General discussion


Why are vendors demanding WinXP?

By jdclyde ·
What could possibly be worse than buying a product and missing the fine print about requirements? That it isn't a speed requirement, but an OS requirement.

Bought my boys each an MP3 player. Chose not to go with an Ipod.

We get up Christmas morning, and they see they each have a 512M MP3 player and are geeked!

The problems start when we try to fire this pig up. Great, they system requirements are incompatable with my boys PC. Too slow? Not enough memory? Not enough free disk space? WRONG. It HAS to have WinXPsp1 or higher. What crap is this? And what in the world would have ever made me think for a second that this piece of crap would not run as a simple USB flash drive?

Will I EVER again purchace anything from ? You can bet your LIFE I will not, and I will strongly recommend against it to anyone I see.

Got the T30 model.

What are you thinking iRiver? Locking yourself to an operating system?

Now I get to look for a hack to get this friggen pig to work on win2k or setup a XP partition just so we can do mp3's.

I wonder if linux would work with this? Have been meaning to setup a linux desktop at home after the holidays, and if it will work for these devices then that would be all the kick in the a$$ I need!

Well, off to research what it will take to get these going. Anyone got any ideas?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

115 total posts (Page 3 of 12)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

people that use computers as TOOLS

by jdclyde In reply to What?

instead of toys have no need to get a new system and new OS every few years.

If I have systems running Win2kpro that do everything I need them to do, why would I put more money into them for just to get to a newer, more bloated version? (In the business world, we call that "stupid")

There was always a marketing myth about computers, and that "by the time you get it home, it is obsolete". Of course only someone that makes a living off of SELLING computers or a complete moron would believe this.

How big and bad of a computer do I NEED to have to do email, excel, word processing, browse the web and listen to some MP3's? Not much. I have a P4, an AMD1900 and a PIII800 at home, but the one I still use for all of my business functions at home is my PII400 because it still does EVERYTHING I need it to do.

When you grow up and enter the real world (and pay for your own resources) you will see that there are still lots of people running win98/winNT/winME/Win2k and they will continue to use it until they don't do the job required of them.

"Be ghetto"? Try "Be Real".

Collapse -

Or people that don't want to waste time

by coyoteNM In reply to people that use computers ...

...Trying to find drivers for old OS's with new computers come with XP. I update old computers to XP if possible. If not possible, then the computer is too old to be worth fighting with. I don't have time to screw with finding drivers and fighting with old OS's that can't handle new equipment and programs. I have too much work to do. In business, that's called s-m-a-r-t.

Collapse -

if you have the money to throw at a "problem"

by jdclyde In reply to Or people that don't want ...

Unless your a thief waiting for the software police to come knocking on your door, it is expensive to just start throwing a copy of XP on every old system, even before you look at having to add memory to handle the new OS.

(Anyone remember when Win95 was as small as a 20 meg footprint?)

Old drivers for new equipment? Why do you need some special driver for a FLASH DRIVE? They have been making them for YEARS, and just now are STOPPING adding the driver for 98/me/2k? This can ONLY be because they are getting a kickback from MS to stop including the support to get people to upgrade to a new OS that gives them NO benifits for their current business needs.

When do I upgrade users to XP? When their computer dies and costs more to fix than it is worth, they get a new system with XPpro. Anything else woule be stupid and wasteful.

Remember, if you spend all the money, it is the same as if it was never earned and you are out of business.

Nothing "s-m-a-r-t" about wasting money, even if it isn't your own.

Collapse -

yes and no

by coyoteNM In reply to if you have the money to ...

Well, I'm thinking strictly business, and also the places where I volunteer work. Now that the really old computers have mostly passed on and I don't have to fight with trying to get modems, printers, etc to work with old 450's running Win98, life is SO much easier! Networking is easier...everything :-)

And if a business has many computers, paying an IT person to keep old relics running is considerably more expensive than upgrading.

But also both places get the licenses on a great discount because of being education or non-profit. I buy extra licenses for people who do the organization's work at home, and to cover donated computers.

