On 2022-02-21 08:37, Joel wrote:
> rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote:
>> On 2022-02-21 00:39, Ant wrote:
>>> In alt.comp.microsoft.windows rabidR04CH <rabid@r04.ch> wrote:
>>>> On 2022-02-19 11:57 p.m., ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Win98SE was initially OEM only(new pcs).
>>>>> Shortly thereafter IE5 was available to the business and consume
>>>>> community as an upgrade to IE4 - 98SE 'rebranded' as an interim release
>>>>> was made available for W98 systems with/included in IE5 - the three
>>>>> biggest features were better USB support, DVD support and Internet
>>>>> Connection Sharing(two 98SE devices sharing the same internet connection)
>>>
>>>> So the upgrade to IE5 turned a regular Windows 98 to SE? I don't recall
>>>> that being the case but that might be accurate.
>>>
>>> Yeah, that didn't happen.
>>
>> Thanks for the clarification. That didn't sound plausible to me either.
>
>
> Yeah, I had Win98 on the ancient computer I used before the Win2000
> computer, and it never got updated to 98 SE. It originally had one of
> the Win95 releases that was newer for OEMs (it was a custom built
> machine from a local shop), upgraded to the original 98.

I recall having both the first and second releases of Windows 98. In
fact, I _still_ have them and I remember that I would always install the
second release not because it was prettier or whatever but because it
simply worked better. I _could_ have installed the first release and
just upgraded it, but I don't recall that even being an option. As far
as I know, if you have the first release and wanted SE, you had to go
out and buy it.

Such practises are no longer the norm and Microsoft will upgrade a first
edition to the second at no charge. Most likely, it is because they are
being compensated in some way from the advertisements and advertising ID
in Windows. I doubt they'd readily give it away otherwise.

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

On 2022-02-21 09:03, Joel wrote:
> rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote:
>
>>> Yeah, I had Win98 on the ancient computer I used before the Win2000
>>> computer, and it never got updated to 98 SE. It originally had one of
>>> the Win95 releases that was newer for OEMs (it was a custom built
>>> machine from a local shop), upgraded to the original 98.
>>
>> I recall having both the first and second releases of Windows 98. In
>> fact, I _still_ have them and I remember that I would always install the
>> second release not because it was prettier or whatever but because it
>> simply worked better. I _could_ have installed the first release and
>> just upgraded it, but I don't recall that even being an option. As far
>> as I know, if you have the first release and wanted SE, you had to go
>> out and buy it.
>
>
> As I remember it, there was a step up edition you could buy, but it
> wasn't a free update, yes.

On Microsoft's part, that was simply unethical, especially since 98
didn't work all too well in comparison to 98SE.

>> Such practises are no longer the norm and Microsoft will upgrade a first
>> edition to the second at no charge. Most likely, it is because they are
>> being compensated in some way from the advertisements and advertising ID
>> in Windows. I doubt they'd readily give it away otherwise.
>
> Well, the thing is that they only sell you your license for the
> machine once (which is most often a preinstalled OEM license). My
> purchase of Win10 entitles me to Win11 (and presumably a future
> version, if it still supports my hardware).

Chances are that it will support your hardware. They had to find ways to
lock out some hardware from 11 but it probably won't be all that easy
going forward.

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

On 2022-02-21 09:28, Joel wrote:
> rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote:
>
>>>> I recall having both the first and second releases of Windows 98. In
>>>> fact, I _still_ have them and I remember that I would always install the
>>>> second release not because it was prettier or whatever but because it
>>>> simply worked better. I _could_ have installed the first release and
>>>> just upgraded it, but I don't recall that even being an option. As far
>>>> as I know, if you have the first release and wanted SE, you had to go
>>>> out and buy it.
>>>
>>> As I remember it, there was a step up edition you could buy, but it
>>> wasn't a free update, yes.
>>
>> On Microsoft's part, that was simply unethical, especially since 98
>> didn't work all too well in comparison to 98SE.
>
>
> It is curious that they had so many different editions of the 9x line,
> rather than continually updating like they do now. But I guess
> distribution of software was just different, back then.

