| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 27 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 38:00:22 |
| Calls: | 631 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 1,187 |
| D/L today: |
22 files (29,767K bytes) |
| Messages: | 173,681 |
Most long time users of M$ products already know all of this, but IIt seems appropriate to me, after reading that article, that former M$
thought the article was a nice summary of why the company is so evil and hated:
https://www.marketingscoop.com/consumer/why-is-microsoft-so-bad/
Most long time users of M$ products already know all of this, but I
thought the article was a nice summary of why the company is so evil and hated:
https://www.marketingscoop.com/consumer/why-is-microsoft-so-bad/
On 2025/10/14 12:18:50, John C. wrote:
Most long time users of M$ products already know all of this, but IMethinks it protests too much. I actually agree with almost all it says,
thought the article was a nice summary of why the company is so evil and
hated:
https://www.marketingscoop.com/consumer/why-is-microsoft-so-bad/
but someone new to the debate might get the impression that it was/is
written by someone needlessly bitter. As I say, virtually all of it is
true (some minor aspects may be challengeable, and no, I don't have the >energy to say which), but the overall _tone_ of the article is so
negative that - except to the already-converted - it might have the
opposite effect to that intended.
On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:19:46 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2025/10/14 12:18:50, John C. wrote:
Most long time users of M$ products already know all of this, but IMethinks it protests too much. I actually agree with almost all it says,
thought the article was a nice summary of why the company is so evil and >>> hated:
https://www.marketingscoop.com/consumer/why-is-microsoft-so-bad/
but someone new to the debate might get the impression that it was/is
written by someone needlessly bitter. As I say, virtually all of it is
true (some minor aspects may be challengeable, and no, I don't have the
energy to say which), but the overall _tone_ of the article is so
negative that - except to the already-converted - it might have the
opposite effect to that intended.
Proof that there's life after death:
Fo weeks now I've been reading "sponsored" posts on sites like
Facebook warning me of the approaching "end of life" for Windows 10 on
14 October 2025.
This morning I started up my Windows 10 laptop and, mirabile dictu, it worked.
People keep urging me to switch to Linux or Windows 11. If either of
those would allow me to run the programs I use every day, I would
seriously consider it, if I could afford it.
For me, an operating system is not the be-all and end-all of
computing. The O/S is only as useful as the apps it runs, and if it
doesn't run my apps, it's useless to me.
If Linux or Windows 11 could run my apps, or other apps that were just
as good and could import my existing data without retyping, they might
be worth considering. But they don't think of that. All they can think
of is mendacious slogans like "end of life".
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you have
to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee
as well. Thats doubly evil.
Snip <
Fo weeks now I've been reading "sponsored" posts on sites like
Facebook warning me of the approaching "end of life" for Windows 10 on
14 October 2025.
This morning I started up my Windows 10 laptop and, mirabile dictu, it worked.
People keep urging me to switch to Linux or Windows 11. If either of
those would allow me to run the programs I use every day, I would
seriously consider it, if I could afford it.
For me, an operating system is not the be-all and end-all of
computing. The O/S is only as useful as the apps it runs, and if it
doesn't run my apps, it's useless to me.
If Linux or Windows 11 could run my apps, or other apps that were just
as good and could import my existing data without retyping, they might
be worth considering. But they don't think of that. All they can think
of is mendacious slogans like "end of life".
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you have
to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee
as well. Thats doubly evil.
On 15/10/2025 07:04, Steve Hayes wrote:[]
For me, an operating system is not the be-all and end-all of
computing. The O/S is only as useful as the apps it runs, and if it
doesn't run my apps, it's useless to me.
If Linux or Windows 11 could run my apps, or other apps that were just>> as good and could import my existing data without retyping, they might>> be worth considering. But they don't think of that. All they can think>> of is mendacious slogans like "end of life".
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you have>> to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee>> as well. Thats doubly evil.
Which Windows 11 built in apps require an additional monthly payment?
On Wed, 10/15/2025 2:04 AM, Steve Hayes wrote:[]
(And even popups on the machine itself, replacing the wallpaper.)Fo weeks now I've been reading "sponsored" posts on sites like
Facebook warning me of the approaching "end of life" for Windows 10 on>> 14 October 2025.
