Searching \ for '[EE] Re: Free PCB package' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/pcbs.htm?key=pcb
Search entire site for: 'Re: Free PCB package'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE] Re: Free PCB package'
2002\12\30@012644 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
cdb wrote:
>
> It is only for Win2K and XP systems. Support for Win9x was dropped
> back in September/October.


That's sad. After recently changing from Win95 to Win98
I have found that many programs now run much slower with
significant increases in hard drive "crunch and grind".

I assume this is because windows 98 requires more ram and
swaps larger amounts of data during the same standard
functions. Now i'm searching for my win95 disk so I can
return my PC's back to their *much faster* previous state.
I can't find one thing that is better about 98 compared
to 95, apart from a few small cosmetic improvements.

Having spent a few days on the holidays playing with a
friends new PC running windows XP, again it is noticeably
slower than my win98 system, even though it has more ram
and a faster processor.

I wish software developers wouldn't just bow down to the
wishes of M$, there ARE advantages to using older operating
systems and people who *choose* to use them should be
respected even if they are "unfashionable". :o(
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\12\30@025120 by Dominic Stratten

flavicon
face
Roman - why not go for a dual boot machine - put Windows 2000 on one
partition and windows 98/95 on the other ?

Set the default boot OS to be Win95/98  and there you go - best of both
worlds.

I use this on our "games and video" machine. It is linked to the 28" telly
downstairs (no monitor) and we use this to play games, watch dvd's and
listen to music on. For the very few applications that need 95/98 I can boot
back down to it.

My office machine (here) runs Windows 98. I've got to try Autotrax on the
machine downstairs but if I like it, I'll chuck in another hard drive and
install Win2k on this one as a dual boot system.

Given the choice between a Win 98 box and a Win2k box, I'd go for the Win2k
box every time. I find it far more reliable, less prone to crashing and can
run for weeks without running out of resources.

Mind you, I used to measure the up time on the Novell server I built in
years :-)


Dom
{Original Message removed}

2002\12\30@092338 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
Or just install some more memory?  If you must run Windows, 98 is far
better than 95, and 2000 is far better than 98.  As it is a Micro$loth
product, though, your hardware has to keep up.  You simply cannot expect a
new M$ OS to run well on old hardware.  Never has happened, never will.

You can spend countless hours/days/weeks tilting at windmills, or just
update the hardware - I suspect you're not still using 16C54s for new
designs, so why should your PC be five years behind?

Dale
--
It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off.


On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, Dominic Stratten wrote:

> Roman - why not go for a dual boot machine - put Windows 2000 on one
> partition and windows 98/95 on the other ?

Roman Black said:
> > That's sad. After recently changing from Win95 to Win98
> > I have found that many programs now run much slower with
> > significant increases in hard drive "crunch and grind".

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\12\30@100637 by John Ferrell

face picon face
I suspect many are in an environment like me.
I have a lot of Legacy applications that I don't want to give up. W98 has
the necessary hardware or software to support the legacy stuff. Some of the
hardware does not have drivers for XP or W2K. As a result, I have a network
that consists of older equipment to support the legacy stuff. Unfortunately,
some programs require strict registration (Norton AV, Microsoft Publisher)
that are specific to a given machine. At the moment my W2K machine is dual
boot with WinME and WinMe has the internet support.
I am just putting off adding the next generation machine as long as
possible.

John Ferrell
6241 Phillippi Rd
Julian NC 27283
Phone: (336)685-9606
Dixie Competition Products
NSRCA 479 AMA 4190  W8CCW
"My Competition is Not My Enemy"



{Original Message removed}

2002\12\30@152208 by Bob Blick

face picon face
> > It is only for Win2K and XP systems. Support for Win9x was dropped
> > back in September/October.

Perhaps it is only "support" that was dropped. Has anyone tried installing
it on 9x?

-Bob

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\12\30@163314 by Bob Barr

flavicon
face
On Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:20:43 -0800, Bob Blick wrote:

>> > It is only for Win2K and XP systems. Support for Win9x was dropped
>> > back in September/October.
>
>Perhaps it is only "support" that was dropped. Has anyone tried installing
>it on 9x?
>

I've tried and no, it won't install on 98se.


