sensors, and is available wired or wireless..    the Mac has pretty much always (since OS7.5 i think offhand) been able to right  click, it just didn't come with a multi button mouse until about 3 years ago.  but after market Mice were fine...    I've been a professional  mac user since the early 90's and the work i do benefits from multi-button mice.....  

oh, and the optical system looks like a silhouette of Mickey mouse if you lift it up a little...

[supermop]

You buy a Mac and your buying into a locked-down computing environment where everything is massively overpriced, underpowered, but looks oh so pretty.