Old Computers – why do people bother

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

I do feel that some posts regarding a preference for older versions of software are not being a little unfair picking on Windows in particular.

I wonder what software of any type, from any supplier ever got smaller in later versions and that this is always put down to 'bloat'.

Adding a new features to an existing program will inevitably make the resultant code larger unless a major rewrite in the whole system is undertaken – not that this hasn't happened in the past, but whenever 'shrinking' code risks introducing errors by rewriting existing sections just to make them smaller the software house has to decide whether the cost and risks are worth it in these days of ever cheaper storage media. Just buy a DVD for about the same price as a CD and far cheaper (and more practical) than floppy disks.

[An OtherParticipant @another21905]

This question of 'Bloat' has had me puzzled for some time. I agree with Nick Clarke that adding new functions will inevitably inflate the amount the of code (given that the same language is in use), but I wonder sometimes whether the 'new functions' are always needed. As a long time user of Linux, even that has many functions and capabilities that I never use. I actually spend some time chucking out unwanted stuff when I make a new installation – my goal is to get to a 'Linux Lite' which actually has the capabilities I need and use.

I know different people have different needs, and I also know that Linux developers have spent a lot of time getting most Linux dialects to the point where they don't need endless user interaction to install, but I have often wished that I could select the bits I need. One example, which although probably not earth-shattering, is that the icon bars at the top of the page in LibreOffice are entirely a duplicate of dropdown menu items. There is a facility to edit the icon bars, so I tend to edit them out of existence – but the code is still there. Linux nowadays supports touchscreens and gestures – but I suppose I am old-fashioned, and use a simple monitor – I don't feel the need to sit stroking and gesticulating at it. There are many other examples.

I concede these are personal foibles, but I am using them as an illustration: this is what I would call 'bloat', so I would like the option to do without. My understanding is that Windows also suffers this syndrome to a larger degree than Linux. It would also seem to fit in with the growth in installation size from older generations to newer.

That said, a modern large disk is far cheaper (and allegedly more reliable) than the small ones of yesteryear, so does it really matter if the applications are huge? The machine I am using now has the OS on a 2TB drive, and I have a 14TB second drive in the machine, plus an 8TB external drive for backup of important stuff – its cheaper and more reliable to use a hard drive as backup, than to faff about with DVDs and CDs – I have many which are unreliable or even unreadable after a relatively short period of storage – bit of a nuisance if important backups on a DVD fail after a short time – I wouldn't back anything up to DVD these days.

[Enough!Participant @enough]

Posted by Nick Clarke 3 on 03/02/2020 15:14:40:

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.

I don't see the use of CAB files as an issue. They're only compressed files after all and their use is pretty much immaterial to the end user. It does give the smallest footprint and allows MS to use whatever installation media is most cost-effective for them (can't blame them for that).

My main bug is MS's practice of burying the OS setup under deeper and deeper levels and generally taking it out of the hands of the end user unless they have serious IT training. Sort of a Nanny-Microsoft approach,

God-Mode helps a bit but some of the setup stuff is pretty obscure when you do get there.

[Mick B1Participant @mickb1]

Well, some've been talking about bloat in operating systems, but what about apps?

There was one allegedly World-class ERP system I used to work with, and there was a time I could raise gales of incredulous laughter from other software consultants when I just described what it had to do just to get from Sales Order despatch to Invoice posting. It took 16 minutes to tell the story, identify the interfaces that had to run and some of the vast number of ways it could fail without intelligible error message.

It was so complicated that there's no way I could remember any major chunks of it now.

[Peter G. ShawParticipant @peterg-shaw75338]

Nick,

The reason why I do not like Microsoft is because of their past antics in trying to force users to use their programs and nothing else.

Off top of my head, and not therefore bound to be absolutely correct, there was the infamous fiasco with Lindows, in which Microsoft went to court in an English speaking country compaining that Lindows was too much like Windows, only for them to be told that windows was soething one looks through so they had no right to the name. They then went to a non-English country, tried again, won, and forced Lindows to change its name. I pass no comment on the usefulness or otherwise of Lindows/Linspire.

Then there was the attempt to force Windows users to use Internet Explorer and Media Player by making them part of the OS. That one was shot down by the EU along with a hefty fine.