Regards, Bob

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\12\30@173219 by cdb

flavicon
face
Roman,

The debate on the autotrax NG centered around the flakiness of Win98+
and the additional maintenance required to get the software (part of
the 3 D designer doesn't seem to be shipped anymore, this needed the
fancy things that XP can do). to work consistently over the range of
OS's.

Natch if you go XP then 2K come along too.

As far as Win98 is concerned there is a program called Win98Lite that
is pretty nifty in relieving 98+ of much of its overhead. I found
that I had less BSD's when using it.

So far the only  Windoze that to me seems the most stable is 2K.

Colin
--
cdb, spam_OUTbodgy1TakeThisOuTspamoptusnet.com.au on 31/12/2002

Light travels faster than sound. That's why some people appear bright
until they speak!

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\12\30@184714 by Wagner Lipnharski

flavicon
face
cdb wrote:
> Roman,
>
> The debate on the autotrax NG centered around the flakiness of Win98+
> and the additional maintenance required to get the software (part of
> the 3 D designer doesn't seem to be shipped anymore, this needed the
> fancy things that XP can do). to work consistently over the range of
> OS's.
>
> Natch if you go XP then 2K come along too.
>
> As far as Win98 is concerned there is a program called Win98Lite that
> is pretty nifty in relieving 98+ of much of its overhead. I found
> that I had less BSD's when using it.
>
> So far the only  Windoze that to me seems the most stable is 2K.
>
> Colin


OK, any strong reason to NOT use VIRTUALPC and install any other windows
platform along your Win98, and being able to run AUTOTRAX?

VirtualPC simply allows you to install "virtual pc's" in your HardDisk, so
you can have as many as you want, considering you have available disk
space.  Once you install Win2k or WinXP "virtually", just backup that
partition to a CD, then whenever that "virtual platform" gets corrupted by
some testing software, just erase the virtual thing, create again and
restore the data from the CD, voilá, Win2k brand new in seconds.

But you all knew that, right?

/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Wagner Lipnharski - UST Research Inc
Orlando FLorida - USA - http://www.ustr.net
/_/_/_/ Atmel AVR Consultant /_/_/_/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\12\30@190901 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
OK, any strong reason to NOT use VIRTUALPC and install any other windows
   platform along your Win98, and being able to run AUTOTRAX?

Well, in the US, Virtual PC (which I didn't realize ran on PCs as well as
Macs, although it should have been obvious) is more expensive than a rather
capable used/surplus PC.  I'm not sure what personal computer ecconomics are
like outside the USA, though, so I've been pretty quiet so far...

I'd think that VPC would be subject to the same sort of "low level hardware
access" issues as newer versions of windows?

I like W98 quite a bit.  It's pretty much the newest OS without annoying
limits in the name of security, and the first where network configuration is
pretty painless.  I've run it on systems as small as a 90MHz Pentium (with a
lot of memory) (mostly kids games on that one), and am running it currently
on the P166 that drives the LPKF (that machine has a lot of memory too.
Most of my memory comes from the dumpsters; only very occasionally indeed do
I notice that W98 is actually paging/whatever to disk (at which point it
DOES become painful!))

BillW

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\12\30@193907 by Stef

flavicon
face
just found this in another newsgroup:
Stef Mientki
Schematic capture/simulation/pcb/vizualization software.

I am interested in making AutoTRAX EDA open source. Are there any
developers interested?

http://www.autotraxEDA.com

AutoTRAX is a complete, fully featured and totally free electronics design
system which includes schematic capture, simulation, PCB design, 3D
visualization and CAM. You can take your design from concept via schematic
capture through to PCB and final manufacture. Drag parts from the parts
library onto one or more schematic pages, connect them together and add
virtual instruments such as function generators and oscilloscopes to
simulate and verify your design. Next use the integral PCB Design Wizard to
create your PCB. Use the auto-layout and auto-router tools to help you
complete your design. You can use the forward/backward annotation function
to ensure design synchronization between schematic and PCB. Finally view
your PCB in 3D before it has even been manufactured and generate Bill of
Material Files, Gerber plot files and 2D/3D CAD/CAM files.

