[brainout]

Click here and look for 'Upgrade Assistant' to download that program. It tests your machine for incompatible apps and hardware. Be sure the hardware is turned on. It's spotty, doesn't catch all of what's on your machine. All of the programs I most need, aren't compatible. Flipside: old programs I rarely use and expected to be rejected, are accepted (like Creative Soundblaster). It didn't detect any of my DOS programs, nor WordPerfect. It claims to be incompatible, though, with ALL of my MS Office stuff (see next paragraph). It is compatible with my Brother printers, but not the HP, though it was silent about the latter. Will run it again to see if minimized programs are detected. Oh boy: once it runs the test it won't REVALUE the results de novo. So just repeats the same answers, as at first.

Incidentally, most MS Office products 2003 AND PRIOR are considered NOT compatible with Windows 8. Here's a link saying Office97 isn't compatible, as well as Excel 2003. Pages before and after the one linked, list many more MS Office products. Notice that this time, they report whether users disagree with MS' own official claim of NOT compatible.

Interestingly, it told me that UEFI 'Secure Boot' couldn't be enabled on my machine, but didn't say that fact would prevent running Windows 8. Since the PERMANENT deal-breaker for me is 'Secure Boot', this little notice implies you don't have to have it.

I didn't test this on the other machines. This one is 2005, Dell 8400. So the ability to install Win8 on older machines isn't as pitched in some of the articles in PC Mag and PC World. 2005 is not old. This machine cannot have Windows 8 if 'NX' isn't available to turn on. I have no way of knowing if I have this elusive 'Nx'. Whew.

So now it doesn't matter that I hate it. Due diligence completed, at last.

This post has been edited by brainout: 31 October 2012 - 12:58 PM

[waldojim]

You don't have to have secure boot. I thought this was settled by now.

Office 95 and 97 both run. I have screenshots for proof.

[compnovo]

waldojim, on 31 October 2012 - 04:52 PM, said:

You don't have to have secure boot.

I can vouch for this, I'm running Win8 Pro on an AM3 motherboard that has the standard BIOS. UEFI didn't exist when I built this box.

[brainout]

TWO unrelated points as updates to this topic:

1) As usual, waldo jim doesn't read too well when reading my posts; that's why I ignore him now. I never said you ALWAYS have to have UEFI, but that Win8 FORCES it. Two different things. If your machine is enabled with Secure boot and you do the regular upgrade -- which most ignorant people WILL do -- then you're locked into it. If you buy a new Win8 machine Secure Boot will be enabled, and so you're locked into it.

My machines don't have Secure Boot, so it cannot be enabled. That wouldn't stop Win8 from running on my machine, and would stop the intrusiveness of it preventing me from creating dual boot with Linux. What stops Win8 from running, is if you don't have Nx and PAE. The Win8 advisor will tell you if Win8 can run on your machine. It won't run on my important machines (thank God), because I don't have Nx on them. It will run on my HP workstation, but I'm damned if I'm going to install it there. Instead I'll buy a separate laptop or tower that will only be used for experimenting with dual/triple boot, making sure I've disabled Secure Boot before installing Win8.

Which leads to the second update in the topic. YOU CANNOT DOWNLOAD a Win8 version of a different bit count versus the one you use for the download. See this link: http://www.amazon.co...asin=B008H3SW4I

So I'll buy the DVD and at my leisure decide if I want Win8 (32-bit) or Win8 Pro (64-bit). The extra $30 is more than worth the hassle of trying to undo. Even the microsoft and Amazon website on Windows 8 (more so the latter) warn that you can't truly uninstall Win 8 Pro after you install it. So I wouldn't even put it on a machine I use. There are plenty of machines at Dell Auction you can get for a song (I'm in the middle of bidding right now, which is why I'm typing here), so it's less hassle to try out on some machine which doesn't matter, yet.