As would machines running 8.1, 8, 7, XP, 2000, Me, 98, 95, and even 3.x.
This morning I started up my Windows 10 laptop and, mirabile dictu, it>> worked.
That's what a lot of people don't get: some, like my brother, have a
People keep urging me to switch to Linux or Windows 11. If either of
those would allow me to run the programs I use every day, I would
seriously consider it, if I could afford it.
For me, an operating system is not the be-all and end-all of
computing. The O/S is only as useful as the apps it runs, and if it
doesn't run my apps, it's useless to me.
I agree with -umendacious-u. (That was initially a hitting of the wrong
If Linux or Windows 11 could run my apps, or other apps that were just>> as good and could import my existing data without retyping, they might>> be worth considering. But they don't think of that. All they can think>> of is mendacious slogans like "end of life".
the vast majority of them, there is the assumption you have (and thus
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you haveA similar "apparent deliberate forgetting" applies to mobile app.s; for
Yup. The move to rentware is spreading.to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee>> as well. Thats doubly evil.
Have you tested a good WINE or CodeWeavers version of WINE ?I've just left those paragraphs untouched, as they illustrate
Quite a few things run under WINE.
The initial configuration in the distro is terrible.
Just looking in winetricks, is going to make you gag.
But a setup done by someone who knows what they are doing,
a lot more things are going to work. Like, one of the things
you might need, is "multilib". The OSes now are 64-bit, but,
they still have 32-bit capabilities even if they do not
readily admit to it or promote it. On WINE, there is wine64
and wine32, and wine32 won't work, unless "multilib" is enabled.
There are also traps. Like confusing "Mono" library as a solution
versus installing actual .NET library instead. I ruined one setup,
by getting on some "mono" kick, which was not what I was supposed
to have installed. There is a whole bunch of stuff that needs to be
installed as packages, to make a fluid environment with fewer "blown errors".
That's why an approach like this might be needed.
https://embeddedinventor.com/best-linux-distros-with-wine-preinstalled-an-analysis/
When they say "preinstalled", do they really mean it ? It is one
thing for 50 items to be listed in a package manager, it's
quite another to install them in some order and configure the
settings of them properly (if needed). That's why, to me, a
"preinstalled" environment is one where "they're in Package Manager"
and "they have been loaded immediately into the OS tree for your usage".
You do not want to be reading a thousand "out-of-date recipes"
to get to the same state that a GamePack might.
I have some experience with WINE, but it is mostlyYet more example of why Windows users feel reluctant to try Linux/Wine!
stumbling and falling on my face. It took me quite a
while to figure out I was missing "Multilib" in the
Synaptic settings or something, to account for why
wine32 invocations did not work as expected. If you
had a 32 bit OS (few exist), then wine32 would work
immediately, because the entire tree is 32 bit.
For example, Debian might still have 32-bit, but
Ubuntu and LM222 would be 64-bit trees (with a
multilib setting you would need to enable, not
a big deal if you know it is needed to make
something work). If you could track down a Debian
ISO with 32-bit on it, then your "falling on your face"
experience will be a tiny bit different.
If we check here, it looks like "i386" goes missing after 2022-09
https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=debian
Zorin loses i386 after 2015-08-01
https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=zorin
So if we go off-track, Devuan has i586 up to the current day,"Oh, just switch to Linux, it'll be easy."
but I couldn't get Devuan to install (because I wasn't Kreskin
enough to "guess" what the disk partitioning scheme should
be to make the install finish). They don't have the people
needed to make a high quality (patched) tree like Canonical
does for Ubuntu.
https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=devuan
Paul
Proof that there's life after death:
Fo weeks now I've been reading "sponsored" posts on sites like
Facebook warning me of the approaching "end of life" for Windows 10 on
14 October 2025.
This morning I started up my Windows 10 laptop and, mirabile dictu, it worked.
People keep urging me to switch to Linux or Windows 11. If either of
those would allow me to run the programs I use every day, I would
seriously consider it, if I could afford it.