Regards
Ilija Kovacevic



Wagner Lipnharski wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2002\12\31@011755 by Mike Singer

picon face
Roman Black wrote:
> That's sad. After recently changing from Win95 to Win98
> I have found that many programs now run much slower with
> significant increases in hard drive "crunch and grind".
>
> I assume this is because windows 98 requires more ram and
> swaps larger amounts of data during the same standard
> functions. Now i'm searching for my win95 disk so I can
> return my PC's back to their *much faster* previous state.
> I can't find one thing that is better about 98 compared
> to 95, apart from a few small cosmetic improvements.
>
> Having spent a few days on the holidays playing with a
> friends new PC running windows XP, again it is noticeably
> slower than my win98 system, even though it has more ram
> and a faster processor.
>

  Convert disk C: to NTFS, then compress and defragment it.
Upgrade RAM to 256M. It will significantly decrease your hard
drive "crunch and grind". It works (i.e. NTFS is "quicker" then
FAT)  if CPU is "quicker" then HDD.

Under Win2K I use for about 2 months:
CPU Celeron 1.7(box) - USA$65
M/B Intel 845 chipset   - $85
RAM DDR 256M Samsung -  $75
HDD Barracuda 60G  -  $105

Works just fine to me (I'm knocking superstitiously at a wood:-)

  Mike.

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email .....listservKILLspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2002\12\31@012426 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
On Tue, 31 Dec 2002, Mike Singer wrote:

> Roman Black wrote:
> > That's sad. After recently changing from Win95 to Win98

>    Convert disk C: to NTFS, then compress and defragment it.

Umm, yeah, except that neither Win95 nor Win98 support NTFS.

Dale

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2002\12\31@023858 by Mike Singer

picon face
Dale Botkin wrote:
> > > That's sad. After recently changing from Win95 to Win98
>
> >    Convert disk C: to NTFS, then compress and defragment it.
>
> Umm, yeah, except that neither Win95 nor Win98 support NTFS.

Roman wrote also:
> Having spent a few days on the holidays playing with a friends new PC
> running windows XP, again it is noticeably slower than my win98
> system, even though it has more ram and a faster processor.

  Mike.

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email .....listservKILLspamspam.....mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2002\12\31@024916 by William Chops Westfield

face picon face
> Having spent a few days on the holidays playing with a friends new PC
> running windows XP, again it is noticeably slower than my win98
> system, even though it has more ram and a faster processor.

Well, presumably XP and ME were microsoft's lasp gasp attempt to get
people with 1GHz+ machines to buy new (faster) ones to make up for the
speed loss, thus improving the US economy and making a bunch of people a
bunch of money.  It doesn't seem to have worked, though.  My 400MHz
machines still seem to be running most applications just fine, not that
I'm what the industry would call a power user ("gee, I guess a windows
PC makes an OK X terminal." :-)

BillW

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email EraseMElistservspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2002\12\31@100046 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
Look up a program called 'BOCHs', which is an open source intel
emulator.  On a fast computer it may go reasonably fast, but since the
instructions are emulated rather than run through the processor it is
much slower than an equivilant virtual pc program.  It was meant to work
an any platform/processor/etc.

When you look it up, it should refer to a similar, open source, virtual
pc program which only runs on intel compatible cpus, as it actually
passes the instructions through the processor and is much faster -
comparable to virtual pc, etc.

-Adam

William Chops Westfield wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2002\12\31@101600 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
This is like saying that DOS is faster than win98.  Dos doesn't have
near the functionality that win9x and above have.

The reason xp and 2k are slower than 9x/me is not just because of the
eye candy (which can be turned off) but is due to the architectural
differences, an architecture which allows a program to crash and burn
without bringing down other programs or the OS itself, obeys user
priviledges, etc.

The reason a lot of developers are moving towards it is not *just* the
inevitable slide towards XP, but is also because there are newer
features which make it slightly easier to develop for and integrate
disparate programs together, not to mention the lack of unexplainable
crashes caused by other misbehaved programs and drivers.

Having said that, it's perfectly reasonable to use win9x if it meets
your needs, but it seems a little presumptious to say, "I'm happy with
what I have, everyone else should also be happy with it, and let's stop
here for awhile."  It takes a surprisingly large amount of work to
maintain a complex piece of software which uses high end features
(graphics, primarily) across the windows operating systems.  I don't
blame him for making this choice.  If (as it says in another message in
this thread) he desires to make it open source, then you are more than
welcome to remedy the incompatibility with your OS choice.

