The original IBM PC? Now that is
interesting because I can control every aspect of that machine.
True. I started with a Commodore 64, but it wasn't until I got a PC-XT clone that things really got interesting. There were virtually *no*
ports on the motherboard, everything was done with add-on cards. So,
you could incrementally upgrade it easily. I started with replacing the 8088 CPU with a V20, getting a math co-processor for my CS classwork, upgrading the hard drive and controller to RLL to get more space, then replacing the motherboard with an AT/287, inheriting a card that added memory to the system along with more I/O... by the time I was done the only things left original were the power supply and the case.
I don't mind windows 11, it's much nicer than windows 10, but the hardware requirements suck.
The one thing I absolutely hated about Win11 was the right-click flyout menu in file explorer. Burying all the useful options in submenus requiring more clicking around was pretty lame.
(I'm behind on messages, so perhaps this already got talked about)
What I'm struggling with, with Win11, along with what you're saying, are
But, in general, Win11 seems fine to me. I can't say I particularly
_care_ about how it's different from Win10, but largely it does what I want, and I can ignore it most of the time.
And that's the state I want for an OS. Basically stop thinking about it.
I haven't used Win 11 as yet but my hunch is I may ride it out until the next OS version is released then try to move to that.. but time will
tell I guess.
Pondering chocolate is far more fun :)
Adept wrote to Avon <=-
So it seems reasonable to me for people to skip the version. I'm really only running it because I got new computers this year, and it seemed
more reasonable to have systems that were running Win 11 immediately.
I've gotten a variety of chocolate, and will eat some while typing this message, though I think the interesting food item I've been doing is my wine and gin advent calendars.
Windows 10 runs fine here, and Windows 11 won't run because this system doesn't have a TPM chip. It's a home model, I'm guessing lots of people will be unable to upgrade, and in 2025 they'll have to push the EOL
date out further.
They should just make a better operating system. Maybe it was a
conspiracy to drive new hardware sales. I might have to upgrade my
desktop to have a PCI 4.0 bus at the minimum.
So it seems reasonable to me for people to skip the version. I'm really only running it because I got new computers this year, and it seemed
more reasonable to have systems that were running Win 11 immediately.
Pondering chocolate is far more fun :)
It _is_.
I've gotten a variety of chocolate, and will eat some while typing this message, though I think the interesting food item I've been doing is my wine and gin advent calendars.
It's neat to try a couple new things each day, write down a short
review, take some pictures, etc.
Eventually I'll get the info into my wine wiki, which, while it's more work than I'd like, is a part of the fun of trying out various alcohols.
Now that computers are front-ends for
the internet, there don't appear to be many interesting differentiators. I
I struggle to figure out the killer feature Windows is bringing to the table nowadays in most use cases.
yeah I expect I'll need to move some systems across to Win 10 or 11 sooner than later... but while the lights keep blinkty blinking I'm happy - heh.
I don't think I necessarily agree with that, nor do I think computers should just be front-ends for the internet. Not everything is well
suited to run as a web/internet based app. Photo and video processing, software development, and other number-crunching tasks lend themselves
to having a powerful computer at home that you can use for those kinds
of things. Video games is another example.
Sometimes it seems like some software companies want us to use web apps though, as they can easily charge a subscription fee. In some ways it seems like a step backwards - I remember hearing about people using dumb terminals connected to powerful central mainframe computers in the 60s
and 70s.. As computers became smaller, more affordable, and more powerful, it became much easier to have a fairly powerful computer at
home that could run software locally, and generally that was seen as a good thing.
Yeah, I'm not sure any particular computer OS has any killer feature
these days. As you said though, Windows just being a known thing means that pretty much all types of software are made for Windows
(particularly gaming).
I've seen certain programs that some people just seem to love which are only made for one platform (i.e. Mac-only versions of certain programs), but I don't think there's any limiting factor where it would really need to be platform-specific.
Oddly, I've noticed that a large percentage of people who do photo &
video editing and making music (content creators) still seem to prefer Mac, and a lot of web developers seem to like working on a Mac too.
I've heard that music software for Mac in general tends to "just work"
and have low latency, but (in my limited experience) I haven't seen much problem with latency with Windows music software either.. The web devleopment connection with Mac is one thing I don't quite understand though.
affordable, and more powerful, it became much easier to have a
fairly powerful computer at home that could run software locally,
and generally that was seen as a good thing.
This is true, but it's also much easier to maintain. Build a web app, and then anyone with a browser can basically use it. You don't need to deal with customers downloading and installing things, really you can just offload all that burden onto the web browser itself. At the end of the day it lowers the burden significantly for development.
I'm not doing dev work for my job or BBS stuff or gaming, I tend to use my iPad. It's just easier and gets out of the way.
Agree, however I am sympathetic to game companies refusing to release for linux...it's a pain in the ass building something closed source and trying to support linux as a platform for your software, due to the bespoke nature of what 'linux' means for basically every type of user.
I prefer doing web dev on a Mac, I also prefer photo editing and making music on a Mac. Doing any kind of dev work in Windows has always been a bit of a nightmare for me. I use a Mac for doing dev stuff at work, but it's also an amazing personal computer. I prefer it infinitely over Windows.
Web development has its own issues though. You have to test it in multiple web browsers (and perhaps multiple versions of multiple web browsers). And for years, IE was the bane of web development as it had its own bugs and special cases you had to allow for. It seems like a
lot of hassle to have to test for multiple browsers & such.
What do you mean by "gets out of the way"?
That's true - though I think gaming support is one of the things Linux users have been wanting most. I think it's good that a big gaming
company like Steam has been supporting Linux for a little while now.
I'm curious how web development was a nightmare on Windows?
The development work I've done is more often back-end, desktop software (usually C# these days, but sometimes C++), and some mobile. I've done a little bit of web development and usually I use Windows and can't say
I've encountered any significant problems doing it.
Sysop: | Chris Crash |
---|---|
Location: | Huntington Beach, CA. |
Users: | 611 |
Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
Uptime: | 60:09:40 |
Calls: | 10,849 |
Files: | 5 |
Messages: | 504,459 |