Three version of Windows 95 as far as I know. You have the original, one
which added IE and then one which added USB support as far as I recall.

>>>> Such practises are no longer the norm and Microsoft will upgrade a first
>>>> edition to the second at no charge. Most likely, it is because they are
>>>> being compensated in some way from the advertisements and advertising ID
>>>> in Windows. I doubt they'd readily give it away otherwise.
>>>
>>> Well, the thing is that they only sell you your license for the
>>> machine once (which is most often a preinstalled OEM license). My
>>> purchase of Win10 entitles me to Win11 (and presumably a future
>>> version, if it still supports my hardware).
>>
>> Chances are that it will support your hardware. They had to find ways to
>> lock out some hardware from 11 but it probably won't be all that easy
>> going forward.
>
> It depends how soon a new version comes along. It might be that they
> keep updating 11 long enough that my hardware will become more
> obsolete, before the new version arrives. But who knows, at this
> point.

You're clearly referring to full updates rather than incremental ones.
What we know for sure is that if your machine can run 10, it will be
supported at least until 2025 and fully. If your machine can run Windows
11, it will supported until 2029, at the very least from what I've read,
probably longer if significant technological changes don't occur.

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote

| > For instance, claiming that Netscape was a failure;
| >that spying is anonymous; that you control your
| >computer. It's all nonsense or partial truth. For someone
| >to say they don't mind spyware is one thing. To pretend
| >it's not really spying is either naive or lying.
| | Paranoid.
| Paranoid to say Netscape was a success before MS built
in IE and jazzed it up with ActiveX? Paranoid to say you
don't really control your computer if you're forced to
send your ID to MS, let them collect usage data, and let
them control the OS? Funny, my car, toaster and frig all
work fine without any intrusion. (Though data collection
in cars is a rising issue. As I write this, car companies are
lobbying hard to eliminate right-to-repair laws so that they
can exclusively profit not only from your repair needs but
also from data collection. It may not be long before Ford
is selling adspace to Nike to show to you when they see
that you're driving past the local mall. And you approve of
that...why? Because yu don't believe you have a right to
control your own car and access to information about your
whereabouts?

Or maybe you think it's paranoid to believe spying is
happening at all? I could give you oodles of links about spying
by cellphones, apps, TVs... about Google geofencing...
about the absurdity of calling data anonymized when the
whole point of collecting the data is to de-anonymize it....
But I know there's no reasoning with ostriches. I'm only
writing this to minimize your ability to mislead others with
your lazy misrepresentation of the facts.

On 2/21/2022 12:00 PM, Joel wrote:
> "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>
>> | > For instance, claiming that Netscape was a failure;
>> | >that spying is anonymous; that you control your
>> | >computer. It's all nonsense or partial truth. For someone
>> | >to say they don't mind spyware is one thing. To pretend
>> | >it's not really spying is either naive or lying.
>> |
>> | Paranoid.
>> |
>> Paranoid to say Netscape was a success before MS built
>> in IE and jazzed it up with ActiveX? Paranoid to say you
>> don't really control your computer if you're forced to
>> send your ID to MS, let them collect usage data, and let
>> them control the OS? Funny, my car, toaster and frig all
>> work fine without any intrusion. (Though data collection
>> in cars is a rising issue. As I write this, car companies are
>> lobbying hard to eliminate right-to-repair laws so that they
>> can exclusively profit not only from your repair needs but
>> also from data collection. It may not be long before Ford
>> is selling adspace to Nike to show to you when they see
>> that you're driving past the local mall. And you approve of
>> that...why? Because yu don't believe you have a right to
>> control your own car and access to information about your
>> whereabouts?
>>
>> Or maybe you think it's paranoid to believe spying is
>> happening at all? I could give you oodles of links about spying
>> by cellphones, apps, TVs... about Google geofencing...
>> about the absurdity of calling data anonymized when the
>> whole point of collecting the data is to de-anonymize it....
>> But I know there's no reasoning with ostriches. I'm only
>> writing this to minimize your ability to mislead others with
>> your lazy misrepresentation of the facts.
>
>
> I trust Microsoft. They know what's best for their customers. They're
> a business, they produce a product that does what we need it to do. I
> don't need to second-guess them.
>

