«

[florianix]

Originally Posted by DarthHelmet86

The computers you listed were sold as set units, no changes made to them. They were in fact sold by weight if you like. (Well not all the time but mostly at least they were just sold as is and you couldn't get things changed). If you had an Atari 2600...that's what you had. Even my average computer allowed me to pick options for every part that came in it, upgrades and degrades and different options that you just wouldn't have got back then.

I think its the current PCs that are sold by weight. Faceless exchangable things.

I admit, exchangable also has a good side. The possibility to expand them without problems or compatibility issues is definitely a plus.

The fact that they are exchangable is not new. There were models that could be upgrades for most of the families (Atari Mega ST and Amiga 1000 and 2000 also Apple II), just to name a few.

Video compression could only be done in hardware at that time, and also not as sophisticated as today. Things like video could not be handled uncompressed at all (because of the data rate of data bus and disks and also capacity).

It is definitely a plus that current computers can handle this easier - and not to forget much cheaper (I spent much more for the computers back then, not to talk about how expensive e.g. the video hardware was at that time).

However, the progress was not as big as I expected. In my eyes the (software) industry failed to convert the full increase in computing power into better functionality and usability.

I still can't believe that most of my new computers need much longer to boot up than some home computers decades ago.

[DarthHelmet86]

You aren't talking about an upgrade there...you are talking about buying a new computer. My computer is hardly faceless or throw away, it is a hand built hand selected beast. Any computer that is made for you is faceless, just like the ones you named, in fact the ones you listed are more like consoles of today. Machines you have that then a new version of it comes out that you just need to get as well.

My computer takes a lot less time to load then any of my old ones, and I make sure that stays that way by not having 600 programs trying to load as Windows starts. And the reason software is not using all the power new computers have is because the makers are having to make sure it works on older computers as well.

[florianix]

Originally Posted by DarthHelmet86

You aren't talking about an upgrade there...you are talking about buying a new computer. My computer is hardly faceless or throw away, it is a hand built hand selected beast. Any computer that is made for you is faceless, just like the ones you named, in fact the ones you listed are more like consoles of today. Machines you have that then a new version of it comes out that you just need to get as well.

My computer takes a lot less time to load then any of my old ones, and I make sure that stays that way by not having 600 programs trying to load as Windows starts. And the reason software is not using all the power new computers have is because the makers are having to make sure it works on older computers as well.

Please don't get me wrong... I didn't want to call your computer faceless.
Nor do I generalize it for *all* current computers.

I know people for who that is even worse than saying something bad about their mother. Accept my excuses if you understood me like that. That was not my intention.

Especially I wouldn't say it when talking about self-made ones.

What I mean is the majority - PCs that are sold of the shelf.

It is also true that there is some progress on boot-times. However, my latest quad-core one doesn't boot Windows 7 faster than my first PC (286) with Windows 2. Don't want to talk about some very early pre-PC systems that were at least somehow usable at once.
I am sure this is one of the points why the Ipads are so sucessfull. Because it does what many people need. And how they want it (e.g without boot times).

For me this is an example of not much additional user-friendlieness despite of a factor 4000 in memory and even much bigger difference in processor power.

I know that this comparison is difficult and I would definitely not want to switch back to the old system...
... The only thing that really disappoints me is that the usability/functionality didn't profit from that huge increase in computing power.
Just beeing able to do someting some minutes faster now is (in my eyes) not what one would expect from 20 years development.

Whatever, expectations and taste are both highly subjective... as are perceived boot times maybe.

About the sentence with the upgrade... didn't understand.
I generally upgrade all my systems as long as possible and only buy new ones when that is not feasible.

[DarthHelmet86]

The upgrades bit is just pointing out that the computers you listed are not really anything but faceless things. They were premade and sold as is, you could spend lots of dollars and maybe upgrade them, or you buy the new more advanced version. Unlike today's computers sold off the shelf, you can put what ever you want in them after that. They might start all the same.but they aren't locked that way. Unless you buy a Mac...but that is another story .

And yeah Windows hasn't really changed that much, but there are some nice changes that make it a lot more user friendly to me. I really love pinning my most used programs to the taskbar. And I can agree that software isn't always using everything PCs could give it, but it is (to me at least) caused by programmers trying to make sure their programs work on weaker PCs so they can get a larger market. And being lazy.

[Eagle of Fire]

I'm all with florianix on this one.