Like every human being, every OS has its good points, and I'm desperately trying to find ONE good thing to say about Win8. When I buy and install it, maybe I'll find that good thing. Right now, I'm still coming up empty.

Really: it shouldn't consume one's life, just to decide on or use, an OS. I've spent three days a week on average troubleshooting Windows glitches since 2000, when a janitor named Jesus found a Win95 Micron PC in the trash and decided I should get it. Turns out the guy who owned that computer (and didn't know enough to wipe off his personal data, or didn't care) -- was trying to upgrade to Win98; and in frustration, threw it out, on what was maybe April Fool's Day.

I spent the next three months buying the software which was on it and then editing the registry, to get the thing working again.

So this problem is not new. Why MS is so callous to its users, baffles me.

This post has been edited by brainout: 02 November 2012 - 01:40 AM

[Dellinsp531]

Well he never reads anyone post so do not feel bad about that.

I agree that Office 93 and 97 does not work on many of my clients computers. Currenlty have many clients coming back to return WIndows 8 computers or bringing back the OS. I had to put up notice all over to get people to understand Windows 8 limitations.

I have about 20 more computers that people brought back because windows 8 is broken. I got only 5 of them to get dual boot with windows 7 and they kept it..... What a head this is getting to be.........

[brainout]

Dellinsp531, on 02 November 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Well he never reads anyone post so do not feel bad about that.

I agree that Office 93 and 97 does not work on many of my clients computers. Currenlty have many clients coming back to return WIndows 8 computers or bringing back the OS. I had to put up notice all over to get people to understand Windows 8 limitations.

I have about 20 more computers that people brought back because windows 8 is broken. I got only 5 of them to get dual boot with windows 7 and they kept it..... What a head this is getting to be.........

Yes, it's frustrating beyond measure. One of the options I'm trying out, is to buy an older computer with NO OS or with an older OS, and then buy maybe another Windows copy for dual boot with Linux, meaning at the end, a triple boot (two Windows OS and one Linux). Just bought an Optiplex 760 with Vista on it, and then will maybe upgrade to Win8 for testing, reverting back to Vista if Win 8 bombs as I think it will, both 32-bit. Then will switch to 64-bit, see how that functions (Win8 Pro). Then will wipe and do it all over again, with Linux. I first have to figure out how to disable Secure Boot on the machine, which I won't know until I get it and monkey around.

On my other machines which I actually use for working, I'll switch a few of them to XP/Linux dual boot, and get ZaReason to make me a laptop with XP/Linux, or maybe even Win7/Linux, after I test Win7. In all events, my main workhorses will still be XP and gradually, Linux.I will keep one Win8 machine and one Win7, only in case of internetting glitches which might require either of those two, OS. Also, in case I have to make design changes to my webpages or Youtube channel, I need to see what those OS show. So I must get at least one machine per OS, in order to know how others would see the page/channel.

I will use them only as a last resort, and they will never have client or personal data on them. I will not sign up for an MS account, or other stuff giving MS the right to invade my machine. I will not use the cloud except temporarily (i.e., wiping afterwards) for ad hoc transfers which complete between my clients and myself, which I can't do through email in Outlook Express (which Win7 will no longer support, though Outlook is satisfactory).

It's a lot of hassle to jump through all these hoops, just to maintain, basic business computing. No wonder PC sales are sluggish, and in desperation people turn to tablets. Wait until they discover the hassle of using tablets. Then tablets will die, too. At which point, MS will be in a really bad position.

This post has been edited by brainout: 03 November 2012 - 05:03 AM

[smax013]

brainout, on 31 October 2012 - 12:35 PM, said:

Click here and look for 'Upgrade Assistant' to download that program. It tests your machine for incompatible apps and hardware. Be sure the hardware is turned on. It's spotty, doesn't catch all of what's on your machine. All of the programs I most need, aren't compatible. Flipside: old programs I rarely use and expected to be rejected, are accepted (like Creative Soundblaster). It didn't detect any of my DOS programs, nor WordPerfect. It claims to be incompatible, though, with ALL of my MS Office stuff (see next paragraph). It is compatible with my Brother printers, but not the HP, though it was silent about the latter. Will run it again to see if minimized programs are detected. Oh boy: once it runs the test it won't REVALUE the results de novo. So just repeats the same answers, as at first.