For me, an operating system is not the be-all and end-all of
computing. The O/S is only as useful as the apps it runs, and if it
doesn't run my apps, it's useless to me.
If Linux or Windows 11 could run my apps, or other apps that were just
as good and could import my existing data without retyping, they might
be worth considering. But they don't think of that. All they can think
of is mendacious slogans like "end of life".
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you have
to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee
as well. Thats doubly evil.
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:_Maybe_ Steve is guilty of making that assumption (unless he actually
[...]
Proof that there's life after death:
Fo weeks now I've been reading "sponsored" posts on sites like
Facebook warning me of the approaching "end of life" for Windows 10 on>> 14 October 2025.
This morning I started up my Windows 10 laptop and, mirabile dictu, it>> worked.
People keep urging me to switch to Linux or Windows 11. If either of
those would allow me to run the programs I use every day, I would
seriously consider it, if I could afford it.
Why wouldn't Windows 11 "run the programs I use every day"? It does
for me, all the way from XP, via Vista, 8.1 and 10 to 11. Some of my
programs are 22+ years old and still run fine (look at the 'User-Agent:' header of this very post, it says "20030910").[FWIW, I know some software _I_ have spent I think some decades using - Turnpike - won't work under 11.]
Or do you mean you don't want to bear the cost of buying a newIf he does mean that (though I don't think he does), what is your
computer, because your existing one can't run Windows 11?
Again, unless he _knows_ something won't, you're _both_ guilty of making (opposite!) assumptions.For me, an operating system is not the be-all and end-all of
computing. The O/S is only as useful as the apps it runs, and if it
doesn't run my apps, it's useless to me.
Very true. That's why many people can't/don't switch OSs.
If Linux or Windows 11 could run my apps, or other apps that were just>> as good and could import my existing data without retyping, they might>> be worth considering. But they don't think of that. All they can think>> of is mendacious slogans like "end of life".
Again, why do you include Windows 11 in this paragraph? Yes, Linux obviously won't run your apps. But Windows 11? Why wouldn't it run them?
Not in so many words. But they come damn close. Anyone who doesn'tThey tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
Well, 'they' don't say it will stop working, because it doesn't.
'They' *did* spread the usual FUD about the system becoming lessGee, thanks. :-)
secure / insecure. But now you can enroll in Extended Security Updates
(ESU) for a year, so the less secure / insecure argument is moot for
now.
And yet again, the replacement, Windows 11, *does* work.Yes, for most people.
No more risky than staying with 10. (Or 7.)And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you have>> to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee>> as well. Thats doubly evil.
You can use Windows 10/11, or any Windows version for that matter,
without an Internet connection. But *you* probably want to use the
Internet and when you do, you expose yourself to risks if you don't
update your OS. So *you* want the Internet and because of that, you need
to get updates over the Internet, which indeed has a cost. That has beenIt's related.
the case for several decades and has nothing to do with Microsoft, hence
also not with the 'Subject:' of the OP.
FWIW, I don't pay any montly fees for my "apps", so you shouldHe meant, I think, that some of the _replacements_ would, whereas what
probably say *which* 'apps' you use, which incur a monthly fee.
On 2025/10/15 18:40:15, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
Why wouldn't Windows 11 "run the programs I use every day"? It does
for me, all the way from XP, via Vista, 8.1 and 10 to 11. Some of my
_Maybe_ Steve is guilty of making that assumption (unless he actually
knows for sure something won't). _Certainly_ _you_ are guilty of making
the opposite assumption :-)
programs are 22+ years old and still run fine (look at the 'User-Agent:' header of this very post, it says "20030910").
[FWIW, I know some software _I_ have spent I think some decades using - Turnpike - won't work under 11.]
Or do you mean you don't want to bear the cost of buying a new
computer, because your existing one can't run Windows 11?
If he does mean that (though I don't think he does), what is your
objection to that reason?
Again, why do you include Windows 11 in this paragraph? Yes, Linux obviously won't run your apps. But Windows 11? Why wouldn't it run them?
