One touch of nature makes the whole world kin:

[flemmings]

That all with one consent praise new-born gauds.

(That's the bit from Ulysses' speech no one bothers to quote.)

That article on why Japanese webpages look the way they do had the techogeeky sneer 'they're so behind the times they still use XP!' Mh yeah. So do I. When I got this computer almost five years ago Vista had just come out. No one in their right mind used Vista. When Windows 7 came to correct the situation, my XP still functioned just fine. Why would I replace it? especially for a new-fangled 'let's change stuff that works just because we can!' system. I know where the start button is; I know what it does; why hide it and expect me to figure out again how everything works?

And of course no one in their right mind would buy Windows 8 for a desktop.

But Windows will stop supporting XP next year. I suppose there are things I could do to maintain the security on this thing. But I'm not letting it go, because I'm damned sure the version of Word I prefer (2000, I believe) will not run on anything later than XP. And no, I can't use Open Office: it mucks up Word 2000's spacing something awful.

So I suppose I'll have to buy a Win7 system for internet browsing, which is already becoming bumpy. (Then again, that might be my outdated Firefox.) But still, I resent it very much. Build it once and build it right, Mr Gates, she says bitterly.

Comments

[nekonexus.livejournal.com]

Ah, but there's no money in build it once rightly. Capitalism shudders at the thought.

Keep a good firewall and antivirus up to date and you should be able to trundle along. Windows 7 is becoming hard to find on new machines anyway, but it is still preferable to 8. (Though 8.1 is a major improvement... or at least seriously unfucks some parts, like returning the start button/bar.)

Or just unplug it from the internet, if you want it as a writing machine anyway. :)

[flemmings.livejournal.com]

I must buy my new system soon, I see. Though in fact I've always bought second-hand, so...

Maybe I should bite the bullet and get some kind of Apple device. I do want something portable that isn't a flipping telephone.

[nekonexus.livejournal.com]

Unsolicited advice ahoy:

The thing about Apple is that you'd be buying planned obsolescence even worse than Microsofts. Their devices are designed to last longer, yes, but the expectation is that you will buy a new one next year anyway. And within 3 years at most, you won't be *able* to upgrade your old device to even use the latest OS, should you want to.

Personally, I'd go with a Chromebook, for portable+internet. But that's selling your data to Google whole-heartedly, as they expect everything to live in the cloud. (So does Apple, for that matter, but incompatible clouds.)

You will find legions of the cult of Jobs who will tell you they are SO HAPPY with their Macs or iThings... which Windows users will never do, granted, but I am leery of their sales model at this point.

[flemmings.livejournal.com]

Worse than I thought. And I don't like the sound of "applications that reside on the Web, rather than traditional applications that reside on the machine itself." What if the web isn't available? Does that mean I can't, say, word process at all?

[nekonexus.livejournal.com]

Depends on the program... Google Drive (formerly Docs), for example, has an offline mode that allows you to create or edit and then synch/upload when you reconnect.

Others, like the new Adobe model, I believe, expect you to be connected to use it.

There is a growing expectation that devices will be "always on" because "everyone" has internet access. (Thus sayeth the rich white dudes who are CEOs and the like.)