Incidentally, most MS Office products 2003 AND PRIOR are considered NOT compatible with Windows 8. Here's a link saying Office97 isn't compatible, as well as Excel 2003. Pages before and after the one linked, list many more MS Office products. Notice that this time, they report whether users disagree with MS' own official claim of NOT compatible.

Does Microsoft ever say how they define the "compatible" response from the Upgrade Advisor? I ask because if they define "compatible" as requiring ALL features/functions to work, then that might explain why some people still get such programs to work...but then just never use the features/functions that no longer work.

And if I put on my tin foil hat and subscribe to my conspiracy theory type mode, then maybe Microsoft is saying Office 2003 and prior are "not compatible" in order to get you to pay for a new version of Microsoft Office or an Office 365 subscription.

[brainout]

smax013, on 03 November 2012 - 12:05 PM, said:

Does Microsoft ever say how they define the "compatible" response from the Upgrade Advisor? I ask because if they define "compatible" as requiring ALL features/functions to work, then that might explain why some people still get such programs to work...but then just never use the features/functions that no longer work.

And if I put on my tin foil hat and subscribe to my conspiracy theory type mode, then maybe Microsoft is saying Office 2003 and prior are "not compatible" in order to get you to pay for a new version of Microsoft Office or an Office 365 subscription.

LOL yeah! That's why I bought two computers today and another two days ago, to TEST what actually works. I wasn't going to do it, but since the hardware was what I wanted, and the OS came along for free, as it were -- why not?

Do you know, these same problems and arguments go on with every new OS release, since Windows first came out? To a certain extent, it's understandable, since the pace of technological change and discovery has been so rapid, and .. messy. The genius of early Windows was its hybridization, and that's why the registry method was developed; it was rushed, and people like Peter Norton long warned of the significant flaws of such an architecture re paging, memory dumping and program, hardware conflict. Of course now that's biting MS in the butt. So I really do understand what MS is trying to do: divorce the past. But they can't leave the existing client base in the lurch. That is where they are making a huge mistake.

I'm so sick of all this searching and researching, I could spit. God help the average person trying to buy a computer.

This post has been edited by brainout: 03 November 2012 - 04:31 PM

[smax013]

brainout, on 03 November 2012 - 04:15 PM, said:

I'm so sick of all this searching and researching, I could spit. God help the average person trying to buy a computer.

Not to be a jerk, but the "average person" likely is not looking to run rather old versions of programs, let alone DOS programs, when they go out to get a new computer.

While it seems you might have a very legitimate reason to be running those rather old versions of programs, it does kind of put you in a very small minority.

[brainout]

smax013, on 03 November 2012 - 06:26 PM, said:

brainout, on 03 November 2012 - 04:15 PM, said:

I'm so sick of all this searching and researching, I could spit. God help the average person trying to buy a computer.

Not to be a jerk, but the "average person" likely is not looking to run rather old versions of programs, let alone DOS programs, when they go out to get a new computer. ;)

While it seems you might have a very legitimate reason to be running those rather old versions of programs, it does kind of put you in a very small minority.

No, actually I'm in the majority of business users. Also, a significant number of people between age 40-60 all have personal records in DOS. Because XP is backwards-compatible, we've not had to do anything to change our records. Same, for MS Office products before 2007; and in XP, all the old MS software runs quite well, whether DOS or Windows.

So the financial sector is not upgrading, nor the Government, nor most law firms and accounting offices, physicians and hospitals. You should have realized all this when you read the article in PC World about how MS is trying to get the user base to LEAVE XP and at least go to Win7. Dell did a whitepaper earlier this year which tracked municipalities, school districts, etc. to see how far along they were in changing to Win7. Seven, not Eight.

