• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

OK all you XP diehards...

Status
Not open for further replies.
$10 million is rather slight considering the amount of checking for regressions that has to be done for every security patch. I expect that future XP updates will have some issues with software other than the handful of applications each government and corporation actually needs.
 
Mike this is not directed at you. I'm just borrowing your words to make a point.

My main computer (a desktop) and my secondary computer (a notebook) have both been runing Vista Home Premium for five years.
I personally have no issues with Vista or even Win8, although I did find the new interface to Office apps etc. needlessly frustrating. I'm just saying that they weren't exactly PR successes and I didn't see too many people lining up outside their favourite computer store to get the next new version, nor did I hear much raving about how much better the new OS was and how it was worth every penny of the upgrade price.

As mentioned elsewhere most problems are usually either configuration or driver issues that aren't entirely MS's fault and they haven't bothered me too much, but as I said, the high-handed way they're handling this XP EOL deal and especially the MSE part really leaves a bad taste...
 
I'm just saying that they weren't exactly PR successes and I didn't see too many people lining up outside their favourite computer store to get the next new version, nor did I hear much raving about how much better the new OS was and how it was worth every penny of the upgrade price....
Yes, your statement is essentially right on the mark. But you must also take into consideration the 'moron factor' when evaluating the reasoning for that statement's so-called accuracy. :)
 
I just switched Mom from XP to Linux... she barely notices the difference, and was more than willing to get used to the new desktop environment (XFCE). Turns out, the hard drive was bad and I had a spare. And since XP is End of Life and I don't have a CD, and don't want to buy Windows 7/8... I figured this was a good opportunity to try something different :D!
 
I just switched Mom from XP to Linux... she barely notices the difference, and was more than willing to get used to the new desktop environment (XFCE). Turns out, the hard drive was bad and I had a spare. And since XP is End of Life and I don't have a CD, and don't want to buy Windows 7/8... I figured this was a good opportunity to try something different :D!

Just be prepared for that frantic phone call you'll get when she first stumbles into the fact that file names in Linux are case sensitive, so she'll save "Recipes.doc" and then later try to open it as "recipes.doc" and wonder why it's gone!
 
Just be prepared for that frantic phone call you'll get when she first stumbles into the fact that file names in Linux are case sensitive, so she'll save "Recipes.doc" and then later try to open it as "recipes.doc" and wonder why it's gone!

Very good point. I in fact just gave her that warning before it inevitably happens. I thought it was an ext file system issue, but apparently even the ntfs-3g driver for Linux is case sensitive for reasons related to POSIX compliance.
 
Well, you can layer a case-insensitive driver over a filesystem.

http://www.brain-dump.org/projects/ciopfs/

I think you'd be nuts to do that, however. There are applications that depend on the difference in the *nix world.

6-bit (and BCD) character sets ruled the computer world for a very long time (well into the 1980s). Early terminals displayed only uppercase and it was uncommon to find a line printer with an upper/lowercase type train mounted--the speed of the printer goes down as the number of different characters on the train goes up. That 029 keypunch didn't do lowercase--you had to do it with multi-punching. Or how about that ASR33 teletype?

So, historically speaking, character sets with lowercase alphabetics in them are fairly recent. Strictly speaking, they're not required for Unix, but everyone puts them in.
 
My father has been using Linux since 2001, when he retired and I bought him a computer. The case-sensitive filename issue isn't an issue, and I suspect it won't be for most people moving from XP or similar systems: they won't use the command line for anything. My father uses file managers and simply look for the file. He doesn't think about case. He only has a limited number of files to look through after all, particularly taking into account that he mostly uses the file manager feature of whatever application he's using - and those will filter on the specific type of fies he's after. Case sensitivity has never been an issue, and certainly not a problem.

Scratching the original Windows system on that box and installing Linux when I bought it turned out to be a wise decision. There's never been a crash or issue with the system since 2001 - I have upgraded the software once and a couple of years ago I replaced the original computer with a newer one, but to my father it was all the same. I run automatic iterative backups on the system, so all his writings and genealogy updates are always safe. The only times I have to assist him is when the net bank changes the user interface - and they do that fairly often actually. Then my father is lost. Very annoying. My own bank doesn't do that, but his does. If it wasn't for the net bank I wouldn't need to do anything with that computer - it takes care of itself.

