Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Latest and Greatest.  (Read 21735 times)
W9CLL
Member

Posts: 50




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: June 06, 2014, 07:52:33 PM »

In all reality this disscussion is pointless among hams, we are by our nature techie so we like our laptops and desktops. The general public doesn't care about USB ports, fast desktops with many monitors, they want ease of use and portibity. The laptop is dead.
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 6482




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: June 06, 2014, 08:32:32 PM »

In all reality this disscussion is pointless among hams, we are by our nature techie so we like our laptops and desktops. The general public doesn't care about USB ports, fast desktops with many monitors, they want ease of use and portibity. The laptop is dead.

You are talking to wrong public because USB is still important and laptop far from dead. It is desktop computers that's on life support. I rarely use mine it is a laptop plugged into a large display and remote key board I use for a main system now that I can grab laptop take it with me when I travel.
Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
W9CLL
Member

Posts: 50




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: June 06, 2014, 10:05:19 PM »

In all reality this disscussion is pointless among hams, we are by our nature techie so we like our laptops and desktops. The general public doesn't care about USB ports, fast desktops with many monitors, they want ease of use and portibity. The laptop is dead.

You are talking to wrong public because USB is still important and laptop far from dead. It is desktop computers that's on life support. I rarely use mine it is a laptop plugged into a large display and remote key board I use for a main system now that I can grab laptop take it with me when I travel.
And what public are you talking about? What are they going to plug in? Everything is in the "device" nowadays. Don't think like a ham here.
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 6482




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: June 07, 2014, 04:08:40 AM »

In all reality this disscussion is pointless among hams, we are by our nature techie so we like our laptops and desktops. The general public doesn't care about USB ports, fast desktops with many monitors, they want ease of use and portibity. The laptop is dead.

You are talking to wrong public because USB is still important and laptop far from dead. It is desktop computers that's on life support. I rarely use mine it is a laptop plugged into a large display and remote key board I use for a main system now that I can grab laptop take it with me when I travel.

And what public are you talking about? What are they going to plug in? Everything is in the "device" nowadays. Don't think like a ham here.

When I flew to San Fransisco last month there was people using laptops all over airport waiting areas and many on plane. it is far from dead. I use a add on 22 inch monitor and remote keyboard and mouse because I like a bigger screen for work at home yet I can take laptop with me.
« Last Edit: June 07, 2014, 04:52:22 AM by W8JX » Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
W9CLL
Member

Posts: 50




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: June 07, 2014, 06:00:17 AM »

I am not trying to argue the point, yes people are still using laptops but they are declining in sales. At the firm I am with we have a lot of mobile users, most have turned in their LT's for high end tablets. The shift is happening, its not main stream yet but will be. As for plug in devices? Everything is going wireless, you no longer need the "cable". As I said before we are hams and techies, we are different so the general public rules don't apply. I am typing this on my tablet, sure I could have powered up my LT but why, this works for what I need. Oh and the question to the desktop going away quicker, I agree in the home users world but not in the corperate realm.

Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 6482




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: June 07, 2014, 06:22:10 AM »

I am not trying to argue the point, yes people are still using laptops but they are declining in sales. At the firm I am with we have a lot of mobile users, most have turned in their LT's for high end tablets. The shift is happening, its not main stream yet but will be. As for plug in devices? Everything is going wireless, you no longer need the "cable". As I said before we are hams and techies, we are different so the general public rules don't apply. I am typing this on my tablet, sure I could have powered up my LT but why, this works for what I need. Oh and the question to the desktop going away quicker, I agree in the home users world but not in the corperate realm.

This is why Win 8x is what it is. Things are changing and 7 has not role in it. I can use my WIN RT tablet and things I do can be seen on WIN 8 laptop. People jumping through hoops to avoid 8 are screwing themselves long term. We went thru the DOS to Windoze change about 20 years ago. Now we are on the cusp of another big change. 
Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
W4KYR
Member

Posts: 606




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: June 07, 2014, 08:55:40 AM »

People jumping through hoops to avoid 8 are screwing themselves long term.

Consumers do not want Windows 8 and neither does the Corporate World. Windows 8 is not popular.
Logged

Still using Windows XP Pro.
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6055




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: June 07, 2014, 09:36:37 AM »

People jumping through hoops to avoid 8 are screwing themselves long term.

Consumers do not want Windows 8 and neither does the Corporate World. Windows 8 is not popular.

More 'JX horn blowing for Microsoft?  Seems to be.

But....  It isn't Windows 8 that people don't want--it's the 'metro' interface.  That's one of the reasons 8.1 was brought out right after 8 was introduced.  It's no doubt that Microsoft isn't going to 'go away' because of W8 or 8.1, but Microsoft had lost a great deal of sales once the word of the way W8 worked got around.

