Calling it obsolete is the same as kids calling checking accounts obsolete, or desktop computers, or wearing underwear. Just ignore them and try not to stand downwind.
Replacements will not reduce costs or personnel, and most likely will not improve efficiency. Look at the massive infrastructure that keeps modern complex systems running. Replace a system that you know and understand and replace it with some modern commodity hardware chosen for being cheap (rooms full of them). Replace the army of IBM drones with an army of Oracle drones. After all the massive expense of converting over the final overhead costs will likely be identical, only you're stuck with a different master.
And unsurprisingly, programs written last year in modern fashionable languages are probably broken already.
Discarding a language merely because it is old is stupid, but stupid is the modern fashion. We used to use computers to send people to the moon, now we use computers to broadcast pictures of our lunch.
Yes but look at modern replacements, also designed for lock in, requiring the use consultants to keep it running (consultants which are coincidentally supplied in bulk by the makers of the modern software). SAP/R3, Oracle, etc.
Why not? More efficient than modern solutions. And developers who understand computers and computing, unlike today's kiddies. Should the Department of Homeland Security worry more about security or coding fashion?
My consulting service can replace your mainframe, and the 3 coders who maintain it! You just need the space for 200 PC servers and 75 IT personnel. And my fee of course.
Remember, C is a language from the 70s, and Unix is an operating system from the 70s, so anyone who uses those is a hopeless Luddite more interested in efficiency and getting the job done than in arguing about methodologies like real coders!
Windows 7 was the most expensive component for many PCs. Usually the cost is hidden or reduced because of forced deals with OEMs (ie, the whole monopoly business). But if you didn't have an OEM system then that OS cost was very noticeable especially on lower end desktop PCs with commodity parts.
Also their Windows was also their way to get customers to also be using their real money maker of Office, and get the users locked into it. Again, the monopoly thing means you get to use product A to gain market share on product B. Microsoft sold Xbox at a profit loss for a few years, precisely so that they could make headway into a new market already dominated by others with more skills and experience. So it makes sense that Microsoft can sell the OS at a steep discount, even make it free, and still make money. The whole reason they've got insane and trying to trick people into Windows 10 is because they'll make money off of that free OS.
I'm holding off until they pay me to install Windows 10. Then I'll install it ten times a day.
Yes. Running a deprecated OS that is highly vulnerable to theoretical malware may be better than upgrading to Windows 10. If it all breaks down, then switch to Linux with the deprecated Windows version running in a VMware without network access. But these older systems are still supported until 2020 at the last, some may be supported longer (we can get security updates longer than the other features). Many of the actually useful features will never be backported to older operating systems anyway, as that's always been Microsoft's strategy.
We run anti-malware programs precisely to avoid the sorts of activities that Microsoft is engaged in: spying on you, presenting advertisements, changing your software without permission, uninstalling your programs, and taking remote control of your system.
Over all, we'd rather shoot ourselves in the foot than have Microsoft shoot us in the foot.
I likeWindows 8.1. Tell me something positive about Windows 10 that would make me upgrade? And don't use that lame bullshit of "you have to upgrade eventually, so go get that tooth pulled now".
Cortana - useless drivel. Not quite there start menu? Universal app - pointless and current examples have problems. DirectX 12 - ok, a grand total of 2 games are missed if you don't do this, meanwhile the biggest name in PC gaming is trying to get weaned off of Windows. Virtual desktops - that's great, they finally catch up to all their competitors by sneaking a good idea past the Windows product managers. No improvements on security (unless you believe the liars in marketing "most secure OS evar!"). No core OS improvements, not smaller or faster.
Microsoft has always been deceptive about its marketing. It always reports huge successes in every release, even Vista, but only because of OEM deals (and strong arm mafia tacticts) and new PC sales. Because the PC market is slowing down that has become more difficult. Also the extremely short period of time since Windows 8 and 8.1 were released means there's absolutely zero customer demand.
I'm going to try Never10. That lets you update to KB3035583 and others but it won't download windows 10 or show you ads. It sets group policy to disallow it even if you're not on an enterprise version of windows. GWX Control Panel is good but with that it's still a never ending game of wack-a-mole.