Not to mention, all the factories in the US which are keyed mostly to XP processes for tool and die making, etc. (so-called 'CNC controller machines).

So actually those who rah-rah Win8 and even the three-year-old Win7 are in the minority, unaware of the bigger business issues. The only 'minority' I'm in, is the minority of business posters in PC Forums. Most other owners of businesses don't have time to post. I wouldn't either, but a) I had to decide what computers to buy, b) I sprained my arm, and c) I was on vacation. Today I made my last purchases (well, the auction ends tomorrow afternoon); soon I'll stop posting here as well. But in each forum or at the end of each article on Win8 -- and all over Youtube -- there are maybe 50% complaints, of which about 20% are people in charge of or daily-savvy about, IT; with the balance of the condemnation of Win8, based on specifics (so you know they did their homework, and actually know computing).

By contrast, the rah-rah Win8 crowd say silly things like oh how much faster, or 'cool' or 'I can play my music/videos/games better', or other stuff revealing them as careless casual consumers, not people who actually have to maintain systems, not serious content creators. The stupidest comments are those claiming you can learn the OS in 20 minutes or even one day. Clicking on a tile and switching between desktop and Modern, closing the program or shutting down the machine, doesn't constitute knowing the OS. It takes MONTHS to learn the OS, and even then you only scratched the surface (pun intended). So the rah-rah-Win8 crowd have a kiosk definition of OS, proving their opinions shallow and worthless. That's the other 50%.

Win8 is a disaster; it will fare badly, because its core design is vulnerable to program conflict, bad paging, memory dump problems, and to overcome these problems -- which also are threats to security -- MS has had to tweak, tweak, tweak. Which would be fine, but they instead also changed the interface in very bad ways. This renders users blind again, and the hidden parameter traps and other obstacles created by MS, will be discovered as this 'new' OS, is used.

The complaints are many and all over the internet, not just with respect ot Win8, but EVERY version of Windows in EVERY edition. Why? Because they keep changing the interface, too. If they kept the same or little-change the interface, but did their tweaking, then more users would be upgrading each time. But instead, there are always significant delays.

Each new OS edition generates the same problems, and MS hasn't yet learned that the worst thing you can do to new sales, is to change the interface. That's why its stock today, is only 25% of what it was worth, 20 years ago.

But you only know that if you know what went before, and how each OS is not backwards-compatible with 50 years of records MOST people have to maintain.

This post has been edited by brainout: 03 November 2012 - 08:43 PM

[smax013]

I have not encountered anyone using DOS for mission critical work in years (realistically a decade or more), except for CNC machining. I have encountered some people who still have files in WordPerfect or Lotus 1-2-3, but typically it was old files that are more like "archive" material...they were using a "modern" version of Office for their current productivity (and I include Office 2003 as a "modern" version mainly because it is the last function version that still had menus).

I have certainly not encountered anyone in their 40's (i.e. my age) using DOS for personal records. Heck, I have not even encountered anyone in their 50s, 60s, or 70s still using DOS for personal records. There was one engineer who I knew who still had a significant amount of stuff in DOS, but he passed away about a half dozen years or so ago.

For myself, I never really used DOS or Windows 3.1 at home. I was a Mac person at home during that time. So, I do have a number of old files in Mac OS 9 era programs, but it is more because I am a "packrat" than because I need them. But, I do have several old Macs that I could use to get to those files as well as all the original program install disks (assuming those old 3.5" floppies will still work without problems). My one real "legacy" file that I still use is my resume as I have it in PageMaker, which never got upgraded to a Mac OS X program. That, however, is strictly due to me being lazy and not "moving" it into a more modern program (I like the flexibility of PageMaker). So, I maintain an old PowerMac G4 tower running Mac OS X 10.4, which can run "Classic" Mac OS (aka Mac OS 9) in a compatibility mode, and thus I can still edit that file if I need to. I did use and support DOS and Windows 3.1 programs in the work world...both as an end user in my career as a structural engineer, but also in computer support work while going to school.