I also have a recollection that the USA landed them with a hefty fine for some trangression or other.

On the other hand, I do have sympathy with Microsoft considering how in its early days, illegal copying of software was rife.

I also wasn't very happy with the buggy earlier versions of Windows.

I have to say that the demise of XP was the final straw for me, being as how XP worked perfectly for me and hence I could see no good reason for replacing it.

Peter G. Shaw

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by An Other on 03/02/2020 17:58:54:

One example, which although probably not earth-shattering, is that the icon bars at the top of the page in LibreOffice are entirely a duplicate of dropdown menu items.

For the last few years I have been involved in the IT and Computing Education of students who are blind or visually impaired as a Qualified Teacher of the Visually Impaired (QTVI).

Icon bars are only navigable to a blind user if there is a text alternative – and even then a menu is often easier to navigate, particularly adaptive menus that don't show greyed out non-options like windows XP used to do – they still got spoken by a screen reader.

A visually impaired user, using a screen magnifier will often find the icons easier to access – even magnified to a large degree they can still be seen on the screen while a menu item can fall off the edges and have to be scrolled across – which can affect the menu selection.

Horses for courses I think, but like you say, it would be nice to be able to make the choice.

Take care,

Nick

[Anthony KnightsParticipant @anthonyknights16741]

Todays computers might all be bigger, better and faster, but I still type at the same speed as when I had a windows 95 machine.

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Anthony Knights on 04/02/2020 07:44:51:

Todays computers might all be bigger, better and faster, but I still type at the same speed as when I had a windows 95 machine.

Ah, but computers do much more than amuse us old chaps whilst we peck at our keyboards! There are over a billion websites on the internet, and two or three million emails are sent every second. It doesn't run on Windows 95.

Though performance is nice to have I don't need a very powerful computer either. But hardware from the Windows XP era is just too sluggish. Where the extra oomph makes a difference to me is compiling big programs and CAD. I also do data analysis, image-processing and graphics. For this I have mid-range kit, which wouldn't suit most of the young folk in my family. They watch TV streamed over the internet to four different computers in the same house, which consumes about 150Mb/s – they have cable. My nephew has a gaming system running a high-resolution panoramic 3-screen display; it can also do 3D immersion, all in near real-time. Not my thing, but very realistic, and his computer is in a different league to mine. Entertainment needs much more compute power than office work.

I'm afraid what we Oldies get to up with our computers is pretty much irrelevant: it's what the rest of the world are doing that drives change.

Dave

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 04/02/2020 10:22:37:

I'm afraid what we Oldies get to up with our computers is pretty much irrelevant: it's what the rest of the world are doing that drives change.

Dave

Which, I am afraid, is the problem with needing to retain an old computer 'because my CAD/CAM/CNC system needs it' – It is not the computer that has been declared end of life but the CAD/CAM/CNC tools you wish to use with it.

The world moves on and sometimes if you can't justify updating you may get left behind – sadly sometimes with a workshop full of kit that no longer works or is no longer supported by the manufacturers or by software.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Well put, Nick

MichaelG.

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 04/02/2020 10:22:37:

Posted by Anthony Knights on 04/02/2020 07:44:51:

Todays computers might all be bigger, better and faster, but I still type at the same speed as when I had a windows 95 machine.

Ah, but computers do much more than amuse us old chaps whilst we peck at our keyboards! There are over a billion websites on the internet, and two or three million emails are sent every second. It doesn't run on Windows 95.

Though performance is nice to have I don't need a very powerful computer either. But hardware from the Windows XP era is just too sluggish. Where the extra oomph makes a difference to me is compiling big programs and CAD. I also do data analysis, image-processing and graphics. For this I have mid-range kit, which wouldn't suit most of the young folk in my family. They watch TV streamed over the internet to four different computers in the same house, which consumes about 150Mb/s – they have cable. My nephew has a gaming system running a high-resolution panoramic 3-screen display; it can also do 3D immersion, all in near real-time. Not my thing, but very realistic, and his computer is in a different league to mine. Entertainment needs much more compute power than office work.

I'm afraid what we Oldies get to up with our computers is pretty much irrelevant: it's what the rest of the world are doing that drives change.