They could make billions by doing things the old way, selling an OS that people want, providing useful goods and services. Intead they'll only make millions by selling statistics about how many people like playing Candy Crush. Just like your crazy uncle Ralph who has a plan to strike it rich any day now, Microsoft has a naive plan to strike it rich by being the last person on the block to jump on the apps and advertisement bandwagon.
I like the Windows 8/8.1 UI. Not the metro crap, but the desktop. It screwed up because it had a fat border that you couldn't change in settings, but I fixed that with the registry (I'd prefer 0 width border). I like the flat look, I thought Aero was pointless shiny fluff to attract users and magpies. I like the minimalist look of OSX, and this was a step in that direction.
Overall I liked Windows 8.1. Ignore the metro app screen and apps and app store, then learn to hobble along without a start menu. After that I like it better than Windows 7. I thought Windows 10 would be similar; get the start menu back sort of, learn to disable cortana, learn to disable telemetry, etc. Just like *all* windows versions you're never going to get 100% improvement, you're going to get 2 steps forward and most of 2 steps back. But during the "wait and see" period Windows 10 has turned out to be a disaster.
Registry was a bad idea that got cemented into place. They wanted to fix the clumsy config file method they used, which was a good goal, but having a centralised database was not the wisest approach. Then they went ahead and put just about everything into that registry (probably some edict to do so from on high) and it became a horrible mess. As i recall they actually required programs to use the registry before you could get your "Works with Windows 95" sticker.
Unix developers, especially FOSS develoopers for BSD and Linux, try to make a good OS and provide a good infrastructure under the hood. Ie, better performance, smaller code, consistency across the system, and so forth. Occasionally there are misguided Unix devs intent on adding poorly thought out features (systemd, pulseaudio, Unity, etc), but they're in the minority. At Microsoft though, according to ex MS devs, adding new features is a top priority, just behind urgent security patches, whereas improving the infrastructure is so low down on the list that it never happens. Which is why the best way to improve performance in Windows is to do a fresh install.
That control panel is pretty good, I recommend it also.
I'm also a bit confused about "recommended" updates. In the Windows Update panel (the real one, not the Widnows 8.1 metro style panel), it doesn't have a category of "recommended". The lowest level category is "optional", so if KB3035583 is listed as optional then I assume that's not "recommended"? Or are all optional updates now recommended?
Windows has the worst package management system I've ever seen. Why do I have to be concerned about Windows Server 2012 bug fixes when I'm not running Windows Server 2012? Now that we're being forced to manually inspect each update you can see all the idiocy that's there. It's like they've gone to Agile and are forced to deliver half-assed updates every two weeks
The publishers don't want this though. They don't care what you the author thinks. They do not want a Kindle book to be seen in a Nook reader for instance.
Waht publishers want is 100% compliance (except for pirates, they can't control them so they crack down on legal customers). In the past we would be ok with 95% of people trasferring copies and not calling out the police for the 5% that may have kept a copy.
So what if there is no way to verify it? What's the big deal? The pirates are not doing this, they never paid for the product in the first place. Only the paying customers who would be assumed to be law abiding are being treated like criminals.
We used to do this. Borland had a sensible license without intrusive copy protection. We have had bestselling video games without any DRM or copy protection. Now suddenly these e-book people are as paranoid as RIAA, now it remains to be seen if they'll become just as hostile as RIAA.
You're right in a sense. For awhile I did not buy new books or new games, because there was a thriving LEGAL market for second hand products. I used to buy used automobiles too. But the publishers have figured out how to add DRM to destroy the second hand markets, which has nothing to do with preventing piracy. As a customer I look after my own rights and interests, I'm not going to go crying over any lost profits of the publishers. I hope that the Netherlands preserves the right to sell products you have purchased and flips a finger at the publishers.
Slashdot Mirror
Calling it obsolete is the same as kids calling checking accounts obsolete, or desktop computers, or wearing underwear. Just ignore them and try not to stand downwind.
Scripting languages. It's all they've ever known. They're coders, not programmers, engineers, or computer scientists.
Personally, I don't use algebra anymore, it was invented centuries ago so I'm waiting for something new to use.