Best example, even though it is not on the same medium: it took Nintendo 20 freaking years (from Super Mario 3 in 1988 to Super Mario Wii in 2009) to realize that the end user wanted to be able to play multiplayer in freaking real time instead of having to take turns... All that time they were covering their ears, making a point not to listen to their player base... And when you compare Super Mario Wii and Super Mario 3, you realize that there is really hardly a difference at all... Except that you can now play multiplayer at the same time on the same screen.

Anyways...

[RRS]

As computers became more commonplace the situation changed, but 20 years ago noone was buying PCs off-the-shelf here (except companies/government). I started with 286, but with each upgrade I was selling away the obsolete parts (with one PC gifted to distant family). I do have few odd bits left at home, like Hercules graphic adapter (my first one!), probably my Pentium II as well.

What I'm still using to that day is 18-year-old keyboard. It's identical to my previous one, so I was using the same layout for 19 years, since 1992 (when I got PC at home). I never needed Windows keys - they're redundant shortcuts working only in Windows itself. And now every damned keyboard has them! What's worse, they went way beyond that. Last time I was installing brand new Dell PC sets, the keyboards had the Insert pad (that block above cursor keys) not in 3x2 but in 2x3 layout! While coding PHP I was deleting characters instead moving to end of the line etc. How convenient! Hooray for new technology! Had those dumb designers forgot about muscle memory that allows us for touch typing?

I'm getting tired of computers. Maybe I wasted too much of my life trying to learn their stuff. I expected them to become faster (yay!) and not to change that much. Today some 18yo pink blonde bimbo who barely knows Office 2007 will be working at the same speed as I do - me with 20 years of experience under my belt - due to the fact that I can't switch from my old interface habits that became my second nature after so many work hours. I wasn't supposed to start to feel obsolete at twentysomething?

[Scatty]

After many years of work, why do you think it's necessary to have a change of job? For the same reason you have issues with younger people being as good as us or even better at typing / working with computers - getting tired of repeatedly doing something. The fact that you can't switch from our old interface habits says a lot there.
For the kids the computers are new, they're excited with them and learning / adapting very fast. We know computers for so long already, we're tired of them. That simply. Time to conquer new areas

[florianix]

Hey, another 18 year old keyboard.

I'm typing this on my IBM "M"-Type keyboard from 1985. Still working perfect...
With the famous "click".
Impossible to destroy.
But without windows key.
So most of the time no wish to destroy it.

The only problem with it is that anyone who you might share an office with will attempt to kill you sooner or later because of the sound of the "click".

I recently heard that some company took over the rights from IBM and continues to produce them. Probably with windows key this time.

@DarthHelmet:
"Faceless" is obviously a subjective thing. Maybe its because of my age that I think they were more different to each other than todays computers. Anyway, all your arguments that any modern one is much better and can be upgraded much better is true. Never objected to that.

@RRS:
About the "ancient users" discussion that you added:
Nobody gets obsolete just because someone can use a computer *faster*.
I'm sure they could train a monkey to work or type faster than me.
But I don't think they will want to replace me. Even if the "Type M" keyboard would be the right one for monkeys. And even if I sometimes wish they would.

PS: No monkeys were harmed writing this post.

[Racer63]

Going back a bit to the original thread... yes, I use an old computer. You see, I had three computers, two laptops and the oldie, a PIII, 1Gb, 256 RAM. At this moment, I just have Windows XP there, but sometimes the computer runs to the limit. For example I can not use Firefox for surfing anymore (I quit at version 3.6), so I use K-Meleon as is the only browser this old PC can cope. In fact, I´m writting this post from the PIII.

But it`s ok, I use it for playing the old games, and very few doesn´t work.

Maybe I can get a PII from a friend in the future and have a DOS computer. I really love this old machines.

[twillight]

Originally Posted by DarthHelmet86

Yeah cause all that new hardware is so horrid and crap. And this is all a scam to just get more money out of the user. Lets all go back to using a Tandy Word Processor and never look back.

You do false statements here.

"Not better" doesn't equal with "worse". It is just not better.

The programmers become either lazy (aka. the same graphic / data a few years back required substantially less resourses), or simply say "f* you", and makes a vital component's update incompatible with the program-sorroundings.
For exapmle flashplayer 1.10 is although knows nothing extraordinary (it is basically the same as 1.09), but it is burned in its forehead "do not be compatible anything less then WinXP". Similar was the case when simple text-editors (Word for Windows) became incompatible with Win3.11 or less, just and because, although used the same contents (aka. letters, numbers), same fonts, same formats (well at least true to the used options at least, like pressing enter, or distance from edge of paper etc.).