Dave

No the internet / WWW mostly runs on LINUX.
I've always said developer's should be given minimum specification machines. That way they won't write code that needs a fast machine and lots of storage to be usable

Needles inclusion of libraries and language "packs" annoys me. I once wrote some simple code for a pic microcontroller to develop the hardware. The task of writing "proper" code was given to the software team and after a week or two they came back asking for a chip with more memory. Turned out they were using a huge C coms library to send 3 characters down a serial line. This was "bit-banging" the I/O pins. I'd just sent bytes to the built-in USART…. My code went into the production units after all.

Robert G8RPI.

[EmgeeParticipant @emgee]

Posted by Nick Clarke 3 on 04/02/2020 11:39:21:

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 04/02/2020 10:22:37:

I'm afraid what we Oldies get to up with our computers is pretty much irrelevant: it's what the rest of the world are doing that drives change.

Dave

Which, I am afraid, is the problem with needing to retain an old computer 'because my CAD/CAM/CNC system needs it' – It is not the computer that has been declared end of life but the CAD/CAM/CNC tools you wish to use with it.

The world moves on and sometimes if you can't justify updating you may get left behind – sadly sometimes with a workshop full of kit that no longer works or is no longer supported by the manufacturers or by software.

I think you have missed the point that old machines work well with old programs, why on earth would anyone want to spend money updating machine/computer and software to do exactly the same operations, unless of course they belong to the "have to have the latest gizmo brigade" ?

Emgee

[CirclipParticipant @circlip]

And why do the letters on keys wear out long before the desktop/laptop becomes redundant? Bring back the IBM M3.(They had the designation loooong before BMW). Bought SWTSMBO an fancy Illuminated one for her desktop where the symbols can't wear out but only silk screened versions on lappys. I also remember when we had champagne parties when programmers had managed to save a byte.

Regards Ian.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Emgee on 04/02/2020 12:41:29:
.

I think you have missed the point that old machines work well with old programs, […]

.

On the contrary: I assumed that ^^^ was what Nick had in mind

Try removing the word ‘with’ from what Nick wrote:

Which, I am afraid, is the problem with … needing to retain an old computer “because […]

MichaelG.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Circlip on 04/02/2020 12:54:03:

And why do the letters on keys wear out long before the desktop/laptop becomes redundant?

.

Because the manufacturers are too cheapskate to use double-shot injection moulding.

MichaelG.

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

My other hobby of astrophotography would be nigh-impossible without an up to date computer.

While I have various word processors/spreadsheets etc. for BBC computers, the only thing that's impressive about them is the quick startup. They are hell on earth to use,and were even in the days of Wordstar.

M$ Word and the rest of office suite are great an continue to improve, I'm afraid.

W10 is great and has the best backwards compatibility since W2000.

Sorry, but hell is using old computers when you are used to a new one

Neil

[EmgeeParticipant @emgee]

Gentlemen, horses for courses.

Emgee

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by Michael Gilligan on 04/02/2020 12:55:10:

On the contrary: I assumed that ^^^ was what Nick had in mind etc etc

While all four of my siblings and I had expensive or grammar school educations; my mother who went to a small country school reckoned she could write and spell better than the whole lot of us put together …… !

Thanks for the correction Michael, I do need them – often!

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Posted by Michael Gilligan on 04/02/2020 12:57:51:

Posted by Circlip on 04/02/2020 12:54:03:

And why do the letters on keys wear out long before the desktop/laptop becomes redundant?

.

Because the manufacturers are too cheapskate to use double-shot injection moulding.

MichaelG.

A college where I was IT Manager (30 odd years ago) was in the habit of cleaning keyboards with a mild solvent.

Fine for IBM XT and PS2 keyboards, but when the tech tried it on a cheapo Amstrad one it ended up perfectly plain – nothing on ANY of the keys!

[Enough!Participant @enough]

Posted by Michael Gilligan on 04/02/2020 12:57:51:

Posted by Circlip on 04/02/2020 12:54:03:

And why do the letters on keys wear out long before the desktop/laptop becomes redundant?.

Because the manufacturers are too cheapskate to use double-shot injection moulding.