Replacements will not reduce costs or personnel, and most likely will not improve efficiency. Look at the massive infrastructure that keeps modern complex systems running. Replace a system that you know and understand and replace it with some modern commodity hardware chosen for being cheap (rooms full of them). Replace the army of IBM drones with an army of Oracle drones. After all the massive expense of converting over the final overhead costs will likely be identical, only you're stuck with a different master.
And unsurprisingly, programs written last year in modern fashionable languages are probably broken already.
Discarding a language merely because it is old is stupid, but stupid is the modern fashion. We used to use computers to send people to the moon, now we use computers to broadcast pictures of our lunch.
Yes but look at modern replacements, also designed for lock in, requiring the use consultants to keep it running (consultants which are coincidentally supplied in bulk by the makers of the modern software). SAP/R3, Oracle, etc.
Why not? More efficient than modern solutions. And developers who understand computers and computing, unlike today's kiddies. Should the Department of Homeland Security worry more about security or coding fashion?
My consulting service can replace your mainframe, and the 3 coders who maintain it! You just need the space for 200 PC servers and 75 IT personnel. And my fee of course.
Remember, C is a language from the 70s, and Unix is an operating system from the 70s, so anyone who uses those is a hopeless Luddite more interested in efficiency and getting the job done than in arguing about methodologies like real coders!
So except for all the bad aspects, it's a pretty good product, then, eh? That's quite the ringing endorsement.
Under the hood without spyware/Cortana/Edge/store, Windows 10 is actually Windows 8.1.
But it's sofware that helps you do what Microsoft wants!
7 years for Windows 8.1. Great for procrastinators like me.
Windows 7 was the most expensive component for many PCs. Usually the cost is hidden or reduced because of forced deals with OEMs (ie, the whole monopoly business). But if you didn't have an OEM system then that OS cost was very noticeable especially on lower end desktop PCs with commodity parts.
Also their Windows was also their way to get customers to also be using their real money maker of Office, and get the users locked into it. Again, the monopoly thing means you get to use product A to gain market share on product B. Microsoft sold Xbox at a profit loss for a few years, precisely so that they could make headway into a new market already dominated by others with more skills and experience. So it makes sense that Microsoft can sell the OS at a steep discount, even make it free, and still make money. The whole reason they've got insane and trying to trick people into Windows 10 is because they'll make money off of that free OS.
I'm holding off until they pay me to install Windows 10. Then I'll install it ten times a day.
Yes. Running a deprecated OS that is highly vulnerable to theoretical malware may be better than upgrading to Windows 10. If it all breaks down, then switch to Linux with the deprecated Windows version running in a VMware without network access. But these older systems are still supported until 2020 at the last, some may be supported longer (we can get security updates longer than the other features). Many of the actually useful features will never be backported to older operating systems anyway, as that's always been Microsoft's strategy.
We run anti-malware programs precisely to avoid the sorts of activities that Microsoft is engaged in: spying on you, presenting advertisements, changing your software without permission, uninstalling your programs, and taking remote control of your system.
Over all, we'd rather shoot ourselves in the foot than have Microsoft shoot us in the foot.
I likeWindows 8.1. Tell me something positive about Windows 10 that would make me upgrade? And don't use that lame bullshit of "you have to upgrade eventually, so go get that tooth pulled now".
Cortana - useless drivel.
Not quite there start menu?
Universal app - pointless and current examples have problems.
DirectX 12 - ok, a grand total of 2 games are missed if you don't do this, meanwhile the biggest name in PC gaming is trying to get weaned off of Windows.
Virtual desktops - that's great, they finally catch up to all their competitors by sneaking a good idea past the Windows product managers.
No improvements on security (unless you believe the liars in marketing "most secure OS evar!").
No core OS improvements, not smaller or faster.
Microsoft has always been deceptive about its marketing. It always reports huge successes in every release, even Vista, but only because of OEM deals (and strong arm mafia tacticts) and new PC sales. Because the PC market is slowing down that has become more difficult. Also the extremely short period of time since Windows 8 and 8.1 were released means there's absolutely zero customer demand.
