Re: Microsoft makes a lot of money, Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as an architecture designer?

David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

On 20/09/2024 01:47, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 19:01:34 +0000, MitchAlsup1 wrote:
 

In particular, MS has not added anything I want in Office since 2003 and
in the OS in particular since 2005. Windows 7 is still better than
windows 10 or 11 or 12...

 
Would you entrust mission-criticial business operations to obsolete,
unsupported software?
 

 
His suggestion was to /continue/ the support and updates for existing
systems, rather than making new ones.
 
But would /I/ trust mission-critical business operations to Windows 7
over Windows 11 ?  Well, I wouldn't trust it to anything Windows, but I
certainly trust Windows 7 more than Windows 10 or 11.  The more useless
crap added to the system, the more scope it has for failures or security
issues.  (The only Windows systems I currently have are Windows 7.)

The one hidden gotcha with Windows 7 is that you need to run “Disk Cleanup”
yearly to remove the slowdown codes, else your computer will turn into a
snail, slow to respond to even keystrokes and mouse movements.

Hit the clean system files button and select ALL options.

Prepare to be surprised at how fast Windows 7 becomes after cleaning.

This applies to all versions of Windows, Microsoft and its vendors want you
to upgrade every five years.

I am not sure I can think of anything I want to do on Windows, and which
I can do with Windows 11 that I could not do with Windows 2000 -
excluding running programs that refuse to run on earlier systems without
good reason, or hardware that does not have drivers for older systems.
(In Mitch's dream world where MS continued to support old systems, those
would not be issues.)  There are a few things that newer Windows does
better than older ones - it makes better use of more ram and more cores,
for example.
 

Open-source software is more responsive to community needs.

 
Absolutely.  It is not perfect either, but it is a lot better in many ways.
 

 

MS would make more money by allowing old OSs to keep running and sent
the employees home...

 
They’re going to charge businesses who want to stick with Windows 10 a
steadily increasing support fee. Charging lots of money to those who want
to stick with old versions of your proprietary software sounds like a
business model with a much more promising future, don’t you think?

 
MS can't make a business from supporting old software.  While there is a
proportion of more technical people who are happy with "if it ain't
broke, don't fix it", a much larger proportion of potential purchasers
are in the "the latest is greatest" camp.