Again, unless he _knows_ something won't, you're _both_ guilty of making (opposite!) assumptions.
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
Well, 'they' don't say it will stop working, because it doesn't.
Not in so many words. But they come damn close. Anyone who doesn't
listen to what they say _very_ carefully _would_ get that impression.
'They' *did* spread the usual FUD about the system becoming less
secure / insecure. But now you can enroll in Extended Security Updates (ESU) for a year, so the less secure / insecure argument is moot for
now.
Gee, thanks. :-)
FWIW, I don't pay any montly fees for my "apps", so you should
probably say *which* 'apps' you use, which incur a monthly fee.
He meant, I think, that some of the _replacements_ would, whereas what
they replace don't. (Office being the obvious example.)
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:You _know_ your stuff works in 11. You're _assuming_ Steve's stuff will.
On 2025/10/15 18:40:15, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
[Most stuff snipped. Only responding to some points.]
Why wouldn't Windows 11 "run the programs I use every day"? It does>>> for me, all the way from XP, via Vista, 8.1 and 10 to 11. Some of my
_Maybe_ Steve is guilty of making that assumption (unless he actually
knows for sure something won't). _Certainly_ _you_ are guilty of making
the opposite assumption :-)
No, I'm not assuming :-), I'm mentioning that my stuff works and
*asking* why he thinks his stuff won't.
No, I _know_ it won't work: it hooks into the 32-bit Windows shell. 11programs are 22+ years old and still run fine (look at the 'User-Agent:' >>> header of this very post, it says "20030910").
[FWIW, I know some software _I_ have spent I think some decades using -
Turnpike - won't work under 11.]
You're probably right, but you mean you didn't get it to work, not
that it can't work! :-)
True! (Doesn't mean we can't "call out" the FUD though.)They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
Well, 'they' don't say it will stop working, because it doesn't.
Not in so many words. But they come damn close. Anyone who doesn't
listen to what they say _very_ carefully _would_ get that impression.
True, but 'we' (in these newsgroups) aren't just anyone, are we?
:-)'They' *did* spread the usual FUD about the system becoming less
secure / insecure. But now you can enroll in Extended Security Updates
(ESU) for a year, so the less secure / insecure argument is moot for
now.
Gee, thanks. :-)
Well, a Linux fanboi recently 'accused' me of defending Microsoft, so> I might as well prove him right! :-)
[...]Probably not. He was/is just assuming worst-case, that he'd have to
FWIW, I don't pay any montly fees for my "apps", so you should
probably say *which* 'apps' you use, which incur a monthly fee.
He meant, I think, that some of the _replacements_ would, whereas what>> they replace don't. (Office being the obvious example.)
For the Windows 11 case: Would he have to pay again for things like (Microsoft) Office?
For the Linux case: Is it at all likely that there *are* any paid-for> 'replacements'?I've never got into Linux, but you are right, I get the _impression_
Anyway, we need more details (for all issues).you too!
Take care.
On 15/10/2025 07:04, Steve Hayes wrote:
Snip <
Fo weeks now I've been reading "sponsored" posts on sites like
Facebook warning me of the approaching "end of life" for Windows 10 on
14 October 2025.
This morning I started up my Windows 10 laptop and, mirabile dictu, it
worked.
People keep urging me to switch to Linux or Windows 11. If either of
those would allow me to run the programs I use every day, I would
seriously consider it, if I could afford it.
For me, an operating system is not the be-all and end-all of
computing. The O/S is only as useful as the apps it runs, and if it
doesn't run my apps, it's useless to me.
If Linux or Windows 11 could run my apps, or other apps that were just
as good and could import my existing data without retyping, they might
be worth considering. But they don't think of that. All they can think
of is mendacious slogans like "end of life".
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you have
to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee
as well. Thats doubly evil.
Which Windows 11 built in apps require an additional monthly payment?
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
People keep urging me to switch to Linux or Windows 11. If either of
those would allow me to run the programs I use every day, I would
seriously consider it, if I could afford it.