-Tor
 
This is old (from 2006), but still a great essay about why Linux / Ubuntu won't catch on with ordinary PC users:

http://archive.today/K3BYE
I'm a fairly novist *nix user but c'mon the guys aim was to try to access a faulty drive to get data off. Also the writer obviously hasn't heard of mc for file management. It is an entertaining read though. He could've just hooked the drive up as slave on another machine and used his beloved Windows box. Would've been in his comfort zone and not wasted a few days. I've never had to pay for XP at all fwiw.

About a month ago I hooked a drive out of a dead Mac to one of my older machines and ran Puppy Linux (by default runs as root). It auto mounted and accessed the drive in it's GUI on the desktop on start up. All files were accessible.
 
Last edited:
I'd like to smack whoever though case sensitivity was a good idea. In the English language, capitalization is only formatting. Like other forms of formatting, it can hint at a specific meaning if with word is ambiguous, but it does not dictate the meaning. I CAN WRITE IN ALL CAPS or i can write in all lower case and i can still be understood. In a case sensitive file system you wind up with duplicate files like "my file" "My file" "My File" "My FIle", etc. And no human organizes paper files in such a way that all folders with capitalized names are first, then lower case names. It makes me angry when I look for a file name on some FTP site, can't find it, only to discover it is after all the other file names because it wasn't capitalized. "dBase" should be in with the other "D"s!!!!

If Unix folks had their way, we would also all have to start counting at zero instead of one.
 
A good FTP server should do the translation for you. It is annoying though, I always have to rename my files so it's all lower case before uploading just to avoid any potential problems.
 
I'd like to smack whoever though case sensitivity was a good idea. In the English language, capitalization is only formatting. Like other forms of formatting, it can hint at a specific meaning if with word is ambiguous, but it does not dictate the meaning.

I can't believe you said that! Capitalization is NOT just about formatting. Perhaps we went to different schools, but the English I learned uses capitals to distinguish the meaning of words. One important place is in proper nouns and initials. One might write us in us, but who would? Around here we have a town called Mission. The word "mission" means something different. A good example of where using half an alphabet has gone horribly wrong is in the Google search algorithm. Type Mørke, and then mørke and you will get the same results. One is a noun and the other is an adjective. This kind of situation makes it impossible to get useful results when one might be hoping to pull references from indexed documents and web pages. It is a serious blot in Google's copybook.


If Unix folks had their way, we would also all have to start counting at zero instead of one.
And why not? It often gives you the correct result, whereas starting with the preloaded value of one will give you the wrong result and you'll just have to subtract one at the end. Try counting seconds. :) Of course, I agree with you in many cases (pun intended). I remember the Silicon Gulch Gazette that came out in about 1977 and the first edition was "0". (Not to be confused with o or O.) People complained about it, and it certainly was confusing.

As for Microsoft adopting the half alphabet style, I suspect that they were doing their usual of underestimating the intelligence of their market. Of course their history goes back to before the use of typewriters - perhaps even before the development of modern English. ;) Speaking of typewriters, did anyone here have a typing teacher who didn't mark them down for getting the letters wrong?
 
This is old (from 2006), but still a great essay about why Linux / Ubuntu won't catch on with ordinary PC users:

http://archive.today/K3BYE

Apart from the fact that you're obviously trolling - you're right. :) Most people will never figure out that reading from a CD is slower than reading from your HDD. And indeed, that is why MS-Windows is normally pre-installed so that those who don't know, and don't care, what an OS is, can also have a computer. That is fair enough. But that article compares a beginner installing an OS to having it professionally pre-installed. That seems somewhat disingenuous to me. Doesn't it to you?
 
I'm with Ole here.
When I was first exposed to case-sensitive filenames around 1989-1990 I had much the same reaction as SomeGuy (I came from a minicomputer OS which was case-insensitive, and before that it was CP/M and the like).
However, I soon changed my mind, I would not go back to case-insensitivity.

Anyway, that is _not_ a problem for people coming from XP, in my opinion. Not many XP users (except people on forums like this) use a command line or a small terminal window for anything. They use file managers.

