Old Computers – why do people bother

[Ron ColvinParticipant @roncolvin83430]

Posted by Michael Gilligan on 31/01/2020 19:20:59:

Posted by Ron Colvin on 31/01/2020 18:09:12:

[…]

Although I do not have any msdos virtual machines running, if I had, they could also be moved across.

[…]

.

My earliest version of Autocad actually needs to be used on an old machine … because it looks for the [hardware] Maths co-processor !!

MichaelG.

I first used Autocad on a Apricot PC, the computer had neither a hard drive or a maths co-processor. The version of Autocad that I used (v2.03) ran off a 3.5" floppy disk. Later on, to speed things up, l bought a second hand 8087 processor.

[Phil WhitleyParticipant @philwhitley94135]

Absolutely.

I spent 30 years in the MRP/ERP software industry, and the gobsmacking intellectual waste as each generation of software developers resolutely trashed the bodies of knowledge and specialised terminology built up in the previous one – and restarted from progressively less well-founded principles – was what characterised the whole period from my viewpoint. The MRP capabilities of the system I was working with at retirement were materially inferior to the first one I implemented in the 1980s.

So you'll forgive me if I consider the latest contortions being forced on consumers as just another twist of a self-serving fashion industry.

This is a concise, and an extremely accurate description of the state of software today!! There seems to be a fanatical urge to change names, rearrange, and hide oft used tools in different menus, without any logical reason or need to do so. thus making new versions of software impenetrable instead of intuitive. Having worked with more than a few computer geeks, I think it boosts their flagging egos to be the only ones to be able to operate "their" software, which we poor mortals are forced to purchase. Windows 10 is a classic example of renaming and rearranging and just plain hiding, or burying of tools that in previous versions were only one click away! It is the absolute antithesis of standardisation, and it works for no one except the geeks! The geek will inherit the earth, but won't understand the software! Their time will come! MUUUAHAHAHAA!

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

Just like Phil says, I came across an example of this a few years ago when I started looking at Linux in earnest.

Some time before then I had tried Suse 9/9.1 along with the KDE2 desktop. I even bought some books on the OS. I found it easy to use and more or less intuitive. However I didn't proceed with it because the Microsoft offering, Win2000, I think, was satisfactory.

Anyway, with the demise of XP came the time to jump ship, so naturally, straight back to Suse, now v11 or 12, & KDE 3 or maybe 4. Could I get on with it? Could I heck. I simply could not find out how to change the desktop to suit my requirements. Eventually someone a Linux forum told me about the almonds in the screen corners which on my screen just looked like a screen aberration. Needless to say I was less than pleased, and passed some comments along the lines of programmers saying "Oh, look how clever I am!", and promptly got told off by the Linux Fan Boys. That experience put me off Suse & in particular KDE.

Eventually I wound up on Linux Mint, and even though KDE was available (at that time), I shunned it like the plague, opting instead for the manual recommended Mate.

Peter G. Shaw

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

There seems to be a fanatical urge to change names, rearrange, and hide oft used tools in different menus, without any logical reason or need to do so. thus making new versions of software impenetrable instead of intuitive.

In the day job I am at present going through the process of helping blind or visually impaired computer users change over from Windows 7 to Windows 10 and quite agree that there are often changes that make is very difficult when an OS or other major software is updated – however I still think it is worth while.

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

I seems to me that lots of things get changed for no apparent reason, and it isn't until one becomes older that one realises this. Change is alright if there is a good reason, but change for changes sake simply is not on. For example, 20 years ago we bought a new washing machine: the old one had numbers around the dial: the new one temperatures & fabrics etc. 'Er indoors insisted for quite a few years on using the old numbers! What was worse, was that she then expected me to be able to translate them if I needed to use the new machine. Yes dear! Thankyou dear!

