JodyT

Member
  • Content count

    675
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

JodyT last won the day on January 25

JodyT had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

89 Excellent

About JodyT

Profile Information

  • OS
    Windows 8 x64
  • Country

Recent Profile Visitors

1,427 profile views
  1. I just don't get that. Once you excise all of the metro stuff from Windows 8x, it really looks more like a windowing system than 10 does. The caption buttons (min/max/close) in Windows 10 and UI are more flat than 8x by a long shot. And the dialog boxes in 8x are more like Windows 7. I just don't get the dislike for Windows 8.
  2. So it'll be March when we see the next updates. Wow! That seems like a real regression for Microsoft! https://www.sevenforums.com/news/405295-february-2017-security-update-release-delayed.html
  3. I don't think there is a precedent for that either - where no updates were issued in a month prior to Windows 2000 Professional. I don't recall how Windows 98 and ME were scheduled for updates, or did they just come at random?
  4. Wonder when it will be?
  5. I switched over to the bulletins tab, but only January's patches are there. Still awaiting February.
  6. So I take it this is where we will now find posted updates for Windows. Nothing is showing up yet https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-us/security-guidance
  7. Now Pale Moon v27.1 is fully working with Facebook. But not without a lot of arguing over there. On to the OP's topic (oh wait! That's me), I wonder if we'll actually get any updates tomorrow. I'm curious to see.
  8. Now can you not remove source files by using the DISM command. Then when you check the status of features is shows in a command window as "Disabled With Payload Removed"
  9. I dunno. I agree that Windows 7 and 8.1 contains telemetry for user data gathering, but them putting in update components meant to explicitly worsen performance? That sounds a bit like wearing a tinfoil hat to me. I never noticed performance declines during the final years of Windows 98SE. XP lived way longer than any other OS, because folks weren't adopting Vista, plain and simple. Once SP2 came around, Vista was a better OS (again on appropriate hardware - Netburst based systems with 3 GB of RAM is NOT appropriate hardware). We seem to want to make Microsoft out to be villans when, at the end of the day, Windows is their copyrighted product. We use it under license; we don't own it. So if Microsoft wanted to say tomorrow: we are going to remotely zap and disable any XP installation from working, they can do that. Remember, terms and conditions are always subject to change. Let's face it, Windows XP does not represent what Windows is today! And they are in the business of selling operating systems. They must create that need. Products that last indefinitely do not help the economy go around.
  10. We don't seem to disagree much Dencorso, do we? LOL. Perhaps you're saying that trends are more stagnant than I'm suggesting.
  11. Well Windows 7 commands a healthy lead amongst business users and gamers. I don't think that will change anytime soon, but it sounds as if Windows 10 is beginning to slide into second place (I'm sure that new system purchases are part of it). Windows 8x and Vista are disappearing rapidly (unfortunate too because they may be the best options overall right now).
  12. If I had to place a bet, I think the x64 Edition and Server 2003 variants would (in x64 builds). If I could take half the money off the table, I think particular XP installations could do it.
  13. I have a hard time understanding how you're getting stuttering issues on WinNT6x, especially on a Quad Core. Those system actually make MORE use of the hardware than XP does. I'm baffled. What is it that you're trying to accomplish? There is no way that Vista or Windows 7 should have such difficulty, unless you're short on RAM or using an older GPU. Just guessing though.
  14. Hmmmm as for Flash, we should all want Flash developers to migrate their applets elsewhere. Flash is a known security vulnerability (no not FUD). You should all WANT Flash to die. That's a good thing. I really don't think that if everyone piles on to using the ESR release that XP/Vista support will be extended. I think Mozilla states that as a goodwill gesture. Security minded folks will want to take advantage of sandboxing and new technologies. I would also think that browser developers would want to start merging code between desktop and mobile versions, so that development time and costs are halved, no? Nobody in the biz world is rushing to preserve XP.
  15. I'm with you for the most part here. I like being on a system that's "symbolically" out of support such as Windows 8 (since I can get fully compatible Server 2012 patches) and still use a fairly modern OS that can utilize newer applications. I also run a Metro-Free environment, and I use a lot of older Windows applications. But I like my browsers to be up-to-the-minute. And my tax software needs to be able to use newer security protocols in the installed TCP/IP stack to even function for e-file use. So for real work, XP and older is now a no go. I need what Windows NT 6 based systems give me. That was different as little as two years ago, but now the whole game has changed. But yes, Windows 10 has not interested me thus far. I hope something changes by 2023, but maybe I'll migrate to a different hardware platform by then.