This is not to say that "forward progress" is aways "good". I have my doubts about Windows 8, but then I have not really sat down to use it really (just "played with it" using the Consumer Preview). I think it will work well for touch enabled devices, but I am still not quite sold on traditional desktops and traditional laptops. I suspect for me personally, I will likely adapt as I am fairly adaptable (I have been seamlessly switching from Mac to Windows and back for more than the last decade, even though I like Mac OS "experience" better) since I seem to have a natural affinity for computers (although I personally think the "Modern UI" is ugly). But, I can see where many people may not be able to adapt to it easily.

[brainout]

smax013, on 03 November 2012 - 09:56 PM, said:

I have not encountered anyone using DOS for mission critical work in years (realistically a decade or more), except for CNC machining. I have encountered some people who still have files in WordPerfect or Lotus 1-2-3, but typically it was old files that are more like "archive" material...they were using a "modern" version of Office for their current productivity (and I include Office 2003 as a "modern" version mainly because it is the last function version that still had menus).

Well unless you are an accountant, broker or lawyer or physician, you'd not see much of that. Those professions accumulate personal information, usually in the form of paper, and convert it into computer records. I suppose the better thing to do is to google on DOS problems in Windows and see what you run into. I used 'DOS compatibility' and similar search terms to find out how big the market is, and I talked to the physicians who are my clients, accountants and brokers I've worked with over 30 years, to see what problems they are facing. Also unions, nursing homes, municipalities, IBM itself, etc.

I'm not ranting based on no information. I'm trying to position my business for the future in light of a problem I didn't know existed, until August, which prompted my joining the forum. I didn't know about Windows 7 or 8 back then. I only knew I wanted to buy more computers as the main ones I have, are seven and more years old and I wanted to see what was worth buying.

The ensuing quest and query results are the substance of all my posts. I documented what I found, and it was mostly bad news. Like me, many people are still using 20+ years old machines that work just fine, thank you -- at doing the core things businesses need to do. They don't plan to upgrade, or are only upgrading a few unconnected machines, or only one segment of the workload, stuff like that. The CNC people are really in a bind, but firms like Taos Computing have DOS emulators they can buy for only $100 per machine, to regain DOS in 64-bit environments. Taos estimates 35 million users in its market niche.

Analyzing an issue from the big-picture level, Win8 is a disaster. Not so much because of its childish design. But because it won't reach back into the past, anymore. So there is a huge scramble to figure out what to do, to preserve that past, and an inordinate disincentive to upgrade. The MAJORITY have this problem, not the minority teenyboppers who only use a computer to email, watch videos, play music and Facebook.

I'm forced to start using Linux for the internet-related stuff, and will keep the old XP (and now Vista and Win7, when absolutely needed). 22 machines is enough to include all the compatible spare parts I might need over the next 10-15 years. By then, it will be a Linux world.

This post has been edited by brainout: 04 November 2012 - 05:27 PM

[waldojim]

brainout, on 02 November 2012 - 01:32 AM, said:

TWO unrelated points as updates to this topic:

1) As usual, waldo jim doesn't read too well when reading my posts; that's why I ignore him now. I never said you ALWAYS have to have UEFI, but that Win8 FORCES it. Two different things. If your machine is enabled with Secure boot and you do the regular upgrade -- which most ignorant people WILL do -- then you're locked into it. If you buy a new Win8 machine Secure Boot will be enabled, and so you're locked into it.

Oh really? So my NON UEFI machines that are running Windows 8, aren't really running Windows 8? Or are you going to claim that my UEFI based laptop (running Windows 8) suddenly locked itself?

You can't seriously be this stupid.

And no, you aren't "locked" into anything. As secure boot is easily disabled, and Windows 8 will continue to function.