Why wouldn't Windows 11 "run the programs I use every day"? It does
for me, all the way from XP, via Vista, 8.1 and 10 to 11. Some of my
programs are 22+ years old and still run fine (look at the 'User-Agent:' >header of this very post, it says "20030910").
Or do you mean you don't want to bear the cost of buying a new--
computer, because your existing one can't run Windows 11?
For me, an operating system is not the be-all and end-all of
computing. The O/S is only as useful as the apps it runs, and if it
doesn't run my apps, it's useless to me.
Very true. That's why many people can't/don't switch OSs.
If Linux or Windows 11 could run my apps, or other apps that were just
as good and could import my existing data without retyping, they might
be worth considering. But they don't think of that. All they can think
of is mendacious slogans like "end of life".
Again, why do you include Windows 11 in this paragraph? Yes, Linux
obviously won't run your apps. But Windows 11? Why wouldn't it run them?
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
Well, 'they' don't say it will stop working, because it doesn't.
'They' *did* spread the usual FUD about the system becoming less
secure / insecure. But now you can enroll in Extended Security Updates
(ESU) for a year, so the less secure / insecure argument is moot for
now.
And yet again, the replacement, Windows 11, *does* work.
And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you have
to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee
as well. Thats doubly evil.
You can use Windows 10/11, or any Windows version for that matter,
without an Internet connection. But *you* probably want to use the
Internet and when you do, you expose yourself to risks if you don't
update your OS. So *you* want the Internet and because of that, you need
to get updates over the Internet, which indeed has a cost. That has been
the case for several decades and has nothing to do with Microsoft, hence
also not with the 'Subject:' of the OP.
FWIW, I don't pay any montly fees for my "apps", so you should
probably say *which* 'apps' you use, which incur a monthly fee.
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2025/10/15 18:40:15, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
[Most stuff snipped. Only responding to some points.]
Why wouldn't Windows 11 "run the programs I use every day"? It does
for me, all the way from XP, via Vista, 8.1 and 10 to 11. Some of my
_Maybe_ Steve is guilty of making that assumption (unless he actually
knows for sure something won't). _Certainly_ _you_ are guilty of making
the opposite assumption :-)
No, I'm not assuming :-), I'm mentioning that my stuff works and
*asking* why he thinks his stuff won't.
Or do you mean you don't want to bear the cost of buying a new
computer, because your existing one can't run Windows 11?
Again, why do you include Windows 11 in this paragraph? Yes, Linux
obviously won't run your apps. But Windows 11? Why wouldn't it run them?
Again, unless he _knows_ something won't, you're _both_ guilty of making
(opposite!) assumptions.
Again, not an assumption, but a question.
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
Well, 'they' don't say it will stop working, because it doesn't.
Not in so many words. But they come damn close. Anyone who doesn't
listen to what they say _very_ carefully _would_ get that impression.
True, but 'we' (in these newsgroups) aren't just anyone, are we?
--'They' *did* spread the usual FUD about the system becoming less
secure / insecure. But now you can enroll in Extended Security Updates
(ESU) for a year, so the less secure / insecure argument is moot for
now.
Gee, thanks. :-)
Well, a Linux fanboi recently 'accused' me of defending Microsoft, so
I might as well prove him right! :-)
[...]
FWIW, I don't pay any montly fees for my "apps", so you should
probably say *which* 'apps' you use, which incur a monthly fee.
He meant, I think, that some of the _replacements_ would, whereas what
they replace don't. (Office being the obvious example.)
For the Windows 11 case: Would he have to pay again for things like
(Microsoft) Office?
For the Linux case: Is it at all likely that there *are* any paid-for
'replacements'?
Anyway, we need more details (for all issues).
Take care.
On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 09:49:06 +0100, wasbit <wasbit@REMOVEhotmail.com>
wrote:
On 15/10/2025 07:04, Steve Hayes wrote:
Snip <
Fo weeks now I've been reading "sponsored" posts on sites like
Facebook warning me of the approaching "end of life" for Windows 10 on
14 October 2025.
This morning I started up my Windows 10 laptop and, mirabile dictu, it
worked.
People keep urging me to switch to Linux or Windows 11. If either of
those would allow me to run the programs I use every day, I would
seriously consider it, if I could afford it.
