Re: How workable is Vista?
- From: Joerg <notthisjoergsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:39:53 -0700
The Real Andy wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 08:40:23 -0700, Joerg
<notthisjoergsch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jim Granville wrote:Stef wrote:Exactly. But it's not just engineers. Many businesses run legacy MRP systems and a change can be extremely expensive. MS used to have an ok attitude towards backward compatibility. That seems to have noticeably changed with Vista, to the point where they might discover that they just shot themselves in the foot.In comp.arch.embedded,Yes - With the 'want to run outdated software', changed to 'need to run outdated software' - version control often removes
The Real Andy <therealandy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If you are an engineer and you want to fiddle with everything and run
outdated software, then Vista is a no go.
Ok, that's a no go for almost everyone in this group then. ;-)
option/luxury of 'want' ;)
Yesterday during the dog walk we met a friend who owns a business and just bought a round of new PCs. His comments about this new stuff consisted mostly of words like "stinks, pain in the neck, sluggish, resource hog" and so on.
If you think this is restricted to MS then you are all fools. If I try
and run mac software from 10 years ago I am going to have greif. If I
try and run linux software from 10 years ago I am going to have greif.
Why is MS so different? I deal with all this *** everyday, not just
MS. Why cant the software designed to run on redhat 6 that I currently
have not run on the current version of redhat? IT will if its
upgraded, just like the NT4 software I have.
That's why I love DOS. Pretty much all of the DOS routines from the late 80's I still need run flawlessly on NT4, Win2k and XP. I've heard they won't on Vista but that wouldn't matter because that's off limits in this office anyhow. Ok, there is the occasional Borland compiler bug (runtime error) but that is quite easily fixed.
Some of this software does not exist in any flavor other than DOS so it's got to run. I am not a SW guy so I wouldn't be able to write myself a Windows version. Now 20 years ain't bad for software, I think.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: How workable is Vista?
- From: rickman
- Re: How workable is Vista?
- From: Jonathan Kirwan
- Re: How workable is Vista?
- References:
- How workable is Vista?
- From: rickman
- Re: How workable is Vista?
- From: The Real Andy
- Re: How workable is Vista?
- From: Stef
- Re: How workable is Vista?
- From: Jim Granville
- Re: How workable is Vista?
- From: Joerg
- Re: How workable is Vista?
- From: The Real Andy
- How workable is Vista?
- Prev by Date: Re: ckt for 8031 using 28c256(ROM) and 6264(RAM)
- Next by Date: Re: Identify microprocessor from code.
- Previous by thread: Re: How workable is Vista?
- Next by thread: Re: How workable is Vista?
- Index(es):