-Adam

Roman Black wrote:

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email @spam@listservKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2002\12\31@125557 by Chris Hunter

flavicon
face
It's going to be amusing to M$ collapse over the next couple of years (you
heard it here first!).  They have now decided to cease all support for
software over three years old.  This, in conjunction with their bizarre
pricing policy and draconian "activation" regime will ensure that their
market share will eventually become as irrelevant as Apple.

Many of the major hardware manufacturers are courting various Linux
companies.  Even IBM install Red Hat Linux by default on many of their
server products, and have bought into Red Hat in a big way.

The end will come when M$ introduce their own mandatory BIOS with their next
generation of Windoze....  I'll be happy to save #500 / $850 by buying a
machine with a generic BIOS and a proper operating system!

Chris

{Original Message removed}

2002\12\31@154614 by John Ferrell

face picon face
> It's going to be amusing to M$ collapse over the next couple of years (you
> heard it here first!).  They have now decided to cease all support for
> software over three years old.

Very interesting. I had not heard that. Essentially, my Microsoft Publisher
Software will die with the hard drive then because I have to get a new
registration code every time I move it. That will provide a lot of incentive
to hack. I wonder if there is any sort of  law on the books to protect the
customer from abandonment? It did not have termination date on the
package....


John Ferrell
6241 Phillippi Rd
Julian NC 27283
Phone: (336)685-9606
Dixie Competition Products
NSRCA 479 AMA 4190  W8CCW
"My Competition is Not My Enemy"



{Original Message removed}

2002\12\31@193732 by PicDude

flavicon
face
John Ferrell scribbled:

> ...  I wonder if there is any sort of  law on the books to protect the
> customer from abandonment? It did not have termination date on the
> package....
>

I guess that it's somewhere in the EULA that you agreed to, either
explicitly or implicitly by opening the software package.

Cheers,
-Neil.

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email KILLspamlistservKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2002\12\31@221413 by Chris Hunter

flavicon
face
If you read the M$ Licence Agreement (that you signed up to by tearing open
the packaging!), you'll discover that they've cleverly omitted to actually
offer ANY support, ever!

Chris

{Original Message removed}


'[EE] Re: Free PCB package'
2003\01\02@030546 by Russell McMahon
face
flavicon
face
> That's sad. After recently changing from Win95 to Win98
> I have found that many programs now run much slower with
> significant increases in hard drive "crunch and grind".
>
> I assume this is because windows 98 requires more ram and
> swaps larger amounts of data during the same standard
> functions. Now i'm searching for my win95 disk so I can
> return my PC's back to their *much faster* previous state.
> I can't find one thing that is better about 98 compared
> to 95, apart from a few small cosmetic improvements.

I run 95 on one PC here and 98SE on several and ME on a laptop.

Win 98 is much stabler and well behaved than 95 BUT it MUST be 98SE.
First release of 98 is not nice. Arguably better to use 95 than 98_pre_SE.

A significant difference from 95 to 98 is that 98 runs USB properly and 95
only ever ran it in a flaky manner.

There are other differences but its been so long that they don't come
immediately to mind.

If you can add some extra RAM to your laptop and you are running 98SE I
doubt that you'll regret it long term.





           Russell McMahon

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\02@073943 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Dale Botkin wrote:
>
> Or just install some more memory?  If you must run Windows, 98 is far
> better than 95, and 2000 is far better than 98.  As it is a Micro$loth
> product, though, your hardware has to keep up.  You simply cannot expect a
> new M$ OS to run well on old hardware.  Never has happened, never will.


Why does my hardware need to do anything new??
This offends me. :o)

If I own a perfectly functional 10 year old hammer
why the f%^$ should I be forced to upgrade (ie pay
money) to buy the latest hammer every 2 years just
so microsoft can get constantly richer at my expense?