 

…. and the keyboard developer didn't run the "Oil of Olay" test.

 

The biggest problem I have with silk-screened characters on keys is reflections from the silk-screen. (I'm hunt-and-peck).

Edited By Bandersnatch on 04/02/2020 14:53:44

[Enough!Participant @enough]

Posted by Emgee on 04/02/2020 12:41:29:

…..why on earth would anyone want to spend money updating machine/computer and software to do exactly the same operations …

Well, a more modern, much faster machine with better graphics capability can do wonders for an older (but powerful) CAD program. Especially if you have large assemblies that need to be manipulated. SSD drives can help too.

There are probably other programs where the speed and graphics capability can be useful too.

[Martin KyteParticipant @martinkyte99762]

The point as far as I can see is for workshop use driving machines old machines are perfectly adequate and can be bought for peanuts. The best thing to do whan setting up a system is buy 2 or 3 identical cheap machines so you have spares. You have to pick your vintage with a certain amount of common sense. When Mach3 was first around parallel ports were a must and old machines had serial ports too. When next generation machines appear they are not geared for connecting to hardware and it takes a while for USB drivers/parallel port emulators etc to become readily available. So for upgrades we wait for the next generation of old machines and jump to that.

CAD is another question.

regards Martin

[Enough!Participant @enough]

I saw this today on mozilla-support-firefox. It might explain why some people at least need the latest and greatest:

 

">You could also limit the number of open tabs. From random comments about that, I'd suggest you keep it under two dozen or so.

 

Alas, I have 37, and that is windows, not tabs. Each window has 2 to 35

tabs, maybe an average of 8, just guessing. With all that it works

pretty well, only requiring a restart of FF once a day or so. I have it

set to not load the tab until I look at it, so that saves a lot of RAM

and a lot of HDD reading. Interestingly, I can look at a tab, then look

at the one next to it, and come back to the first one only 10 seconds

later, and it's blank and has to reload, from the cache I presume."

 

Edited By Bandersnatch on 04/02/2020 16:43:48

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Posted by Emgee on 04/02/2020 12:41:29:

Posted by Nick Clarke 3 on 04/02/2020 11:39:21:

Posted by SillyOldDuffer on 04/02/2020 10:22:37:

…

…

I think you have missed the point that old machines work well with old programs, why on earth would anyone want to spend money updating machine/computer and software to do exactly the same operations…

Emgee

Well nobody would, provided nothing changed and those old computers and old programs were reliable. Unfortunately, they're not, which is why Martin suggests buying two or three for spares and picking the vintage with a certain amount of common sense.

My career in IT has been one of persistently finding that the computers available today aren't man enough for the work available. When I started, chaps would spend ages working to make a program small enough to fit on a tiny machine, and then even more time fine tuning it for the required throughput. As Robert mentioned, it's still going on. Trouble is computer programmers are expensive so – where possible – it pays to do away with a few of them by buying bigger computers that don't need experts to shoehorn programs into it.

Many other examples. Not good when the weekend accounting reconciliation is still chugging away on Monday evening. Not good when paying customers are timed out because a web server is overloaded. Not good when weather forecasts are inaccurate because there isn't enough capacity to crunch all the numbers. Costly when a corporate is beaten to the draw on the stock exchange because their computer is a few milliseconds slower than the competition. Failure of a computer system to keep up with real events is catastrophic to any automated process control system, and fatal to military men.

Very few customers want exactly the same operations. Once a simple Word Processor was enough, then people needed Spreadsheets, and small databases. Then collaborative software for team working – email, messaging, IP-telephony, video-conferencing, Powerpoint. CAD/CAM, 3D printing, data mining, process control and CGI. Digital cameras and Games. The Internet, Cryptography, Virtualisation, E-commerce, Search Engines, Smart Phones, Face and pattern recognition, the Entertainment Industry, Robotics and Cyber Warfare. At the moment there is no end in sight.

Having a valid reason for wanting old programs on old computers is the exception that proves the rule. But it's a niche requirement. Most of time most of the world needs more powerful computers and faster communications.

Dave

[Enough!Participant @enough]

…. or is it like the fashion world. Is it offered because people want it or do people want it because it's offered?

[Author]

Posts