Peter G. Shaw

[Kiwi BlokeParticipant @kiwibloke62605]

I think I keep my old computers for many of the same reasons that I keep my old wife. I've got to understand their ways (to a limited extent), they still work, my requirements are much as before, and newer models tend to be expensive…

[Pete WhiteParticipant @petewhite15172]

Posted by Kiwi Bloke on 02/02/2020 08:40:49:

I think I keep my old computers for many of the same reasons that I keep my old wife. I've got to understand their ways (to a limited extent), they still work, my requirements are much as before, and newer models tend to be expensive…

Plus one, spot on!!

Pete

Linux for 16 years, over half of it with Mint.

[Clive IndiaParticipant @cliveindia]

Am I alone in just wanting to buy a computer and use it and for it to work all the time without re-booting.

I don't want to partition drives, use Linux in it sometimes and switch this and that. I don't want some smart-arse to tell me to put in *FX15,1 and all will be marvelous – I just want one that works without any intervention from teccies.

As someone said – like the wife. Like the car. Like the TV.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Clive India on 02/02/2020 09:36:51:

Am I alone in just wanting to buy a computer and use it and for it to work all the time without re-booting.

I don't want to partition drives, use Linux in it sometimes and switch this and that. I don't want some smart-arse to tell me to put in *FX15,1 and all will be marvelous – I just want one that works without any intervention from teccies.

As someone said – like the wife. Like the car. Like the TV.

.

If only there were more decent Apps available, amongst all the dross … that would be an iPad

MichaelG.

[Andrew TinsleyParticipant @andrewtinsley63637]

Just occurred to me. Why wouldn't anyone use an old computer, as long as it works and does the required task?

I still use an ancient laptop on Windows 3.1 to write script. Which reminds me that Windows 3.1 is a very well written OS, quite unlike the later flabby Windows OS systems which are hardly good examples of precise, economical programming.

Andrew.

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Andrew Tinsley on 02/02/2020 12:29:45:

… Which reminds me that Windows 3.1 is a very well written OS…

Andrew.

Andrew is pulling our legs, it must be Panto time! All together now, "Oh no it isn't…"

Dave

[Andrew TinsleyParticipant @andrewtinsley63637]

Sorry Dave, Ask any good programmer and you will find that 3.1 is a very well written and compact OS without the flab of later systems. Don't take my word for it, go and find out what a real professional thinks of it!

Andrew.

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by Andrew Tinsley on 02/02/2020 12:29:45:

Just occurred to me. Why wouldn't anyone use an old computer, as long as it works and does the required task?

I still use an ancient laptop on Windows 3.1 to write script. Which reminds me that Windows 3.1 is a very well written OS, quite unlike the later flabby Windows OS systems which are hardly good examples of precise, economical programming.

Andrew.

Although now working in education, I have been an IT professional since the early 1980s

Windows 3.1 isn't actually an operating system – it is a program and user interface stuck on top of the operating system DOS.

I have never said that one should not use a computer for a task that it is capable of – I do it often.

My issue was when one is expected to support people (again, not on this forum) who are upset that the outside world has moved on and why can't their 2007 computer work with the new printer they have bought or why can't you make a 2004 computer work well with today's programs, or thirdly why won't my 12 year old program work on my new computer.

I have a 2003 Toshiba laptop under my desk at the moment that is basically a footrest because the original Win Xp loads OK but then needs updates that demand more memory than is, or can be, installed on the motherboard. It then stops. Without the updates (service packs) few programs will run.

 

Edited By Nick Clarke 3 on 02/02/2020 13:52:32

[Andrew TinsleyParticipant @andrewtinsley63637]

Hello Nick,

I was aware that 3.1 was not a true OS, but didn't want to complicate the issue. I still claim that the actual programming is a very economical use of programming. Later Window systems took advantage of the ever growing power of the hardware. It didn't have to be economical of systems use, because there was so much more system to use! Hence the discipline of the Windows 3.1 programming went to the dogs!

If you are a normal home user and not a large number cruncher or gamer, the later systems like Win 7 or 10, have little improvement over say Win 2000 in terms of ease of use or perceived speed. I know the later systems are very much faster given the correct hardware, but for the average Joe, there really isn't a lot of difference in the real world. I really do think that the progression of Windows OS owes more to Microsoft's desire to make money than anything else.