Quote

My machines don't have Secure Boot, so it cannot be enabled. That wouldn't stop Win8 from running on my machine, and would stop the intrusiveness of it preventing me from creating dual boot with Linux. What stops Win8 from running, is if you don't have Nx and PAE. The Win8 advisor will tell you if Win8 can run on your machine. It won't run on my important machines (thank God), because I don't have Nx on them. It will run on my HP workstation, but I'm damned if I'm going to install it there. Instead I'll buy a separate laptop or tower that will only be used for experimenting with dual/triple boot, making sure I've disabled Secure Boot before installing Win8.

Ok, quick question, why bother disabling secure boot if you are buying the machine just to run Windows 8?
Or do you have a problem with additional security?

Quote

Which leads to the second update in the topic. YOU CANNOT DOWNLOAD a Win8 version of a different bit count versus the one you use for the download. See this link: http://www.amazon.co...asin=B008H3SW4I

So I'll buy the DVD and at my leisure decide if I want Win8 (32-bit) or Win8 Pro (64-bit). The extra $30 is more than worth the hassle of trying to undo. Even the microsoft and Amazon website on Windows 8 (more so the latter) warn that you can't truly uninstall Win 8 Pro after you install it. So I wouldn't even put it on a machine I use. There are plenty of machines at Dell Auction you can get for a song (I'm in the middle of bidding right now, which is why I'm typing here), so it's less hassle to try out on some machine which doesn't matter, yet.

For what little it is worth, Microcenter has been selling the DVD version for $39.99

Quote

Like every human being, every OS has its good points, and I'm desperately trying to find ONE good thing to say about Win8. When I buy and install it, maybe I'll find that good thing. Right now, I'm still coming up empty.

Really: it shouldn't consume one's life, just to decide on or use, an OS. I've spent three days a week on average troubleshooting Windows glitches since 2000, when a janitor named Jesus found a Win95 Micron PC in the trash and decided I should get it. Turns out the guy who owned that computer (and didn't know enough to wipe off his personal data, or didn't care) -- was trying to upgrade to Win98; and in frustration, threw it out, on what was maybe April Fool's Day.

I spent the next three months buying the software which was on it and then editing the registry, to get the thing working again.

So this problem is not new. Why MS is so callous to its users, baffles me.

As you obviously aren't running Windows 8, it is impossible for you to come up with any points, good or bad.

Back to the issue I have though: "TWO unrelated points as updates to this topic:"
Yes, they were actually direct comments to your statements that Windows 8 required secure boot - because it is factually incorrect. AND Because both Office 95 and 97 have been tested and proven to work just fine. Had you actually tried it before making those comments, you would have likely gotten a different reply. Namely with someone trying to help understand what differences broke it. Seeing as you have not tried, and no nothing of the situation you are commenting on, you got the reply you earned.

[waldojim]

Dellinsp531, on 02 November 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Well he never reads anyone post so do not feel bad about that.

I agree that Office 93 and 97 does not work on many of my clients computers. Currenlty have many clients coming back to return WIndows 8 computers or bringing back the OS. I had to put up notice all over to get people to understand Windows 8 limitations.

I have about 20 more computers that people brought back because windows 8 is broken. I got only 5 of them to get dual boot with windows 7 and they kept it..... What a head this is getting to be.........

Oh I read them. And reply accordingly. When people like you make stupid comments, I call you out on them. For example, Office 93 huh? You sure about that?

[waldojim]

brainout, on 03 November 2012 - 08:20 PM, said:

No, actually I'm in the majority of business users. Also, a significant number of people between age 40-60 all have personal records in DOS. Because XP is backwards-compatible, we've not had to do anything to change our records. Same, for MS Office products before 2007; and in XP, all the old MS software runs quite well, whether DOS or Windows.

