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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The PC is dying and MS knows it.  (Read 43466 times)
K5UNX
Member

Posts: 806


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #75 on: November 25, 2014, 06:42:27 AM »

. . . but upgrading an operating system just for the sake of upgrading the operating system does nothing for anyone. We use applications to do our "work" . . . The OS is just the underlying mechanisim to run needed applications.

There's a website somewhere that tracks exactly that.....the level of usage of different OS versions worldwide.  It startled me, as so many were "way behind" the current version, so you're definitely not alone in your thinking.   It was pretty clear that they got the word on Vista, though.

Yea Vista was just bad . . . . I am not saying anyone needs to camp out on XP. That's on the side of simply not wanting to change. I am all for staying up to date. Win 7 is up to date as far as a supported operating system goes. I don't see a problem hanging on to Win 7 for a while as it does the job and is still supported. Let's not get into the extended support vs this support vs that support. Win 7 is still receiving patches, security fixes etc. At this point new features on Win 7 don't matter. If you want  or need new features, go to Win 8.x.

All this talk about Windows versions is just wasting time. We should be spending more time talking about how we use our computers for Ham Radio.

Logged

W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #76 on: November 25, 2014, 07:23:13 AM »

Yea Vista was just bad . . . .

The problem with Vista was it was ahead of hardware at its launch. I was far more chipset dependent than XP and Dell rushed to market with bad Vista hardware. You could not simply take a XP platform and put Vista on it and do well. By the time Vista SP1 was released the chipsets were ready too and Vista was fine but damage had been done. MS did not help either as they set low hardware requirements at launch for OEM to keep costs down when they should of been higher. Win 7 did better mostly because hardware at its launch was much better and is nothing more than a tweaked Vista. With a new name and much better hardware it played well. Win 8 suffered teething problems that have been overcome and Win 10 is nothing more than a tweaked Win 8x but with a new name it will have a clean slate.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
K5PHW
Member

Posts: 106




Ignore
« Reply #77 on: November 25, 2014, 09:08:05 AM »

 The only man on the planet who's wife is never right.  Roll Eyes
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #78 on: November 25, 2014, 03:18:37 PM »

The only man on the planet who's wife is never right.  Roll Eyes

Your wife huh?
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
K5UNX
Member

Posts: 806


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #79 on: November 25, 2014, 05:43:53 PM »

Yea Vista was just bad . . . .

The problem with Vista was it was ahead of hardware at its launch. I was far more chipset dependent than XP and Dell rushed to market with bad Vista hardware. You could not simply take a XP platform and put Vista on it and do well. By the time Vista SP1 was released the chipsets were ready too and Vista was fine but damage had been done. MS did not help either as they set low hardware requirements at launch for OEM to keep costs down when they should of been higher. Win 7 did better mostly because hardware at its launch was much better and is nothing more than a tweaked Vista. With a new name and much better hardware it played well. Win 8 suffered teething problems that have been overcome and Win 10 is nothing more than a tweaked Win 8x but with a new name it will have a clean slate.

Vista was not a Dell problem . . Everyone I know who ran Vista, had it blue screen or crash often. I got so fed up with it that I asked our IT dept if I could beta test Win 7 as the company was getting ready to roll it out. I am still on the early adopter program  for my company and that's how I got on win 8 a year ago.

Logged

AA4PB
Member

Posts: 14935




Ignore
« Reply #80 on: November 25, 2014, 06:05:44 PM »

I used a Dell computer that came with Vista installed at work for several years for doing firmware and software development and never had a problem of any type with it. My team member also had an identical Dell with Vista and never had a problem with his as far as I know.
 
Logged

Bob  AA4PB
Garrisonville, VA
K5UNX
Member

Posts: 806


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #81 on: November 25, 2014, 06:09:04 PM »

I used a Dell computer that came with Vista installed at work for several years for doing firmware and software development and never had a problem of any type with it. My team member also had an identical Dell with Vista and never had a problem with his as far as I know.
 


Yea that's just life with computers I suppose. I know some, like you, had good luck with it . . . .
Logged

WG8Z
Member

Posts: 326




Ignore
« Reply #82 on: November 26, 2014, 09:54:49 AM »

 JX said "The problem with Vista was it was ahead of hardware at its launch."
Funny   

90% of issues I've experienced wasn't hardware it was driver issues. Vista just seemed to load the wrong drivers.
Iv'e successfully run Vista on machines that came with Win9x.. Just needed to load the right NT-drivers.
Slow maybe but stable....

Vista was just yet another instance of Microsoft releasing unfinished/incomplete code. Choice example of Plug and Pray
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #83 on: November 26, 2014, 10:57:23 AM »

Yea Vista was just bad . . . .