I can't see much advantage in upgrading computers or anything else for that matter, if what you have does the job satisfactorily. The time to upgrade is when you NEED something better or you can't get the spares to keep it going.

Andrew.

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Andrew Tinsley on 02/02/2020 13:40:01:

Sorry Dave, Ask any good programmer and you will find that 3.1 is a very well written and compact OS without the flab of later systems. Don't take my word for it, go and find out what a real professional thinks of it!

Andrew.

Er, dare I claim I was a real professional? (As opposed to an unreal one.)

I see in a later post Andrew confesses 'I was aware that 3.1 was not a true OS, but didn't want to complicate the issue…'

Therefore the case for the prosecution rests. I ask for the maximum sentence allowed by law to be passed. Henceforth Mr Tinsley shall be required to use CP/M-80, because it was very well written and lacks the flab of later systems…

[mickParticipant @mick65121]

I need a computer with a parallel printer port to run the ports and pins on my Mach3 control for my mill. Also my laptop which runs Windows7 is the only computer that will support the control for my Denford lathe.

[Maurice TaylorParticipant @mauricetaylor82093]

Some people have to buy new kit ,ie computer ,machine tools,tv etc whether it’s needed or not.

[Maurice TaylorParticipant @mauricetaylor82093]

Some people have to buy new kit ,ie computer ,machine tools,tv etc whether it’s needed or not.

[Guy LambParticipant @guylamb68056]

To paraphrase Descartes, I consume therefore I am.

[MeunierParticipant @meunier]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 02/02/2020 15:26:53:

(As opposed to an unreal one.)

 

Hmmm Dave, anyone who noted your avatar in articles for MEW might ponder that remark ! (unless the effect was due to condensation acquired whilst measuring humidity  ) 
DaveD

Edited By Meunier on 02/02/2020 20:28:35

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Meunier on 02/02/2020 20:27:33:

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 02/02/2020 15:26:53:

(As opposed to an unreal one.)

Hmmm Dave, anyone who noted your avatar in articles for MEW might ponder that remark ! (unless the effect was due to condensation acquired whilst measuring humidity )
DaveD

Edited By Meunier on 02/02/2020 20:28:35

It's the real me! (Though I had more hair when the photo was taken!)

Dave

[Anthony KnightsParticipant @anthonyknights16741]

I have just been looking up minimum system requirements for various Windows operating systems to see how bloated the latest systems are.

Windows 98SE- 200MB hard drive. Windows 2000- 2GB hard drive. Windows 10- 20 GB hard drive

Installation discs Windows 98SE, 2000 and XP all fitted on a CD, although win2000 and XP had to crush the data into CAD files in order to get them to fit.

Vista needed a DVD and win7 at 5.1 GB needed a dual layer DVD when I made a backup. It's probably all gone to USB memory sticks now. God knows how big the windows 10 installation file is.

Every tine Microsoft brought out a new system, it all changed changed and you spent weeks finding out where they had moved everything. I'm sorry but I have just got fed up with constant battle to keep up. I don't like windows 10 and get by with Linux for the internet and Win7 or XP for printers and old windows programs.

[Andrew TinsleyParticipant @andrewtinsley63637]

Thank you Anthony,

Exactly the point I was trying to make,

Andrew.

[CirclipParticipant @circlip]

Larger drives are required cos the Programmers (Coders????) need more space between the lines to allow for the updates to make the rushed out O/S work. "Service packs"?????

Regards Ian.

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by Anthony Knights on 03/02/2020 10:53:15:

Installation discs Windows 98SE, 2000 and XP all fitted on a CD, although win2000 and XP had to crush the data into CAD files in order to get them to fit.

I suspect that the reason .CAB (not CAD) files were used were because there was the option to install from 6 floppy disks in XP and, although I never actually had to do it, Win2000. The files had to be small enough to fit on a floppy.

Nick

[Author]

Posts