I think you may be overestimating those numbers. I haven't seen DOS used in a business in many years now. The last known place I saw it was in a telephone exchange. And yes, they moved on as well. Granted I see the world from a telco point of view, but they run on 99% Unix.

Quote

By contrast, the rah-rah Win8 crowd say silly things like oh how much faster, or 'cool' or 'I can play my music/videos/games better', or other stuff revealing them as careless casual consumers, not people who actually have to maintain systems, not serious content creators. The stupidest comments are those claiming you can learn the OS in 20 minutes or even one day. Clicking on a tile and switching between desktop and Modern, closing the program or shutting down the machine, doesn't constitute knowing the OS. It takes MONTHS to learn the OS, and even then you only scratched the surface (pun intended). So the rah-rah-Win8 crowd have a kiosk definition of OS, proving their opinions shallow and worthless. That's the other 50%.

Performance is a consideration for people in many different fields. Consider animation studios or Photographic professions before you comment about performance aspects. Even music producers benefit when the machines perform smoother/quicker. Just because YOU find that performance has no bearing, doesn't mean others don't.

[Dellinsp531]

brainout, on 03 November 2012 - 04:52 AM, said:

Dellinsp531, on 02 November 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Well he never reads anyone post so do not feel bad about that.

I agree that Office 93 and 97 does not work on many of my clients computers. Currenlty have many clients coming back to return WIndows 8 computers or bringing back the OS. I had to put up notice all over to get people to understand Windows 8 limitations.

I have about 20 more computers that people brought back because windows 8 is broken. I got only 5 of them to get dual boot with windows 7 and they kept it..... What a head this is getting to be.........

Yes, it's frustrating beyond measure. One of the options I'm trying out, is to buy an older computer with NO OS or with an older OS, and then buy maybe another Windows copy for dual boot with Linux, meaning at the end, a triple boot (two Windows OS and one Linux). Just bought an Optiplex 760 with Vista on it, and then will maybe upgrade to Win8 for testing, reverting back to Vista if Win 8 bombs as I think it will, both 32-bit. Then will switch to 64-bit, see how that functions (Win8 Pro). Then will wipe and do it all over again, with Linux. I first have to figure out how to disable Secure Boot on the machine, which I won't know until I get it and monkey around.

On my other machines which I actually use for working, I'll switch a few of them to XP/Linux dual boot, and get ZaReason to make me a laptop with XP/Linux, or maybe even Win7/Linux, after I test Win7. In all events, my main workhorses will still be XP and gradually, Linux.I will keep one Win8 machine and one Win7, only in case of internetting glitches which might require either of those two, OS. Also, in case I have to make design changes to my webpages or Youtube channel, I need to see what those OS show. So I must get at least one machine per OS, in order to know how others would see the page/channel.

I will use them only as a last resort, and they will never have client or personal data on them. I will not sign up for an MS account, or other stuff giving MS the right to invade my machine. I will not use the cloud except temporarily (i.e., wiping afterwards) for ad hoc transfers which complete between my clients and myself, which I can't do through email in Outlook Express (which Win7 will no longer support, though Outlook is satisfactory).

It's a lot of hassle to jump through all these hoops, just to maintain, basic business computing. No wonder PC sales are sluggish, and in desperation people turn to tablets. Wait until they discover the hassle of using tablets. Then tablets will die, too. At which point, MS will be in a really bad position.

I had several clients that are now moving to Linux as their main computer and using Windows 7 as a secondary boot.

I have set up four boot for a few clients so far Linux, Windox 8, Windows 7, and Windows Xp.

waldojim, on 04 November 2012 - 09:42 PM, said:

Dellinsp531, on 02 November 2012 - 08:03 AM, said:

Well he never reads anyone post so do not feel bad about that.

I agree that Office 93 and 97 does not work on many of my clients computers. Currenlty have many clients coming back to return WIndows 8 computers or bringing back the OS. I had to put up notice all over to get people to understand Windows 8 limitations.

