Jay,

You probably never worked in the IBM mainframe world.  One of IBM's strongest 
points was that new versions of the operating systems (there were several 
different ones) did not break existing programs.  Also,  you are given ample 
warning (yesrs) when backward compatible features would be discontinued.   
After all if a business pays multiple millions of dollars for a software 
package or spent millions of dollars for in house development it is not good 
business to break those programs by an operating system upgrade.

Contrast that to Micorsoft which breaks a significant number of programs with 
each upgrade.

 Jim Bentley
American Celiac Society
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel: 1-504-737-3293



----- Original Message ----
From: Alastair Burr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: RBASE-L Mailing List <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2008 2:43:12 AM
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Somewhat off list topic -- Vista

 
Jay,
 
I have Vista Home Basic and yesterday (at long last) the auto 
update gave me SP1.
 
If may be early days but SP1 seems fine to me - as has Vista 
from when I bought my new PC almost 18 months ago.
 
IMHO it seems to me that the problems that users have had is 
with upgrading old hardware running XP to Vista. I reckon that upgrading PCs - 
right back from the start of Windows - has been problematical. Back in the late 
'90s at work we began only upgrading the OS when a new PC was purchased and 
it solved lots of problems.
 
Clearly, there are going to be problems with people seeing the 
cost of hardware (even though it's cheaper now) as too much to warrant 
upgrading 
the OS. Indeed, that's why I hung on with W98SE for so long. I wished then that 
I could have afforded to buy new hardware earlier and, with hindsight now, even 
more so. Nevertheless, if you can't afford it...
 
As for compatibility with older programs there are, as I see 
it, two types of problem. Firstly there the things that are never going to be 
upgraded - old multi-media CDs, DOS-based games, that sort of thing - which 
cost 
money at the time and cannot (always) be used on newer equipment. Then 
there is the replacement of programs that can, fairly easily, be upgrade to a 
current version. Cost may well be a factor but, while the supplier is still 
active, you are likely to get a better product. (Definitely so with 
RBTI.)
 
For me, I suspect that some sort of switch in the OS could be 
used to remove support for whatever compatibility with old hardware & 
software could be incorporated. I suppose that happens to some extent anyway 
but 
not at the kernel level?
 
That said, I still regularly use a DOS box for file movements 
as it's so much easier with a BAT file. With MikeB's help I'm moving forward 
but 
it's slow and time's at a premium. If there were some easy way in Windows to 
program the old DOS type of operations then that would be very useful. There's 
not the time to learn all the programming and it keeps changing anyway. I knew 
a 
bit of BASIC, I could write macros in DOS versions of Word but Visual Basic and 
beyond is too much to have to learn _properly_ and I just dabble. R:Base is 
different because it's changed relatively slowly as far as the commands' syntax 
is concerned - bit by bit is easy to keep up with and I like doing 
it.
 
Regards,
Alastair.
 
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Jay Ward 
To: RBASE-L Mailing List 
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 3:55  AM
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Somewhat off list  topic -- Vista

The last few items on the  list have been about DOS and Vista compatibility so 
I have a few questions for  the group.
 
1.    We  accept the fact that 7.5 has gone away since a majority of us are 
using  7.5.  Why can’t we accept the fact that Microsoft should not go back for 
 generations and create as much compatibility as 
possible?
2.   Mac is a  great system but compatibility isn’t always there.  Why should 
Microsoft  create compatibility?
 
I ask these questions for  several reasons.  On Dec. 17 the formal beta for Win 
7 is now due and it  seems to be a good date.  When the beta for Vista came out 
it ran fast,  booted in under 15 seconds (64-bit version) and basically had no  
drivers.  Over 2MM lines of code later we have Vista SP1 and we all  complain 
about it.  What would happen if Microsoft released Win 7 as  incompatible but 
fast and solid, which I think Vista is?  Would we accept  it.  We are all 
caught in looking backward and not keeping up at  times.  MAC has somewhere in 
the neighborhood of 1000 drivers.   Vista is now up beyond 30,000 drivers to 
stay compatible.  Do you think  it is time to redo the system and make it 
small, fast and stable  regardless?
 
I only ask these  questions since I will have Win 7 on the 18th of December if 
the  date holds as I think it will and I do have some input into their  
planning.  What say you?
________________________________
 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 
Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.5/1702 -  Release Date: 01/10/2008 
09:05



      

Reply via email to