The problem with Vista was it was ahead of hardware at its launch. I was far more chipset dependent than XP and Dell rushed to market with bad Vista hardware. You could not simply take a XP platform and put Vista on it and do well. By the time Vista SP1 was released the chipsets were ready too and Vista was fine but damage had been done. MS did not help either as they set low hardware requirements at launch for OEM to keep costs down when they should of been higher. Win 7 did better mostly because hardware at its launch was much better and is nothing more than a tweaked Vista. With a new name and much better hardware it played well. Win 8 suffered teething problems that have been overcome and Win 10 is nothing more than a tweaked Win 8x but with a new name it will have a clean slate.

Vista was not a Dell problem . . Everyone I know who ran Vista, had it blue screen or crash often. I got so fed up with it that I asked our IT dept if I could beta test Win 7 as the company was getting ready to roll it out. I am still on the early adopter program  for my company and that's how I got on win 8 a year ago.



It is a matter of record that Dell rushed to market early when Vista launch and is race to be first they used non compliant chipset and had a lot of problems with the first several months of production units. They corrected problem by time SP1 launched and later ones were okay. Intel was a bit slow getting cheap sets made and Dell did not wait. HP for one did wait and did not have this issue.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #84 on: November 26, 2014, 11:02:06 AM »

JX said "The problem with Vista was it was ahead of hardware at its launch."
Funny   

90% of issues I've experienced wasn't hardware it was driver issues. Vista just seemed to load the wrong drivers.
Iv'e successfully run Vista on machines that came with Win9x.. Just needed to load the right NT-drivers.
Slow maybe but stable....

Vista was just yet another instance of Microsoft releasing unfinished/incomplete code. Choice example of Plug and Pray

As i said the CHIPSET is a big part of PnP and a big factor in early problem. Later systems with proper chip set and SP1 had far fewer issues. By time 7 launched the chipsets were well matured by then and launch was smooth as Vista blazed trail and took flack.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
WA2CWA
Member

Posts: 546


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #85 on: November 26, 2014, 11:19:20 AM »

I still have two HP desktop machines here running Vista 32 bit. Both have run flawlessly since day one. One is a dual core in the shack which runs my Flex 5000 and other ham software related programs. The other in my home office runs all my graphics programs. My other office machines are also HP and both run 8.1. I saw no advantage in backpedaling to Win 7 when I purchased the newer machines. The Vista machines are great for me because they can still run some of the few very old software programs I don't want to get rid of, and haven't been, or can't be, updated to run under Win 7 or 8. I've had two Dell desktops, previous to all the HP's, both running XP and they both sucked for over all reliability and performance.

Pete, wa2cwa
Logged
VA2FSQ
Member

Posts: 583




Ignore
« Reply #86 on: November 26, 2014, 08:28:28 PM »

I think a lot of people don't realize that XP 64 yes XP 64 bit was the forerunner of Vista.  I ran XP64 for a long time. Far more stable than XP was and I could use 16g of ram.  When Vista X64 came around, I made the switch again and then it was a new user interface on top of xp64.  Win7 is just Vista with again a new interface, one that makes sense in somE of the basic things.  look closely, you will find the same bugs that were in vista still in win7.  Same operating systems, just evolved.
I would be highly surprised that anything that ran on vista wouldnt run on win 7 assuming you had 32bit and stayed 32bit.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2014, 08:31:33 PM by VA2FSQ » Logged

VA2FSQ
VK6IS
Member

Posts: 355




Ignore
« Reply #87 on: December 01, 2014, 10:24:13 PM »

Is the PC losing its touch?
- The PC industry’s response to the rapid rise of tablets,
 has been to push touch-screens into laptops of all shapes and sizes.
http://www.zdnet.com/is-the-pc-losing-its-touch-7000036303/
Logged
K1PJR
Member

Posts: 364




Ignore
« Reply #88 on: December 13, 2014, 05:18:47 AM »

I'm a CPA.  We have 30 desktop/laptops. Tablets are cute but cannot replace a full size computer for what we do and the programs we run. I don't know if any firm that is switching to tablets to run there day to day software.

Phil
K1PJR
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 13268




Ignore
« Reply #89 on: December 13, 2014, 06:49:55 AM »

I'm a CPA.  We have 30 desktop/laptops. Tablets are cute but cannot replace a full size computer for what we do and the programs we run. I don't know if any firm that is switching to tablets to run there day to day software.

Phil
K1PJR

It is only a matter of time. I do not see a Ipad or Android tablet replacing a laptop but a Win tablet will with new Surface Pro 3 and future models. Times are changing.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20wpm REAL Extra Class..
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 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!