Path:
eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!fee
der.eternal-september.org!border3.nntp.ams.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!bo
rder1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp
.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 04:45:35 -0600
Message-ID: <e$DniHbm8Y1QFwST@soft255.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 10:44:54 +0000
From: "J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk>
Reply-To: G6JPG@soft255.demon.co.uk
Newsgroups:
alt.windows-xp,alt.os.windows-xp,microsoft.public.windowsxp.setup_deployment,mi
crosoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support,microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
Subject: Re: Proposal to Keep WinXP Support "Alive"
References: <m36sc8dpovqpibrtvmcd7pvdq2kpu3m5i6@4ax.com>
<XnsA12C3B284ED20jj@88.198.244.100>
<669769ce-c1a1-4f17-90f0-68768fc8dab6@f4g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
<kb38pt$h2i$1@dont-email.me>
Organization: 255 software
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=us-ascii;format=flowed
User-Agent: Turnpike/6.07-M (<vghDLwBD8kCUxBEgdBcACQ0oOJ>)
Lines: 117
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace:
sv3-D9KQIm3yVA5t/J6apuA15zvvHPza669KKRLEUWhHczycWBqtBxwra7jsXm3CyRuG5j9LLBFNonf
BcBx!3ClmeukIrWzDnSU+0N+6CPEwNj9lt3bCFyXKixaTPasVMiRqL/zNgrDQjh/jvzp+3miEEbegQa
27!+1wtsgFk
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 7036
Xref: mx04.eternal-september.org alt.windows-xp:3995 alt.os.windows-xp:5404
microsoft.public.windowsxp.setup_deployment:2454
microsoft.public.windowsxp.help_and_support:30868
microsoft.public.windowsxp.general:106060
In message <kb38pt$h2i$1@dont-email.me>, QuestionQuigley
<doregan@verizon.net> writes:
>On 12/17/2012 4:49 AM, Greegor wrote:
>> Microsoft's big opportunities to sell new versions of
>> Windows used to accompany hardware 6x faster
>> than the previous hardware.
>>
>> This entails huge costs, much greater than the
>> mere cost of computers and Windows.
>>
>> Adapting or replacing old, expensive or proprietary
>> software is a huge expense, as is any retraining
>> caused by such changes.
>>
>> But these huge expenses were seen as
>> worthwhile because of the 6x speed increase.
>> Those days are over.
>>
>> The applications that pay the bills for large
>> corporate users are things like order entry,
>> order recall, inventory, database, telephone
>> services scripts (Oracle) and word processing.
>>
>> One outfit has about 150 computer workstations
>> in one room alone, plus about 30 more among
>> offices and operation center. But they have
>> about 25 such locations. Upgrading from XP
>> would offer them no advantage whatsoever.
>>
>> Even though an operating system is crucial
>> for a computer, it is nonetheless a minor fraction
>> of the overall cost. If Microsoft is going to force
>> that MASS of old computers to be replaced with
>> no real advantage and for no real reason aside
>> from the marketing needs of Microsoft, it becomes
>> a bit like the tail wagging the dog.
>>
>> What does Microsoft get per new OEM computer
>> with Win8? Maybe $30? Yet they expect to
>> force old systems to be scrapped and new computers
>> which provide no actual advantage to be purchased
>> at about $700 per system?? Just to fulfill Microsoft's
>> MARKETING NEEDS??
>>
>> To force corporate customer service centers to
>> landfill/scrap all of those WinXP-Pro computers
>> by cutting off revised SECURITY UPDATES
>> is blatantly a MARKETING PLOY by Microsoft.
>>
>> And not a very nice one.
>>
>> Cutesy tiles instead of icons? Big deal.
>>
>> How about that Android, eh?
>It seems each version of Windows and MS Office has a new look and feel
>that causes many users to get lost. It is one thing to improve >functionality,
speed, and reliability, but it seems pointless to create
>new layouts and menus that result in users getting lost. MS seems to
>ignore the human interface. I'm sure the time wasted by users hunting >through
each new menu causes billions of dollars of lost productivity
>each year.
The counter to that is that the majority (though not all) of us like
what we know. If a new way of doing things is actually better, though
unfamiliar, but they provided the option of keeping the old way, then
the vast majority of _upgrading_ users would immediately switch to the
old way. This would have the result that (a) the users would not benefit
from the new way, (b) MS [and others] would in effect have to duplicate support
effort, in that they'd have to keep supporting both.
Having said that, I do think they should put _more_ effort into easing
transitions. I'm not sure how it can be done, though: if you provide an
"old way" option, then as I've said above, most upgraders would just
activate it, and never get any benefit. (Whether there's any point in
those people upgrading anyway is a matter for another thread!) If they provided
some mechanism for the software to _gradually_ show the new
features, (a) it'd require quite a bit more programming effort, (b)
people might hate it just as much [remember how popular "clippy" was!]
if not more.
Some solution is of course always offered by third parties - "classic
shell" for W7 (and 8), for example, and several "old menu" offerings for Office
2010.
FWIW, I use XP here, and Office 2003 - since they do all I want. I _did_
upgrade to XP from '98SElite, though: I _have_ found it more stable
(sorry 98Guy if you're here), and of course there's the better USB
support. I have played with 7 for long enough - I was setting up a new
big laptop for a very un-computerate person (she uses applications -
mail [I put Eudora OSE], Word, and IrfanView, and that's about it - and
probably has no interest in what version of Windows they operate under,
and I/we decided that 7 provided better future-proofing for her), and I
had it to play with for a month or two, and although I found some things
about it irritating, I think I could soon get to live with it with no problems.
At work, we moved to Office 2010 (from '03) a few months ago,
and there I _do_ find the new ("ribbon") interface irritating: I
genuinely have tried to give it a good go. (Also the so-called help
therein is also irritating, being more a google-like interface to
something online. Conversely, I think the help - and similar - in
Windows 7 is pretty good, and certainly better than XP and previous:
mainly because they've put some thought into considering what you might
call things, rather than forcing you - as in earlier versions - to think
of exactly what _they_ call things.)
So I _can_ see _some_ justification for new ways of doing things, and
forcing them on users. (Compare the seat-belt and crash-helmet laws; I'm
not sure if those are the same in US as UK though. [Here belts must be
fitted, work, and be worn if the car was made later than 19xx, and
helmets must be worn [by riders of motorised two-wheelers!] except by
Sikhs.])
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of
enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill (quoted by Deb Shinder in WinNews Newsletter,
2012-11-30)
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.1
* Origin: Prison Board BBS Mesquite Tx //telnet.RDFIG.NET www. (1:124/5013)
|