I still think that Microsoft is going to 'bring back' the interface of W7 when Windows 9 comes out, and the Metro interface is just going to be soon forgotten, just as the fiasco called Windows Vista was.  Having a general purpose desktop system running off a touchscreen (the main reason the Metro interface was developed and introduced) just isn't going to work for the average Joe who still wants a traditional desktop computer system.
Logged
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 12995




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: June 07, 2014, 09:46:46 AM »

I don't understand why Vista was a fiasco. I had a Dell Vista machine with dual monitors that I used every day at work primarily for software development and I never had an issue with it. It was still working when I retired.
Logged
K5UNX
Member

Posts: 311


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #24 on: June 07, 2014, 01:19:47 PM »

More 'JX horn blowing for Microsoft?  Seems to be.

But....  It isn't Windows 8 that people don't want--it's the 'metro' interface.  That's one of the reasons 8.1 was brought out right after 8 was introduced.  It's no doubt that Microsoft isn't going to 'go away' because of W8 or 8.1, but Microsoft had lost a great deal of sales once the word of the way W8 worked got around.

I still think that Microsoft is going to 'bring back' the interface of W7 when Windows 9 comes out, and the Metro interface is just going to be soon forgotten, just as the fiasco called Windows Vista was.  Having a general purpose desktop system running off a touchscreen (the main reason the Metro interface was developed and introduced) just isn't going to work for the average Joe who still wants a traditional desktop computer system.

Windows 8.1 does not get rid of the Metro interface. I have been using Win 8 and 8.1 full-time at work for the last four months so I have hands-on experience with both. With either, you don't use the Metro interface, unless you want to. The start tiled screen, while looking like Metro, is the only thing you would see. That's actually faster than the old Win 7 start button. The biggest thing I see from 8 to 8.1 is a start button in the lower left corner for the people that whine about not having the start button. I never use the start/windows icon/button. It's easier to just touch the Windows key to the left of the space bar. I use Outlook, Word, Excel, Putty, VMware tools, IE, Chrome, and other apps. None of them are Metro apps. I never see a Metro interface.

I hear this "I hate Metro" talk from people that have never used Win 8 or 8.1. I don't count walking up to a computer in Best Buy and seeing Metro at the same as someone who uses it on a daily basis.

The whole "I hate Win 8 because of Metro" argument has to be one of the most un-informed arguments out there.

Overall I like Win 8.1 better than Win 7.  It feel quicker on the same PC I was using Win 7 on. Don't bother calling me a MS fanboy, I am writing this on a Mac. If I had a choice at work I would use Mac OSX.

As far as corporations not using Win 8.x . . . That's crap. I work for a company with 300K employees. I am on the early adopter program for Laptop operating systems in the company. I got Win 7 before everyone and have been on Win 8/8.1 before everyone. We're just getting ready to turn 8.1 over to full-time approved support with a company 8,1 image. XP & Vista are no longer supported internally by IT.

I doubt MS will bring back a Win 7 interface for Win 9. I would bet we'll see more forward motion. More touch interfacing. MS will move forward, not backwards. But I also think more online services. Look at Apples WWDC announcements. More online services, more mobile friendly, more being able to move from device to device. MS will follow suit I bet in some form. Look at Office 365 and the free tools valuable now.
Logged

W4KYR
Member

Posts: 606




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: June 07, 2014, 01:48:18 PM »

I don't understand why Vista was a fiasco. I had a Dell Vista machine with dual monitors that I used every day at work primarily for software development and I never had an issue with it. It was still working when I retired.


Vista was a poor replacement for a good portion of existing machines that ran Windows XP

A lot of low end corporate machines XP machines could not run Vista properly or at all. The requirements for Vista were too high. Before Vista was introduced, 512 MB Ram was considered the normal Ram for a new computer. Higher XP machines did have 2 GB Ram, but that was not the average.

My company had many low end XP machines with 256 MB Ram and 1.7 GB speed. No way Vista would have ran on those machines. The company wasn't going to pay for upgrades and then pay a new license for Vista. Buying new machines just to run Vista was not in the company's plans.

Many programs that our company used would only run on XP machines. Some programs were written for Vista later on after Vista was out for awhile but
the company was not going to spring for new Vista machines and also was not going to buy new software that would run under Vista.

I suspect that our company was very typical of other companies that had plans in force on not to buy new machines unless one machine was not repairable and even then, the new machine would only run XP.

Driver issues. Sure they were eventually ironed out, but that was one of it's biggest issues when Vista was first released according to some IT experts.