Wow... You must be far younger than I am.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:03:30 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote:
>
>>> Yeah, I had Win98 on the ancient computer I used before the Win2000
>>> computer, and it never got updated to 98 SE. It originally had one of
>>> the Win95 releases that was newer for OEMs (it was a custom built
>>> machine from a local shop), upgraded to the original 98.
>>
>>I recall having both the first and second releases of Windows 98. In
>>fact, I _still_ have them and I remember that I would always install the
>>second release not because it was prettier or whatever but because it
>>simply worked better. I _could_ have installed the first release and
>>just upgraded it, but I don't recall that even being an option. As far
>>as I know, if you have the first release and wanted SE, you had to go
>>out and buy it.
>
>
>As I remember it, there was a step up edition you could buy, but it
>wasn't a free update, yes.
>
>
>>Such practises are no longer the norm and Microsoft will upgrade a first
>>edition to the second at no charge. Most likely, it is because they are
>>being compensated in some way from the advertisements and advertising ID
>>in Windows. I doubt they'd readily give it away otherwise.
>
>
>Well, the thing is that they only sell you your license for the
>machine once (which is most often a preinstalled OEM license).

Yes, most licensees are OEM license, because most people buy prebuilt
computers that come with Windows.

>My
>purchase of Win10 entitles me to Win11

Yes.

>(and presumably a future
>version,

Maybe. That remains to be seen. None of us knows for sure what
Microsoft may do in the future.

>if it still supports my hardware).

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 09:28:44 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote:
>
>>>> I recall having both the first and second releases of Windows 98. In
>>>> fact, I _still_ have them and I remember that I would always install the
>>>> second release not because it was prettier or whatever but because it
>>>> simply worked better. I _could_ have installed the first release and
>>>> just upgraded it, but I don't recall that even being an option. As far
>>>> as I know, if you have the first release and wanted SE, you had to go
>>>> out and buy it.
>>>
>>> As I remember it, there was a step up edition you could buy, but it
>>> wasn't a free update, yes.
>>
>>On Microsoft's part, that was simply unethical, especially since 98
>>didn't work all too well in comparison to 98SE.
>
>
>It is curious that they had so many different editions of the 9x line,
>rather than continually updating like they do now. But I guess
>distribution of software was just different, back then.

I'm not sure that it has anything to with differences in the
distribution of software. Rather, whether to call a new release a new
version or just an update is a marketing decision. Maybe those in
charge of marketing have changed and have different views.

On 2/21/2022 12:17 PM, Joel wrote:
> Bill <nonegiven@att.net> wrote:
>
>>> I trust Microsoft. They know what's best for their customers. They're
>>> a business, they produce a product that does what we need it to do. I
>>> don't need to second-guess them.
>>
>> Wow... You must be far younger than I am.
>
>
> I'll be 45 next week. But I am completely serious. Microsoft has no
> motive to deprive us of anything useful. Their OS is king of the
> desktop hill.
>

Well, they have a motive to keep you on "MS Lane"--and apparently,
whatever they are doing, it's working. Do you use the software or does
the software use you (think about it carefully)?