For me, an operating system is not the be-all and end-all of
computing. The O/S is only as useful as the apps it runs, and if it
doesn't run my apps, it's useless to me.
If Linux or Windows 11 could run my apps, or other apps that were just
as good and could import my existing data without retyping, they might
be worth considering. But they don't think of that. All they can think
of is mendacious slogans like "end of life".
They tell you to replace a system that they say is going to stop
working with one that doesn't work. That's evil.
And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you have
to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee
as well. Thats doubly evil.
Which Windows 11 built in apps require an additional monthly payment?
Office 365 for one.
Steve Hayes wrote:
On Wed, 15 Oct 2025 09:49:06 +0100, wasbit <wasbit@REMOVEhotmail.com>
wrote:
On 15/10/2025 07:04, Steve Hayes wrote:
And you can't just pay for it once and be done with it. No, if won't
work at all unless you have an internet connection, for which you have >>>> to par a monthly fee. And many of their new apps require a monthly fee >>>> as well. Thats doubly evil.
Which Windows 11 built in apps require an additional monthly payment?
Office 365 for one.
The question was relative to 'Windows built in apps'.
Microsoft 365 fka Office 365 is not a Windows built-in app.
- the term Office 365 was discontinued over 5 yrs ago
Windows 11 does include a variety of installed apps
e.g. Edge, Microsoft Store, Photos, Phone Link, Teams, Paint, Paint3D, Calendar, Mail, OneDrive, Clock, CoPilot, Camera, News(link to Msn web page), Maps, Snipping Tool(Snip and Sketch) etc. are all free
- no monthly or additional payment
Note: A Microsoft Account(MSA) may be necessary for some apps(e.g. OneDrive)
Yet more example of why Windows users feel reluctant to try Linux/Wine!
I get the impression Wine is fine for undemanding Windows applications,
but not if they hook into the Windows shell in any way, such as
Turnpike. Much like OTVDM lets me run _some_ 16-bit applications, like
the one that picks a random quote to add to my .sig, but won't run Xtree Gold, like a full VM would.
On 15/10/2025 10:32 pm, J. P. Gilliver wrote:Oh yes, it's old! I used to use it on my W7-32 occasionally - it was
<Snip>
Yet more example of why Windows users feel reluctant to try Linux/Wine!
I get the impression Wine is fine for undemanding Windows applications,
but not if they hook into the Windows shell in any way, such as
Turnpike. Much like OTVDM lets me run _some_ 16-bit applications, like>> the one that picks a random quote to add to my .sig, but won't run Xtree
Gold, like a full VM would.
"Xtree Gold". Boy oh Boy, are you talking OLD!!
I can remember (fondly) using that back on Win3/4/6/7 along with its predecessors XTree and XTree Pro on MSDOS(1980's/90's).
On 15 Oct 2025 19:05:52 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
wrote:
J. P. Gilliver <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
On 2025/10/15 18:40:15, Frank Slootweg wrote:
Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:
[Most stuff snipped. Only responding to some points.]
Why wouldn't Windows 11 "run the programs I use every day"? It does
for me, all the way from XP, via Vista, 8.1 and 10 to 11. Some of my
_Maybe_ Steve is guilty of making that assumption (unless he actually
knows for sure something won't). _Certainly_ _you_ are guilty of making
the opposite assumption :-)
No, I'm not assuming :-), I'm mentioning that my stuff works and
*asking* why he thinks his stuff won't.
It is a well-known fact that 8-bit programs that run under 32-bit
Windows will not run under 64-bit Windows.
Another reason for thinking that it it won't is that I tried it and it didn't. Fifteen years ago I got a brand-new laptop with Windows 7
64-bit installed. I tried to run the programs I use most frequently
and the 8-bit ones didn't run. The computer came with a set of DVDs
with the 32-bit version of Windows 7 on it. I installed it, and the
older 8-bit programs worked.
When that computer was stolen, I replaced it with a 2nd-hand one with
Windows 10 32-bit on it. The programs run more slowly than they did
under Windows 7, but they do run.