So when I see an older OS having serious problems, I try to upgrade it to XP, not re-install the original. It saves alot of grief.

I agree, it is strange and annoying to have an mp3 player dependent on your computer's OS, whatever OS that may be.

Collapse -

upgrade vs maintain argument

by jdclyde In reply to yes and no

I have heard both sides of this.

The logical thing is to see how much time is spent on old systems just because they are old and add in replacement parts and get a cost.

The other side that I have heard and is more common in smaller organizations is that you as a tech are getting paid anyways, so it doesn't MATTER if your spending time on this or waiting for something to go wrong.

If less things are going down, they don't NEED as many support people, thus you get IT layoffs. (this is in who's benifit? Sure not the techs.)

When you get new systems, have to reload all the apps and settings and then take it out into the field and replace the old system (after transfering all the data) where is the time savings?

Run a computer until it doesn't run or it doesn't do the job it was intended for, and THEN replace it is our chosen route to follow, and I agree with it. Then we get a new PC based on the needs, not the ego.

How much time are you spending with XP now? Everytime there is a new service pack to fix the new secure OS by MS, requires time.

How many times do you have to reload an XP system because of the user picking up a trojan/malware/virus?

How much time is wasted fighting with all the new MS registration and copy protection involved with XP?

Volunteer work, yes you want to minimize your hands on time. Been there, done that.

Collapse -

Always depends...

by coyoteNM In reply to people that use computers ...

Every office and situation is different...we do what is most practical to do given our circumstances.

It's true you don't want to efficient yourself out of a job. But in some cases, being freed from the mundane repetitious jobs lets you work on more advanced and interesting projects, and gives you a chance to forge ahead in your field.

I have the computers do automatic updates, keep the virus and spyware guards up-to-date, automate the maintenance as far as possible. Plus because of the work we do, our equipment budget is pretty generous. The machines get replaced before they start breaking down or getting obsolete.

So maybe I'm not looking at it from a typical situation. But I have to say being able to keep things up-to-date and automated is a big advantage in our office, and has made me look good, since I did the automation. Lots better than when I spent much of my time running around trying to keep cranky machines and software running, and applying patches manually. In fact, the virus problem was a big part of why I began to automate everything. I couldn't keep up, otherwise.

Collapse -

leasing computers?

by jdclyde In reply to Always depends...

if not, you should be.

Any place that turns over computers that quickly, why would you buy them?

That is just a fantasy world that many of us just won't see.

And yes, since I went around and applied all the updated software and moved everyone onto FireFox, my running around putting out fires has gone from 80% of what I was doing to about 10% over the last year.

Kissing IE goodby was the single biggest time freer I have done in years.

Collapse -

University arrangements

by coyoteNM In reply to leasing computers?

Leasing is a good way to go, although it has its own headaches. The civil engineering offices where I used to work often leased, since they also had to keep up with the CAD and modeling programs. The university where I work now has good purchase contracts set up with the major vendors. We end up buying new because of that, then passing the replaced ones on in the university system. Also, it's a small group. We're only talking about 30 computers. We keep computers for 2 or 3 years, then get new ones, upgrading 1/2 of them at a time. It works well for us. But if your company can work well with the older stuff, then of course, why upgrade...

Collapse -

If is old not necessary bad

by 3xp3rt In reply to people that use computers ...

You?re right. I know company (little one) where all the IT works are done by a PI computer with Windows 95 and all the applications are mudded in Clipper for DOS.
So all the applications work in DOS mode, there are fast and stable and can do anything what this company need.

Collapse -

The TRUE definition of "obsolete"

by jdclyde In reply to If is old not necessary b ...

when it doesn't do what you need it to do.

Must be hard to find someone to support this setup though.

I got the last of our 486's off the network 4 years ago, and the last P1 is just about ready to be phased out. (finally)

Problem with old hardware. Replacement parts.

Back to Desktop Forum
115 total posts (Page 3 of 12)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums