Computer Help

[Chris Parks]

I know of one corporation still using XP as they know it works and see no reason to change. They are big enough that Microsoft can't ignore them and just go along with the situation.

[paul cottingham]

Hell, there were banks in Canada when I still owned my business still using 2000 cause they are too cheap to upgrade. I bet many still do.

[Brian Elfert]

Hell, there were banks in Canada when I still owned my business still using 2000 cause they are too cheap to upgrade. I bet many still do.

I find it hard to believe that banks would still be using Windows 2000 with the lack of security patches. Companies may still be able to pay for patches to Windows 2000, but my understanding is the cost for just one company can be on the order of a million or millions of dollars per year.

[paul cottingham]

This was quite a while ago, but the machines were so nailed down with policies (i dont think they could even go on the internet...just the banks internal intranet) even the floppies and cdroms were disabled. Security patches were not as important in that environment as they are in the wild. To service even the simplest thing on them was a massive hassle for us. You are correct, tho, i doubt they are still running 2000, but it is not beyond the realm of possibilty.

[Curt Harms]

There are a couple of things that keep me from recommending Linux vs. OS X or Windows to a general user. One is a concern that although the person's current workflow would fit within Ubuntu's capabilities easily, the first time they want to purchase a commercial application, it's likely they will want to move to the OS that the application supports. Even if you can find something comparable for Linux, they aren't happy. I attempted to move my daughter's school from Windows to Linux, pointing out that there were open source choices for the applications they used. There was no interest even though the savings were pretty big. Their concerns varied, but one was that a teacher would want to use an application for which there were no Linux options. Another is that despite proclamations to the contrary, there is still some work to do to make the desktop experience for the general user seamless. As I was setting Ubuntu up on a netbook to replace XP for my granddaughter, I ran into inconsistent display setting issues because it was just a little outside of the defaults that Ubuntu accepted. Now I could fix that, but it wasn't something that a general user would put up with. When I wanted to install Flash in Firefox, the process to install it was difficult because Adobe doesn't support Linux. Chrome comes with Flash, so I was able to use that. But it's these inconsistencies that gives me pause to recommend Linux to people who are just looking to get work done on their computer.

I don't know about all distros but Linux Mint and SolydXK play flash videos with the entire O.S. running off a DVD or flash drive as well as installed on a hard drive. Ubuntu doesn't include flash due to some licensing concerns but installing restricted-add-ons and restricted-extras installs media players and flash. It's a 3 click process from a repository. I've not had to fight with anything. Adobe is not making available current flash releases, the version is stuck on 11.2.something. Flash security updates are provided 'til 2017. By then flash will be irrelevant or somebody will make pepper flash (what Google/Chrome are using) available more widely.

I think though that the key to wider acceptance would be to be able to buy a machine, take it home, plug it in and there ya go. And be able to convince prospective purchasers you'll answer phone calls and be in business in 5 years. 4 onscreen buttons - power, web, email, write a letter. Use a raspberry PI for hardware(?) and sell it for $99. I've seen PC-type machines like this advertised in senior oriented magazines. I wonder if they sell?

[Jackson Phillips]

I know of at least 3 national retail chains that still have computers running Windows 95 on their point of sale computers. All of their employees are trained to use them and their inventory management software only runs on 3.1 and 95. No internet. Their reasoning is that until it's more expensive to fix their old computers than it is to buy a new fleet, all the software needed, and transition to it including training, they aren't going to change. They just buy new monitors every few years so customers don't feel like they're time traveling when they go to checkout.

[Garth Almgren]

I'm still using Win7 at work and at home, and it is what I'm most comfortable with right now. I've used Win8.1 on both my wife's laptop (touchscreen) and at school (non-touchscreen), and I will say that it is better than the first release when it comes to keyboard and mouse support, but it still gives an advantage to those with touchscreens, and it just feels weird to me. As others have said, it is still possible to find PCs that come with Win7, and it isn't that hard to upgrade later if you so choose. Just make sure you back up your important documents/pics/music/whatever before you start an upgrade, either to an external hard drive or to a cloud service such as Carbonite, Box, or DropBox.

I've been using Gmail for my personal email for several years, and I like it, but before that I had used Thunderbird since before it was even called Thunderbird. I greatly preferred Thunderbird to Outlook, which itself is miles better than Outlook Express.

[Myk Rian]

uh, linux does run on cellphones, Android uses the Linux kernel. And you sound an awful lot like a Linux basher to me.

Count me in the same group.
I am computer literate, and have tried Linux, 4 times. Screw it. Too much trouble.
I get enough Linux in my life with my Android phone.
Oh. Linux IS prone to virus, malware, hacking, etc. Just like Win and Macs.

[paul cottingham]

Count me in the same group.
I am computer literate, and have tried Linux, 4 times. Screw it. Too much trouble.
I get enough Linux in my life with my Android phone.
Oh. Linux IS prone to virus, malware, hacking, etc. Just like Win and Macs.

Yeah. Not touching that (for the hundredth time.) Cause its simply untrue.