On 2/21/2022 12:37 PM, Joel wrote:
> Bill <nonegiven@att.net> wrote:
>
>>>>> I trust Microsoft. They know what's best for their customers. They're
>>>>> a business, they produce a product that does what we need it to do. I
>>>>> don't need to second-guess them.
>>>>
>>>> Wow... You must be far younger than I am.
>>>
>>> I'll be 45 next week. But I am completely serious. Microsoft has no
>>> motive to deprive us of anything useful. Their OS is king of the
>>> desktop hill.
>>
>> Well, they have a motive to keep you on "MS Lane"--and apparently,
>> whatever they are doing, it's working. Do you use the software or does
>> the software use you (think about it carefully)?
>
>
> I just think that their OS has evolved over time. Win11 introduces
> some changes, but I'm choosing to embrace that, to stay contemporary.
>

What do you think it is "evolving (over time)" to do?

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 12:17:18 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bill <nonegiven@att.net> wrote:
>
>>> I trust Microsoft. They know what's best for their customers. They're
>>> a business, they produce a product that does what we need it to do. I
>>> don't need to second-guess them.
>>
>>Wow... You must be far younger than I am.
>
>
>I'll be 45 next week. But I am completely serious.

Microsoft's motive, like those of almost all companies, is to make
money. They might know what's best for their customers, but they don't
necessarily use that knowledge to decide what to do.

>Microsoft has no
>motive to deprive us of anything useful.

I they thing making a particular change will sell more copies of
something they have a motive to do it even if it deprives many of us
from something we consider useful.

>Their OS is king of the
>desktop hill.

Probably, but many Macintosh users might disagree with you.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:00:55 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>Bill <nonegiven@att.net> wrote:
>
>>>> Well, they have a motive to keep you on "MS Lane"--and apparently,
>>>> whatever they are doing, it's working. Do you use the software or does
>>>> the software use you (think about it carefully)?
>>>
>>> I just think that their OS has evolved over time. Win11 introduces
>>> some changes, but I'm choosing to embrace that, to stay contemporary.
>>
>>What do you think it is "evolving (over time)" to do?
>
>
>I think Microsoft is dealing with the realities of the current era.
>Security is more of a focus than it used to be, for one thing.

Yes. Another thing is the growing use of Android (and the apple
equivalent) devices.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:14:24 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

>Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>
>>Microsoft's motive, like those of almost all companies, is to make
>>money. They might know what's best for their customers, but they don't
>>necessarily use that knowledge to decide what to do.
>>
>>>Microsoft has no
>>>motive to deprive us of anything useful.
>>
>>I they thing making a particular change will sell more copies of
>>something they have a motive to do it even if it deprives many of us
>>from something we consider useful.
>
>
>How would that sell more copies, though?

How would *what*?

>
>>>Their OS is king of the
>>>desktop hill.
>>
>>Probably, but many Macintosh users might disagree with you.
>
>
>macOS is weird, to me.

I know next to nothing about it, so I have no opinion, but my guess is
that if I spent a few weeks on a Macintosh, I'd probably agree with
you. Something different from what they're used would feel weird to
most people.

>Windows simply has the best interface, and
>available software.

Best? Yes, best to you, and also to me. But not everyone would agree
with us.

>I am happy that I came back home to Microsoft,
>after using Linux for two years on my old computer.

I never used Linux.

On 2022-02-21 11:33, Joel wrote:
> rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote:
>
>>>>> As I remember it, there was a step up edition you could buy, but it
>>>>> wasn't a free update, yes.
>>>>
>>>> On Microsoft's part, that was simply unethical, especially since 98
>>>> didn't work all too well in comparison to 98SE.
>>>
>>> It is curious that they had so many different editions of the 9x line,
>>> rather than continually updating like they do now. But I guess
>>> distribution of software was just different, back then.
>>
>> Three version of Windows 95 as far as I know. You have the original, one
>> which added IE and then one which added USB support as far as I recall.
>
>
> Yeah, they updated it to support emerging technology, but didn't
> provide that to people who were already running 95. It was just so
> different from the way it is now.