I have about 20 more computers that people brought back because windows 8 is broken. I got only 5 of them to get dual boot with windows 7 and they kept it..... What a head this is getting to be.........

Oh I read them. And reply accordingly. When people like you make stupid comments, I call you out on them. For example, Office 93 huh? You sure about that?

Wow you read that. That is a suprice. I was check to see if you would catch that. But yes, several clients have office from 1993 which had offical name Office 4.0, which was later rebrand as Office 93.

This post has been edited by Dellinsp531: 05 November 2012 - 01:39 PM

[brainout]

Click here to see sample problems users have with the Upgrade process. Look at the comments to the article.

[brainout]

brainout, on 05 November 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

Click here to see sample problems users have with the Upgrade process. Look at the comments to the article.

Click here to enter Windows 8 forums, and read the complaints or kudos, tips, etc.

It pays to do homework. Sadly, some commenters in PC World forum pretend to a knowledge and expertise they don't have. Others only know superficial experience with Win8, only know superficial things about computing, so don't realize what a problem Win8 is. So here you find real complaints by real users actually using Win8. This helps you see beneath the superficial.

I can't afford superficial. I have to keep my business operating so had to spend an inordinate amount of time evaluating Vista, Win7, and Win8 to make purchasing decisions for one or maybe two businesses which I've inherited. So now I've finished doing that analysis, and will at most only use Win8 on one machine dedicated solely to internetting. If, even that.

Win8's interface is annoying, but that's not the main reason for refusing it. The main reson, is that it makes computing harder than prior, for a business user. Proof of that is all over the internet in tech and non-tech places, such as (for the latter), Microsoft forums. So the rah-rah Win8 users here in PC World, aren't thinking, aren't doing their homework, and so prove to be careless about what they say.

This post has been edited by brainout: 05 November 2012 - 06:48 PM

[waldojim]

Dellinsp531, on 05 November 2012 - 01:37 PM, said:

Wow you read that. That is a suprice. I was check to see if you would catch that. But yes, several clients have office from 1993 which had offical name Office 4.0, which was later rebrand as Office 93.

Wow.... and now a surprice.... And no, that was not intentional. Nor was it re-branded. Know how I know this? I own Office 4.2. AKA - Office 4.2

[waldojim]

brainout, on 05 November 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:

brainout, on 05 November 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

Click here to see sample problems users have with the Upgrade process. Look at the comments to the article.

Click here to enter Windows 8 forums, and read the complaints or kudos, tips, etc.

It pays to do homework. Sadly, some commenters in PC World forum pretend to a knowledge and expertise they don't have. Others only know superficial experience with Win8, only know superficial things about computing, so don't realize what a problem Win8 is. So here you find real complaints by real users actually using Win8. This helps you see beneath the superficial.

I can't afford superficial. I have to keep my business operating so had to spend an inordinate amount of time evaluating Vista, Win7, and Win8 to make purchasing decisions for one or maybe two businesses which I've inherited. So now I've finished doing that analysis, and will at most only use Win8 on one machine dedicated solely to internetting. If, even that.

Win8's interface is annoying, but that's not the main reason for refusing it. The main reson, is that it makes computing harder than prior, for a business user. Proof of that is all over the internet in tech and non-tech places, such as (for the latter), Microsoft forums. So the rah-rah Win8 users here in PC World, aren't thinking, aren't doing their homework, and so prove to be careless about what they say.

Some of us don't have to pretend to do either.

Some of us actually know what we are talking about.

Such as every time you mention XP runs on DOS. That is obvious that you are oblivious.

Or the comments "My Atom is quicker than my Quad core Xeon". Which I have to admit, I love it every-time you throw that one out. Because you make it so painfully obvious, even to the people new to the field, that you are a fool. If you cannot keep basic knowledge straight, how can anyone take you seriously on anything in depth? This is like you spouting off formulas regarding signal propagation through the ionosphere without even understanding that 2 plus 2 equal 4.