Posted on 02/28/2012 7:17:12 PM PST by EveningStar
You’re messing up not embracing 7. It’s darned good.
Drive by poster.
Who is a drive by poster?
> Internal Version....... Known as Windows 4 ——— Windows NT 4.0 Windows 5 ——— Windows 2000 Windows 5.1 —— Windows XP Windows 5.2 —— Windows XP SP2 Windows 6 ——— Windows Vista Windows 6.1 —— Windows 7
So, will "Windows 8" be really 6.2, or 7.0?
I'm betting 7.0 (no I haven't looked yet).
Not exactly :) There was the old pre-win95 OSes 1 through 3.x
Following those the official numbering series is:
Windows NT 3.5 = NT 3.5
Windows NT 4 = NT 4
Windows 2000 = NT 5
Windows XP/Server 2003 = NT 5.2
Windows Vista/Server 2008 = NT 6
Windows 7/Server 2008 R2 = NT 6.1
Windows 8 should probably be 6.2 as the kernel is an evolution of the NT 6 one.
Hell, I still have a few XP systems unconverted to 7. I'm not going to leapfrog them to 8, either.
I may stick with Windows 7 for the NEXT decade, like XP was the PRIOR decade.
What are you looking for? Maybe I can help.
A drive by poster is one who excerpts two or three sentences from the article, not even coming close to the 300 words we are allowed. Then posts that and disappears.
Exactly. Windows 7 was a great leap backwards in some ways; need to improve not introduce Windows 8!
It’s not just you! If I were job-hunting I’d seriously have to downgrade my skills from Expert to Fumbling in the Dark for Office 10/Windows 7. Especially miss XP Windows Explorer search; Windows 7 Explorer search is useless and horrible!
I post enough to attract the reader. If he wants to read more, he can click on the link just as I did. Many FReepers do not understand copyright laws and intellectual property.
Then posts that and disappears.
I didn't disappear. I'm hanging around to read the comments. Some of these people know a hell of a lot more about this subject than I do. I'm looking for helpful information.
Windows actually split into two distinct families for a while when the original NT version came out. There were the consumer versions (3.1/95/98/ME) and the industrial versions (NT 3.1/3.5/4.0/2000). Windows XP uses the NT kernel, whether the home or pro version, so it was basically where the two product groups converged again.
All Windows desktops now use the same OS kernel (NT), and now it’s all moving to 64 bit from 32 bit.
Hey thanks, Chuck, but please don't trouble yourself.
The one that stuck in my craw the most was the defrag tool. I had a devil of a time finding it, and when I did, Windows suggested that I leave that pesky little task up to the computer.
Huh? Excuse me, Microsoft, but I'll be the judge of when my computer needs defragging.
Appreciate your offer to help. Thank you.
I couldn't agree more. I makes me want to strangle someone when Microsoft hides or completely eliminates a basic tool that its users have become comfortable with, and very reliant upon.
I mean, what the hell? Why can't the search function be right where it used to be, and worse yet, why make it so doggone hard to find? And, when you finally do find it, it's not half the search tool that we used to have in XP.
Arrrrgggghhhhh....!
Man, you are reading my mind!
I have XP Pro on my old clunker and Win7 on my wife's new machine.
I have spent more time cussing when I have to do something with hers that was pure automatic in knowing what to do with XP.
There was really no reason for some of their crap.
Maybe after I become more familiar with Win 7 once I get myself a new machine, I might quit cussing, but XP seems a lot easier, quicker and logical to run around in.
I couldn't agree more. I makes me want to strangle someone when Microsoft hides or completely eliminates a basic tool that its users have become comfortable with, and very reliant upon.
I mean, what the hell? Why can't the search function be right where it used to be, and worse yet, why make it so doggone hard to find? And, when you finally do find it, it's not half the search tool that we used to have in XP.
Arrrrgggghhhhh....! *****
The trouble with new program/OS applications is that the programmer "Weenies" think that their changes are "Neat-o Keen" ...
Their reasoning is that the end user will get used to the changes.
I had the same problem with the Management Information Systems [MIS] Department when I worked for MCI. I had responsibility for a specialized mainframe program that had been written for my department.
It seemed like every time I requested a specific upgrade, MIS would either NOT give me what I requested, or would ALSO give me changes that I DID NOT request [or they would do both]. MIS called these upgrades "features". It would then take me MONTHS to get the upgraded application straightened out.
I took to calling them Miserable Incompetant Symps" ...
What programmers NEED to realize is that they should KEEP the features that end-users like, shit-can the ones they hate - and offer new optional capabilities that the end-user can opt-in for AFTER trying them out ...
That's some arrogant and back-asswards reasoning on their part. All they're doing is upsetting their customers. It's a fundamental error that large businesses have been committing for decades.
Remember when Coca Cola up and decided to toss out their classic formula for "New Coke"? That failure to survey their public nearly cost them the company. That famous debacle is even taught in business schools today, as an example of what happens when you forget to ask your customers what they most need and want in your product.
In XP, the defrag program was a VERY scaled-down version of Diskeeper [from Executive Software].
I found a freeware verision of Executive Software's Diskeeper Lite at MajorGeeks, loaded it, and it over-rode XP's scaled-down version. So that when you clicked on Disk Defrag from the Windows Accesories/System Tools drop-down box, Diskeeper Lite automatically ran [NOT the Windows XP scaled-down version].
Don't know if this would work in Win 7, though.
FYI - Diskeeper Lite does have a Welcome pop-up box each time you run it. But, you can just 'X' out of it. ALSO, the first time you run it after installation, you get a "bogus" MMC error. If you click the "ignore this time and every other time" selection, you will never see this "bogus" error again ...
Your instinct is right. XP is easier, quicker, and more logical.
After going from XP to 7, what I've noticed is that Microsoft seems to have gone in the direction of making a lot of functions automatic. Plug a new device into your machine, and before you know it, Windows 7 has installed it without any input from you.
I don't mind nifty stuff like that, but hiding or degrading simple user tools, such as search, is a huge mistake on their part. The OS hasn't been invented than can anticipate your every need, in that regard.
I’ll keep that Diskeeper Lite defrag tool in mind. Don’t know if it would run on 7 or not, but it might be worth a try. Thanks!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.