They should have been available as upgrades that users could download
from Microsoft's site at the very least. The fact that they weren't
shows just how the company changed over the years. They are much better
than they were and I imagine that it is because they've monetized the
operating system more effectively.

>>>>> Well, the thing is that they only sell you your license for the
>>>>> machine once (which is most often a preinstalled OEM license). My
>>>>> purchase of Win10 entitles me to Win11 (and presumably a future
>>>>> version, if it still supports my hardware).
>>>>
>>>> Chances are that it will support your hardware. They had to find ways to
>>>> lock out some hardware from 11 but it probably won't be all that easy
>>>> going forward.
>>>
>>> It depends how soon a new version comes along. It might be that they
>>> keep updating 11 long enough that my hardware will become more
>>> obsolete, before the new version arrives. But who knows, at this
>>> point.
>>
>> You're clearly referring to full updates rather than incremental ones.
>> What we know for sure is that if your machine can run 10, it will be
>> supported at least until 2025 and fully. If your machine can run Windows
>> 11, it will supported until 2029, at the very least from what I've read,
>> probably longer if significant technological changes don't occur.
>
>
> Right, Win11 will be supported for a long time, even if the next
> version doesn't support my hardware. I'm cool with that.

There's always Linux! :)

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

On 2/21/2022 1:26 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:00:55 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Bill <nonegiven@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>> Well, they have a motive to keep you on "MS Lane"--and apparently,
>>>>> whatever they are doing, it's working. Do you use the software or does
>>>>> the software use you (think about it carefully)?
>>>>
>>>> I just think that their OS has evolved over time. Win11 introduces
>>>> some changes, but I'm choosing to embrace that, to stay contemporary.
>>>
>>> What do you think it is "evolving (over time)" to do?
>>
>>
>> I think Microsoft is dealing with the realities of the current era.
>> Security is more of a focus than it used to be, for one thing.
>
>
> Yes. Another thing is the growing use of Android (and the apple
> equivalent) devices.
If MS decides to take more control over its OS by forcing MS logon and
possibly going to a subscription service as it does for part of it
Office suite, MS will lose greater market share to other OS;s

Many computer are being sold to school kids (K-16), and people who are
buy a computer more for the recreational aspects that the business
aspect. The are not going to pay $1k for a computer knowing they are
going to continue to pay for the operating system on that computer.

On 2022-02-21 12:00, Joel wrote:
> "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>
>> | > For instance, claiming that Netscape was a failure;
>> | >that spying is anonymous; that you control your
>> | >computer. It's all nonsense or partial truth. For someone
>> | >to say they don't mind spyware is one thing. To pretend
>> | >it's not really spying is either naive or lying.
>> |
>> | Paranoid.
>> |
>> Paranoid to say Netscape was a success before MS built
>> in IE and jazzed it up with ActiveX? Paranoid to say you
>> don't really control your computer if you're forced to
>> send your ID to MS, let them collect usage data, and let
>> them control the OS? Funny, my car, toaster and frig all
>> work fine without any intrusion. (Though data collection
>> in cars is a rising issue. As I write this, car companies are
>> lobbying hard to eliminate right-to-repair laws so that they
>> can exclusively profit not only from your repair needs but
>> also from data collection. It may not be long before Ford
>> is selling adspace to Nike to show to you when they see
>> that you're driving past the local mall. And you approve of
>> that...why? Because yu don't believe you have a right to
>> control your own car and access to information about your
>> whereabouts?
>>
>> Or maybe you think it's paranoid to believe spying is
>> happening at all? I could give you oodles of links about spying
>> by cellphones, apps, TVs... about Google geofencing...
>> about the absurdity of calling data anonymized when the
>> whole point of collecting the data is to de-anonymize it....
>> But I know there's no reasoning with ostriches. I'm only
>> writing this to minimize your ability to mislead others with
>> your lazy misrepresentation of the facts.
>
>
> I trust Microsoft. They know what's best for their customers. They're
> a business, they produce a product that does what we need it to do. I
> don't need to second-guess them.

Ok, that's just naive. While it isn't as bad as most people claim, there
is no real reason to trust Microsoft either. They're just as bad as
anyone else but getting somewhat better with time.

Let's not forget that Microoft Office changes your language to reflect
the latest "woke" trends. Let's not forget how they bribed their way
into becoming the standard when it was clearly that the OpenDocument
Format was going to be chosen...

However, it's amazing what Microsoft is offering, at a ridiculously low
price, as far as gaming goes. For less than the cost of Netflix, you get
access to all of Microsoft's stellar games and others. That, right
there, is a gigantic step in the right direction.

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

On 2022-02-21 12:14, Bill wrote:
> On 2/21/2022 12:00 PM, Joel wrote:
>> "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote:
>>
>>> | >   For instance, claiming that Netscape was a failure;
>>> | >that spying is anonymous; that you control your
>>> | >computer. It's all nonsense or partial truth. For someone
>>> | >to say they don't mind spyware is one thing. To pretend
>>> | >it's not really spying is either naive or lying.
>>> |
>>> | Paranoid.
>>> |
>>>   Paranoid to say Netscape was a success before MS built
>>> in IE and jazzed it up with ActiveX? Paranoid to say you
>>> don't really control your computer if you're forced to
>>> send your ID to MS, let them collect usage data, and let
>>> them control the OS? Funny, my car, toaster and frig all
>>> work fine without any intrusion. (Though data collection
>>> in cars is a rising issue. As I write this, car companies are
>>> lobbying hard to eliminate right-to-repair laws so that they
>>> can exclusively profit not only from your repair needs but
>>> also from data collection. It may not be long before Ford
>>> is selling adspace to Nike to show to you when they see
>>> that you're driving past the local mall. And you approve of
>>> that...why? Because yu don't believe you have a right to
>>> control your own car and access to information about your
>>> whereabouts?
>>>
>>>    Or maybe you think it's paranoid to believe spying is
>>> happening at all? I could give you oodles of links about spying
>>> by cellphones, apps, TVs... about Google geofencing...
>>> about the absurdity of calling data anonymized when the
>>> whole point of collecting the data is to de-anonymize it....
>>>    But I know there's no reasoning with ostriches. I'm only
>>> writing this to minimize your ability to mislead others with
>>> your lazy misrepresentation of the facts.
>>
>>
>> I trust Microsoft.  They know what's best for their customers. They're
>> a business, they produce a product that does what we need it to do.  I
>> don't need to second-guess them.
>>
>
> Wow... You must be far younger than I am.

I'll just bet that Joel is unaware of how Microsoft conspired to make
Windows 3.1 very unstable on PCs running DR-DOS and how they _might_
have been responsible for why Netscape ran so poorly from the 4.7x
editions on.

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

On 2022-02-21 12:17, Joel wrote:
> Bill <nonegiven@att.net> wrote:
>
>>> I trust Microsoft. They know what's best for their customers. They're
>>> a business, they produce a product that does what we need it to do. I
>>> don't need to second-guess them.
>>
>> Wow... You must be far younger than I am.
>
>
> I'll be 45 next week.

When's your birthday? Mine's February 24th.

> But I am completely serious. Microsoft has no
> motive to deprive us of anything useful. Their OS is king of the
> desktop hill.

Actually agreed here.

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

On 2022-02-21 13:06, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 12:17:18 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Bill <nonegiven@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> I trust Microsoft. They know what's best for their customers. They're
>>>> a business, they produce a product that does what we need it to do. I
>>>> don't need to second-guess them.
>>>
>>> Wow... You must be far younger than I am.
>>
>>
>> I'll be 45 next week. But I am completely serious.
>
> Microsoft's motive, like those of almost all companies, is to make
> money. They might know what's best for their customers, but they don't
> necessarily use that knowledge to decide what to do.