I'm going to try Never10. That lets you update to KB3035583 and others but it won't download windows 10 or show you ads. It sets group policy to disallow it even if you're not on an enterprise version of windows. GWX Control Panel is good but with that it's still a never ending game of wack-a-mole.
They could make billions by doing things the old way, selling an OS that people want, providing useful goods and services. Intead they'll only make millions by selling statistics about how many people like playing Candy Crush. Just like your crazy uncle Ralph who has a plan to strike it rich any day now, Microsoft has a naive plan to strike it rich by being the last person on the block to jump on the apps and advertisement bandwagon.
I like the Windows 8/8.1 UI. Not the metro crap, but the desktop. It screwed up because it had a fat border that you couldn't change in settings, but I fixed that with the registry (I'd prefer 0 width border). I like the flat look, I thought Aero was pointless shiny fluff to attract users and magpies. I like the minimalist look of OSX, and this was a step in that direction.
Overall I liked Windows 8.1. Ignore the metro app screen and apps and app store, then learn to hobble along without a start menu. After that I like it better than Windows 7. I thought Windows 10 would be similar; get the start menu back sort of, learn to disable cortana, learn to disable telemetry, etc. Just like *all* windows versions you're never going to get 100% improvement, you're going to get 2 steps forward and most of 2 steps back. But during the "wait and see" period Windows 10 has turned out to be a disaster.
Registry was a bad idea that got cemented into place. They wanted to fix the clumsy config file method they used, which was a good goal, but having a centralised database was not the wisest approach. Then they went ahead and put just about everything into that registry (probably some edict to do so from on high) and it became a horrible mess. As i recall they actually required programs to use the registry before you could get your "Works with Windows 95" sticker.
Unix developers, especially FOSS develoopers for BSD and Linux, try to make a good OS and provide a good infrastructure under the hood. Ie, better performance, smaller code, consistency across the system, and so forth. Occasionally there are misguided Unix devs intent on adding poorly thought out features (systemd, pulseaudio, Unity, etc), but they're in the minority. At Microsoft though, according to ex MS devs, adding new features is a top priority, just behind urgent security patches, whereas improving the infrastructure is so low down on the list that it never happens. Which is why the best way to improve performance in Windows is to do a fresh install.
No means no.
You gotta let it go!
That was supposed to be a joke. Humor is in short supply where Microsoft is concerned so I can understand the confusion.
That control panel is pretty good, I recommend it also.
I'm also a bit confused about "recommended" updates. In the Windows Update panel (the real one, not the Widnows 8.1 metro style panel), it doesn't have a category of "recommended". The lowest level category is "optional", so if KB3035583 is listed as optional then I assume that's not "recommended"? Or are all optional updates now recommended?
Windows has the worst package management system I've ever seen. Why do I have to be concerned about Windows Server 2012 bug fixes when I'm not running Windows Server 2012? Now that we're being forced to manually inspect each update you can see all the idiocy that's there. It's like they've gone to Agile and are forced to deliver half-assed updates every two weeks
The publishers don't want this though. They don't care what you the author thinks. They do not want a Kindle book to be seen in a Nook reader for instance.
Waht publishers want is 100% compliance (except for pirates, they can't control them so they crack down on legal customers). In the past we would be ok with 95% of people trasferring copies and not calling out the police for the 5% that may have kept a copy.
So what if there is no way to verify it? What's the big deal? The pirates are not doing this, they never paid for the product in the first place. Only the paying customers who would be assumed to be law abiding are being treated like criminals.
We used to do this. Borland had a sensible license without intrusive copy protection. We have had bestselling video games without any DRM or copy protection. Now suddenly these e-book people are as paranoid as RIAA, now it remains to be seen if they'll become just as hostile as RIAA.
You're right in a sense. For awhile I did not buy new books or new games, because there was a thriving LEGAL market for second hand products. I used to buy used automobiles too. But the publishers have figured out how to add DRM to destroy the second hand markets, which has nothing to do with preventing piracy. As a customer I look after my own rights and interests, I'm not going to go crying over any lost profits of the publishers. I hope that the Netherlands preserves the right to sell products you have purchased and flips a finger at the publishers.