The fact is that on the SAME hardware (which I have
already paid for), the '98 version works much worse
than the '95 version. So now you're saying I should
spend more money improving my PC so M$ new software
will work as good as it used to do anyway?? ;o)

Come on Dale, this is like saying I MUST upgrade to
18F pic so it will work as fast as my 16F84 always
did, and M$ get paid for all the "upgrading"...
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\02@080852 by Claudio Tagliola

picon face
I think there are certain Engineers which have the Tweaker extensions
enabled. They urge to strive to the latest techno-gadgets and smell
of new equipment. I can safely say you are not one of them :)

I would horror by thinking to hook up a two year old digital camera to
anything from MS with a 9 in it's name. Let alone do some proper
internet connection sharing or hooking up a LAN. I know it's possible
with the old MS OS's and also with Linux, but I don't want to be my
own administrator, I just want to have it running. And with the last
two iterations of the MS OS (2k and XP), that's exactly the case. Some
years ago, I had a dual boot system for a while, but ended up
removing the Linux partition cause I didn't use it, it wast just too much
of a hassle.

Oh well, maybe I'm just a bit offended as well, by taking an analogy
between something as a computer and a hammer. You obviously
don't have a very high regard for the modern wizardry this world
has come up with :) There are only so many inventions which changed
the world, and I think electronics are one of them.

Best regards,
Claudio

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Why does my hardware need to do anything new??
This offends me. :o)

If I own a perfectly functional 10 year old hammer
why the f%^$ should I be forced to upgrade (ie pay
money) to buy the latest hammer every 2 years just
so microsoft can get constantly richer at my expense?

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\02@080853 by Jinx

face picon face
> The fact is that on the SAME hardware (which I have
> already paid for), the '98 version works much worse
> than the '95 version. So now you're saying I should
> spend more money improving my PC so M$ new software
> will work as good as it used to do anyway?? ;o)

IF you're going to play with MS then you'll have to play by
their rules. Eh ?

a) don't use MS so you aren't on that treadmill
b) re-write W98 so it runs at a speed you're happy with
c) splash out $50 for some RAM
d) do none of the above and buy an itchy hairy shirt with the $50

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\02@080855 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Dominic Stratten wrote:
>
> Roman - why not go for a dual boot machine - put Windows 2000 on one
> partition and windows 98/95 on the other ?


Hi, sure dual boot is a good idea sometimes. :o)
The bad thing is that i don't own Win2000 and have
NO intention of giving M$ another cent... :o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\02@082102 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Chris Hunter wrote:
>
> If you read the M$ Licence Agreement (that you signed up to by tearing open
> the packaging!), you'll discover that they've cleverly omitted to actually
> offer ANY support, ever!


Those agreements are not legal and won't stand the
test of time. In a situation where 99% if the users
NEVER read the "agreement" the user can't be held
accountable. There are laws protecting the consumer
from "agreeing" to documents they may be tricked
into.

Under a much older class of common law the user is
protected that the product they bought will perform
as *expected* and as advertised and will be covered by a
*typical and expected* level of service and guarantee.

Like those "I agree" buttons when you install software.
Does anyone actually read that stuff? ANY UNFAIR CLAUSE,
or ridiculous fine print will not hold up in court.

In publicly accepted use it is NOT an "I agree" button,
but a "yeah whatever, install the darn thing so I can
look at it" button.

Nobody ever presses the button to signify agreement,
they press it solely to continue installation. Test
my theory by providing an "install without agreeing
button" as an alternative and see how many users still
continue to "agree" to the terms...

It's like writing on the road you drive over, "by
driving over this text you agree to the following..."
;o)
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\02@083309 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Jinx wrote:

> IF you're going to play with MS then you'll have to play by
> their rules. Eh ?


Not really. :o) I never make decisions based
on the assumption that i'm a helpless victim.
Castaneda trained me to be a hunter, not a prey,
and it doesn't bother me at all if the prey is
larger than I am. <grin>
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\02@092939 by Lee Mairs

flavicon
face
You Microsoft bashers don't need to replace your perfectly functional
hammers.  You should stay with your 8080s, and Z80s.  CP/M was perfect for
you.  Enough of this nonsense!
Lee


{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\02@131524 by Wagner Lipnharski

flavicon
face
Roman Black wrote:
> If I own a perfectly functional 10 year old hammer
> why the f%^$ should I be forced to upgrade (ie pay
> money) to buy the latest hammer every 2 years just
> so microsoft can get constantly richer at my expense?

Hi Roman,

first, Happy New Year,

second, are you using a granite sharpen hammer made by some nedherthal
figure 20 thousand years ago, or a model that suffered hundreds of updates,
including the nail extraction head unit with rubber handle and such? The
point is a hammer really does not need any improvements, something that
even a computer and its software will not need either in the year 3400, I
guess, right?  I am afraid that I saw last week at Home Depot a new hammer
using polycarbonate and porous uretane at the handle, it does not transfer
the hammering shock to your hand and arm, avoiding damages to the muscles.
If you are using a regular wood handle hammer, you need to upgrade to the
new model... see?

:)

I don't like William Gates either, but we need to understand and clap its
marketing capacity to being able to sell what he sells and in the speed he
sells, not even talking about the way he uses to convince even you to
upgrade your system every 2 years.  Lotus 123 was much better than Excell
and even so he found a way to take the first out of the market, WordPerfect
was much better than Word (for the time) and the same happened. Even with
more than 50% of piracy he was always able to keep going and be rich. Its
only frustration was never being able to get CorelDraw down, since he was
never able to produce something technical as an EDA software. This, I
guess, was always pointed by his lawyers as what could bring MS down.
Nobody sues MS because he needed to restart the letter again at the crashed
Word, but a multi-million circuit board design crashing, requiring 10 days
of extra work, could generate a nice and fat law suit. He simply doesn't
want that, because he knows his company and what it produces.

If your new car breaks down, the manufacturer doesn't say you need to buy
the next year version that will have all the issues fixed, right?  they
have responsibility about it.

Recently bouth 2 E-Machines, software fully installed.  Win-XP and all.
Word keeps messing around with the docs names, it is not rare open a file,
"saving-as" as a NEW name, at the end, when you "save" the file, it simply
writes over the previous name... funny? nice job?  It happens often, in
both machines we bought, to avoid problems, whenever we want to change a
letter or something, we "save-as" and MUST verify if the file under edit
was really changed name...  Thanks Bill - perhaps you could spend 100k/year
more to pay a some "professional user" to test your softwares before you
release it.

Wagner

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\02@140727 by Chris Hunter

flavicon
face
Sorry Roman - you opened the wrapper, so you are bound by Micro$haft's terms
and conditions!  This HAS been tested in court (under several
jurisdictions), and M$ always won (after all, they've got enough money to
win any court case!).

Your line about the "I agree" button is amusing, but not accurate - you
really ARE bound by the contents of the Licence Agreement!  The "unfair
clause" arguement has been lost many times...

Chris


{Original Message removed}

2003\01\02@143432 by Florian Voelzke

picon face
How about this version:

It depends where you live!

Here in germany, any unexpected terms and conditions are invalid. But of
course it depends on the court what has to be expected and what not. The
classical "I agree" button of any software which comes in a package has
no value, because you are not able to read the terms when you buy the
software. The problem of software which is delivered without any media
or package is somewhat trickier...
And what is very important here: Some companies tend to just translate
their terms and conditions into german language without adapting them to
german law - which makes them pretty senseless.

Florian

Chris Hunter wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> {Original Message removed}

2003\01\02@161153 by Dale Botkin

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Roman Black wrote:

> If I own a perfectly functional 10 year old hammer
> why the f%^$ should I be forced to upgrade (ie pay
> money) to buy the latest hammer every 2 years just
> so microsoft can get constantly richer at my expense?

Nails take about the same amount of force, and work the same way, as they
have for a long time now.  If all you want to do is run the same
applications, then by all means keep the same OS.  But by your standards,
I should be pissed that I can't do all my PIC development in BASIC on my
old Sinclair 1000 and a black & white TV.

> The fact is that on the SAME hardware (which I have
> already paid for), the '98 version works much worse
> than the '95 version.

Yeah.  New OS requires more resources.  If that's THAT MUCH of a problem,
stay wit the old software.

> So now you're saying I should spend more money improving my PC so M$
> new software will work as good as it used to do anyway?? ;o)

*I* am not saying it, *MICROSOFT*, whose operating system *YOU* chose to
use, says so.  Don't shoot the messenger, Roman.  Switch to something
else.

> Come on Dale, this is like saying I MUST upgrade to
> 18F pic so it will work as fast as my 16F84 always
> did, and M$ get paid for all the "upgrading"...

No, I'm just saying that you can't expect the same hardware to work with
all the newest, latest crap forever.  I run Linux on my server, and even
*THAT* has had hardware upgrades.  Why?  Well, the 2.4 kernel is
substantially larger than the 0.96 kernel, for one thing.  It also does a
lot more.  If I want to be able to run the same apps at the same speed on
the same hardware I used in '95, I'll have to revert to the same version
of Linux and lose a lot.  Same deal with Windows, only a little worse
maybe.

Dale

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2003\01\03@075820 by Roman Black

flavicon
face
Dale Botkin wrote:

> > So now you're saying I should spend more money improving my PC so M$
> > new software will work as good as it used to do anyway?? ;o)
>
> *I* am not saying it, *MICROSOFT*, whose operating system *YOU* chose to
> use, says so.  Don't shoot the messenger, Roman.  Switch to something
> else.


My apologies Dale. :o)
I do think the "hammer" analogy has some credence,
I have word processors and image editors that I
paid for many years ago and they still do the same
job I require. That's why i get annoyed when
"upgrading" the OS only to find that my trusted
tools no longer work as well as they did before.
I just believe that an "upgrade" should work
better, not worse.
-Roman

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\01\03@135104 by Mike Singer

picon face
Roman Black wrote:
> Dominic Stratten wrote:
> >
> > Roman - why not go for a dual boot machine -
> > put Windows 2000 on one partition and
> > windows 98/95 on the other ?
>
> Hi, sure dual boot is a good idea sometimes. :o)...

  As for me, dual Win2K and Win98/95 is a pointless
idea. Win98/95 require first partition be FAT, if I'm not
mistaken. With FAT - first partition Win2K can't be
reliable. And all the mess with two Windows folders.

  Mike.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2003\01\04@061431 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
On Thu, 2 Jan 2003, Roman Black wrote:

*>If I own a perfectly functional 10 year old hammer
*>why the f%^$ should I be forced to upgrade (ie pay
*>money) to buy the latest hammer every 2 years just
*>so microsoft can get constantly richer at my expense?

No, so they can make money. Because that's what they are in the game for.
Btw they are rumored to drop support for anything older than three years.
In that context the cost of ownership of a PC workstation reaches a whole
new dimension. It means support will be available only for W2K upwards
(this year and next).  The COO will be hardware+3 years of licenses, for 3
years, the way I see it. With a basic software bundle etc and low cost
PS's you should be looking at $300 to $500 COO per year per machine, just
to stay in the game. If you do not like that, change for a more liberal
OS. It does not have to be Linux, there are several other alternatives
(most of them are Unix derivatives though). And not all are free, or open
source either, nor are they unsupported.

Peter

PS: The figures above are unchecked.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2003\01\05@093359 by Wojciech Zabolotny

flavicon
picon face
On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 08:55:41PM +0300, Mike Singer wrote:
> Roman Black wrote:
> > Dominic Stratten wrote:
> > >
> > > Roman - why not go for a dual boot machine -
> > > put Windows 2000 on one partition and
> > > windows 98/95 on the other ?
> >
> > Hi, sure dual boot is a good idea sometimes. :o)...
>
>    As for me, dual Win2K and Win98/95 is a pointless
> idea. Win98/95 require first partition be FAT, if I'm not
> mistaken. With FAT - first partition Win2K can't be
> reliable. And all the mess with two Windows folders.
>

Not a problem at all, if you use eg LILO. It is able to change partitions
dynamically at the startup...
Below is the sample from lilo.conf taken form one of my multiboot
machines it hides the Win98 partition when booting Win2k, and
hides Win2k partition when booting Win98. Works perfectly...

Some other boot managers are even more powerfull.

other=/dev/hda1
       label = d
       table = /dev/hda
       change
         partition=/dev/hda1
           set=win95_lba_normal
           activate
         partition=/dev/hda2
           set=ntfs_hidden
           deactivate
other=/dev/hda2
       label = n
       table = /dev/hda
       change
         partition=/dev/hda1
            set=win95_lba_hidden
            deactivate
         partition=/dev/hda2
           set=ntfs_normal
           activate

--
                               HTH & regards,
                               Wojciech Zabolotny
                               RemoveMEwzabTakeThisOuTspamise.pw.edu.pl

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email spamBeGonelistservspamBeGonespammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2003\01\05@131257 by Mike Singer

picon face
Thank you.

I'll try it.

  Mike.

Wojciech Zabolotny wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email TakeThisOuTlistservEraseMEspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2003 , 2004 only
- Today
- New search...