Agreed. Some of the decisions in 8.x were particularly mind-baffling but
the releases since have generally taken into consideration what users
want. That's not to say they're perfect: Windows 11 has gone bad to
deciding to hide my Start menu a split-second after I've pressed the
button in what will inevitably result in the Start menu no longer
opening like it did before I reset the PC.

>> Microsoft has no
>> motive to deprive us of anything useful.
>
> I they thing making a particular change will sell more copies of
> something they have a motive to do it even if it deprives many of us
> from something we consider useful.

I think the reason Windows machines sell more than Macs at the moment
has nothing to do with the quality of the OS as much as habit, similar
to what prompted people to buy PCs in the 1980s when competitors were
making much superior machines. They're always used PCs and Windows so
they'll probably always use PCs and Windows. MacOS is doing a much
better job for home and creative users but it's not always enough to
convince the general user.

>> Their OS is king of the
>> desktop hill.
>
> Probably, but many Macintosh users might disagree with you.

nospam is already frothing at the mouth.

I like the guy despite our disagreements but it's mostly because I don't
like zealots of any kind.

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

On 2022-02-21 13:31, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 13:14:24 -0500, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

< snip >

>>
>>>> Their OS is king of the
>>>> desktop hill.
>>>
>>> Probably, but many Macintosh users might disagree with you.
>>
>>
>> macOS is weird, to me.
>
> I know next to nothing about it, so I have no opinion, but my guess is
> that if I spent a few weeks on a Macintosh, I'd probably agree with
> you. Something different from what they're used would feel weird to
> most people.

It's different than Windows but not really weird. The way you install
and remove applications in it is very much superior to the way it's done
in Windows and you're not going to have to deal with malware in MacOS as
you would with Windows... or at least not to the same degree. For a home
user, the protections Apple offers while browsing, for backups and the
like are superior to what Microsoft offers by far as well.

>> Windows simply has the best interface, and
>> available software.
>
> Best? Yes, best to you, and also to me. But not everyone would agree
> with us.

It has the largest library of software which, by default, makes it the
best. This is one area where quantity is definitely to the user's
advantage because if one piece of software doesn't please them, there
are hundreds of others which might. Apple has less software and
therefore less choice but I'd say that the software Apple itself makes
and gives away for free is much better than that of Microsoft.

>> I am happy that I came back home to Microsoft,
>> after using Linux for two years on my old computer.
>
> I never used Linux.

You're not exactly missing much though it would have been beneficial for
you to at least learn how it works and get acquainted with the fairly
good open-source software most distributions are bundled with.

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

On 2022-02-21 13:59, Joel wrote:
> rabidR04CH <rabid@ro4.ch> wrote:
>
>>> I'll be 45 next week.
>>
>> When's your birthday? Mine's February 24th.
>
>
> March 1st.

As a fellow Piscean, you're safe from any kind of personal attacks. :)

>>> But I am completely serious. Microsoft has no
>>> motive to deprive us of anything useful. Their OS is king of the
>>> desktop hill.
>>
>> Actually agreed here.
>
> Yeah, I love Linux too, but for a desktop machine, it's gotta be
> Win11.

11 is indeed better than 10 but I'm still hoping my current installation
won't screw up on me with the Start menu garbage like the previous one did.

--
rabidR04CH
MSI GT72 2QD on Linux Mint 20.3
"But Peter and the apostles answered, 'We must obey God rather than
men.'" - Acts 5:29
For fans of message boards, I invite you:
https://retalk.com/invite/rabidR04CH

On 2/21/22 10:16, rabidR04CH wrote:

[snip]

> Three version of Windows 95 as far as I know. You have the original, one
> which added IE and then one which added USB support as far as I recall.

Mine was OSR2, which introduced DOS7.1 / FAT32, with USB support.