Vista's UAC was another sore point.


In case one thinks I am exaggerating about the machines on the market and used in the workplace at the time....Microsoft admitted that only 20 to 30% of the systems on the market would qualify for a  "Vista Ready" by the Spring of 2006.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2008/03/the-vista-capable-debacle-intel-pushes-microsoft-bends/


Then we have the  infamous "Vista Capable" label which is different from "Vista Ready" and that came back and bit them.

http://www.crn.com/slide-shows/channel-programs/206905984/tracing-microsofts-vista-capable-debacle.htm

"Microsoft pushed through OEM resistance and the confusion of its own executives to brand thousands of PCs with the logo of an operating system the computers were not capable of running smoothly without major hardware upgrades."

All this lead to the launch and acceptance of Vista as a fiasco and a mistake that hurt Microsoft. Some equated Vista with Windows ME. And years later we look back and see that was an unfair comparison.

Suffice to say by the time of the release of Vista SP2, the critics settled down some. And it turned out that was an OK operating system after a lot of issues were finally ironed out.

We can look back and say fondly, at least Vista  had a pretty much normal GUI. Unlike Windows 8 with it's Metro theme.
.

Logged

Still using Windows XP Pro.
AA4PB
Member

Posts: 12995




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: June 07, 2014, 02:03:30 PM »

"Vista was a poor replacement for a good portion of existing machines that ran Windows XP"

We didn't attempt to upgrade any old XP machines to Vista. We purchased new high-end machines that already had Vista installed on them. They worked out of the box and I never had any problems with them.


Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 6482




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: June 07, 2014, 02:48:01 PM »

"Vista was a poor replacement for a good portion of existing machines that ran Windows XP"

We didn't attempt to upgrade any old XP machines to Vista. We purchased new high-end machines that already had Vista installed on them. They worked out of the box and I never had any problems with them.


Vista required newer compatible cheap sets and was not a good XP upgrade. 7 needs better to but it detects and disables Chipset features not supported when you upgrade to 7.
Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
K1CJS
Member

Posts: 6055




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: June 07, 2014, 07:34:01 PM »

Windows 8.1 does not get rid of the Metro interface.

I never said it did.

Quote
I have been using Win 8 and 8.1 full-time at work for the last four months so I have hands-on experience with both. With either, you don't use the Metro interface, unless you want to. The start tiled screen, while looking like Metro, is the only thing you would see....

That's the metro interface--the user's interaction screen with the OS.

And that's what I meant.  Win 8.1 restored the start button, which was what I was referring to.  No matter if the 'new' start screen was faster, there was too many people who just didn't like it and who wanted that start button back--because that's what they were used to.  That's why it was restorred.

BTW, If you didn't beta test Win 8 (I did) then you don't know what was contemplated for the OS.  There were many changes made from the beta version to the release version of Win 8--but Microsoft still blew it by trying to have both a traditional OS and a touchscreen OS at the same time.  That's why Win 8 isn't selling--even now with Win 8.1--except for installation in newer machines.  That's why Win 7 is still being offered, although at a higher price by some manufacturers--because that is what the people want. 

In short, that's why Win 8 AND Win 8.1 both was and is such a flop.
Logged
K5UNX
Member

Posts: 311


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #29 on: June 07, 2014, 08:54:28 PM »

Windows 8.1 does not get rid of the Metro interface.

I never said it did.

Quote
I have been using Win 8 and 8.1 full-time at work for the last four months so I have hands-on experience with both. With either, you don't use the Metro interface, unless you want to. The start tiled screen, while looking like Metro, is the only thing you would see....

That's the metro interface--the user's interaction screen with the OS.

And that's what I meant.  Win 8.1 restored the start button, which was what I was referring to.  No matter if the 'new' start screen was faster, there was too many people who just didn't like it and who wanted that start button back--because that's what they were used to.  That's why it was restorred.

BTW, If you didn't beta test Win 8 (I did) then you don't know what was contemplated for the OS.  There were many changes made from the beta version to the release version of Win 8--but Microsoft still blew it by trying to have both a traditional OS and a touchscreen OS at the same time.  That's why Win 8 isn't selling--even now with Win 8.1--except for installation in newer machines.  That's why Win 7 is still being offered, although at a higher price by some manufacturers--because that is what the people want. 

In short, that's why Win 8 AND Win 8.1 both was and is such a flop.

The start screen is the only "Metro" looking thing I ever see. Everything else looks like regular Windows that we're used to.

The restored start button in 8.1 does not bring back the old start menu structure. It still takes you to the new start screen.

Logged

Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!