Pete Dashwood wrote:
> "HeyBub" <heybub@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:13ss610qeihllca@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Pete Dashwood wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> As noted above, if you decide to leverage some of your "old"
>>> equipment and hit problems, I'm really happy to help. This has been
>>> a really fun project... :-)
>>>
>>
>> Cool. If you want a hobby. With lickty-split computers, pre-laden
>> with Vista, available for under $300, it's not economical to put a
>> 386 machine on life-sup****t.
>
> Actually, I never suggested using a 386 machine, although I would if
> it made sense. Pentium 3 (petesp3 is actually an AMD equivalent) on
> the other hand is quite a serious processor. How can spending $300 be
> more "economical" than spending nothing :-)?
The same way that driving across two county lines to save twenty-five
cents
on a bunch of bananas is. But see below.
>
> You would have to pay ME $300 to take a machine with Vista on it,
> "lickety-split" or otherwise... (Did you see the recently released
> email exchanges between senior MS executives, regarding Vista? Glad
> to know that the user community was not the only sector affected by
> this farce. I like MS and I use their products regularly, with a high
> degree of satisfaction, but Vista is just a joke... Hopefully,
> Windows 7 will rectify the damage. If it doesn't, I'll be going
> Linux.)
Consider the book: "Systems of Survival." The author makes the point that
an
appropriate commercial mindset is "Dissent for the sake of the task," in
which disaffection and controversy make for a better product.
Contrary-wise,
the guardian syndrome is "Assent for the sake of the task."
Linux has (according to the last statistics I've seen) 0.86% of the
desktop
market. But, given your proclivity for breathing life into expired
non-living things, you might be quite comfortable with a knock-off of a
40-year old operating system designed by a money-losing division of the
telephone company and enhanced by troglodytes who earnestly believed the
DOS-command line was not archaic enough.
If you're not using Vista, then you're suckin' hind tit.
And I'm not just saying that because I'm a Micros~1 stockholder.
>
> Hmmm... that's a point I hadn't considered. As my earnings have been
> close to negligible in the last tax year, it isn't a problem, but
> definitely worth considering once I start generating revenue again.
Your earnings are negligible because you spend your productive hours
refurbi****ng antiquated computers, electric typewriters, and manual
butter-churns. If I had that much spare time, I'd stand on the side of the
road with a sign: "Will work for ***."
It's much more efficient just to pay for three minutes.
>
> I'm not suggesting people shouldn't buy new equipment. More that, as
> computer professionals, we should be able to leverage more use out of
> the equipment we have.
You may have a point. I once saw an article that advocated making
developers
use the crappiest machines that could still light up so the developers
would
have an appreciation for the user's experience.
|