[snip]

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Jesus said, 'Love your neighbors.' Well, I do love them. I love to kill
them." ["Nasty Nick," Croatian Policeman]

Ken Blake wrote:
>
>
> Maybe. That remains to be seen. None of us knows for sure what
> Microsoft may do in the future.

This thread was started based on the foundation of a required MSA for
Windows 11 and making money on the that requirement.

For the most part - imo, it's the transition to CTR(Click to Run)
Windows, like Office.
- If one follows the historical pattern - Office 2013 and later
required an MSA - the primary purpose for retail(non-Enterprise use, but
Consumer and SMB) installation and activation.

Once Microsoft 365(fka Office 365) appeared and Office installs were
handled via CTR(except for Enterprise volume licensing where MSI remains
available), the use of the MSA login in Office(assigned to the MSA that
purchased the product) became the method for ongoing validation and the
availability of all included features(M365 with gradual new or changed
features or Stand-Alone stagnant feature versions).

The logical step, as I've said before isn't about monetizing Windows 11
via MSA logon - Windows is already monetized.

There have been a few comments about business rejecting or fearing the
Win11 MSA logon requirement, monopolistic practices, blah blah..
- That's also somewhat not accurate, misunderstood or based on
ignorance(lacking knowledge of Enterprise Admin options).

The Win11 MSA logon impacts the Consumer and SMB industry(most everyone
conmmenting in this group consumer or a few supporting SMB's), not the
Enterprise side.
Why?
In an admin based organization any reasonably capable IT org or
outsourced IT should know how to use an unattend.xml/autounattend.xml
file with their favorite or chosen Windows deployment tool.
- if not, then the wrong IT personnel or outsourced IT should be
replaced or contractually required to do so.

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ

"knuttle" <keith_nuttle@sbcglobal.net> wrote

| If MS decides to take more control over its OS by forcing MS logon and
| possibly going to a subscription service as it does for part of it
| Office suite, MS will lose greater market share to other OS;s
| | Many computer are being sold to school kids (K-16), and people who are
| buy a computer more for the recreational aspects that the business
| aspect. The are not going to pay $1k for a computer knowing they are
| going to continue to pay for the operating system on that computer.

You might be right. Chromebooks work if people
don't mind spying. I set up a Raspberry Pi 4 for
someone that's tha RPi, monitor, and bluetooth
keyboard/mouse. A whole Linux computer for $200.
It's very much adequate for basic needs.

On 2022-02-21, Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I love Linux too, but for a desktop machine, it's gotta be
> Win11.

Not for me. Linux on the desktop here for over 20 years. Windows 11
from what I can see is a nightmare. I have no desire to go where
Microsoft would lead me.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 Reasons I won't be vaccinated -- https://tinyurl.com/ebty2dx3
Covid vaccines: experimental biology -- https://tinyurl.com/57mncfm5
The fraud of "Climate Change" -- https://RealClimateScience.com
There is no "climate crisis" -- https://climatedepot.com
Don't talk to cops! -- https://DontTalkToCops.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote

| Sure, but the numbers don't lie - Microsoft is dominant because it's
| the most universal OS.
|

Windows is now about 3/4 of desktops. It used to
be over 90%. They don't have a phone, so they're
only about 10% of device shipments and 30% of
online clients.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems

Where they own the market is in corporate computing.
They've lost a lot with desktops, laptops, phones. Why?
Because their phones were crap and a lot of people moved
to Mac for convenience. I would never use a Mac myself,
but for people who just want to email, shop, and look hip
at Starbucks, Mac is it.

I don't expect MS are worried. Corporate have always been
their customer. SOHo is just icing on the cake. And now it's
an unpaid army of beta testing suckers. They're doing very well
with Azure. But they will lose share. The Windows niche is people
who really use a computer but don't want to tackle Linux, or
can't use the limited Linux software selection. The more
Windows becomes locked down, the less reason there will be
not to switch to Mac. With Mac "it just works".