As for 0.. zero is good, except for year numbering. This is year number 2014 in the western system. Not 2014 years since something. But many people continue to think that years like 2014 are "counted" from zero (and with that, the year 2000 misunderstanding). They aren't.. English actually got this right: 2014 AD (Anno Domini, which means something like 'the year 2014 of the Lord' ), and BC for 'before Christ'. In my native Norwegian there's no AD equivalent, instead the term 'after Christ' is used, which is wrong - it implies a year zero. Which doesn't exist, for the same reason January 0 doesn't exist.

But 0 isn't really Unix.. it is C. In C one should think not of indices, but of offsets. So array[0] is the first position. In Fortran (also on Unix) indices are used, so they start from 1.

-Tor
 
Changes of meaning conveyed through capitalization are one thing in human-to-human communication, where the human brain is plenty capable of recognizing those instances given the context. They're quite another thing with computers, which have only extremely rudimentary capability for discerning context with a reliability that steadily decreases with the amount of direct human input. "Mission" and "mission" might mean different things, but then again, they might not. "Mission" in the middle of a sentence is obviously a proper noun, but "Mission" at the beginning of a sentence could be either, depending on the context. And even in the middle of a sentence it could possibly be an exception to the obvious interpretation, if, say, the writer were using capitalization for stylistic effect, as in "he was devoted to the Mission above all else, to the extent that I'm capitalizing it to show how important it was to him." How the hell is a computer suppose to figure that out?

And anyway, when it comes to filenames specifically, case-sensitivity is just retarded. As SomeGuy says, absolutely nobody does record organization (i.e. what a filesystem essentially is) with any regard to case, because it's never, ever important there. Of course, insisting on the Technically Correct implementation (see what I did there?) over the one that makes any sense in the actual use case is typical Unixoid behavior, so it's no surprise there.

Also, case-insensitivity in Microsoft operating systems has nothing whatsoever to do with thinking the users are stupid and everything to do with their deriving from OSes that didn't distinguish case (RT-11 by way of CP/M.)
 
All good points; especially *(array+0) being the same as array[0] or even *array in C. (C allows for some pretty whacky-looking constructs; not as bad as APL, but that's another story...)

I might be more tolerant if there were a compiler diagnostic that said something to the effect of "I can't find a variable by the name of "Widget", but I can find one by the name of "WIdget".

Anyone here ever use PUFFT? Second-guesses almost any syntactical error and tries its level best to create a usable program. Missing parentheses? Misspelled "FORMAT"? No problem... For that matter even the original 704 FORTRAN had better error messages than modern C compilers. For example:

Code:
SOURCE PROGRAM ERROR.  THIS IS A TYPE
  GO TO (), I
- BUT THE RIGHT PARENTHESIS IS NOT FOLLOWED BY A COMMA.
 
@commodorejohn: "Retarted"? That's pretty strong wording.

I for one do use the case sensitivity to good effect. Its use is even built-in to one of the most used tools out there: GNU Make.
It first looks for a file called 'makefile' (actually it looks for another one before that but that's not important), and after that it looks for a file called 'Makefile'. And this is very good. All source distributions, or at least any meant for Unix, comes with, or generates a file called 'Makefile'.
So when I want to make a temporary hack change (like linking with ElectricFence to catch malloc errors) I don't modify Makefile, I make a copy which I call 'makefile' and make my changes there. Now Make will pick up that one instead.
A simple 'git status' will easily show me all the directories where I have installed this local 'makefile'. And it's immediately clear what's going on.

Can't do that with case-insensitive file systems. And that's just one use. Case-sensitivity is good. Calling it retarded is, well, retarded.

-Tor
 
. . . absolutely nobody does record organization (i.e. what a filesystem essentially is) with any regard to case, . . .

I do. Always have and always will. It gives a lot of freedom to organize. It is certainly visually useful in directory listings where it makes it easy to tell things apart and pick things out.

because it's never, ever important there.

I just proved you wrong. :) Now you can put me down as a dingbat anytime you want, but I will still continue to use the tools at my disposal, and use them to my advantage. Using things to my advantage is a concept that I consider practical.

BTW: One of the places I use the case tool is with the DOS sort command. Even as far back as DOS 2.0 could case be put to good use in organizing lists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top