Posts by Chronicle

Windows 10 marks the end of 'pay once, use forever' software

Like you, I'm getting on in years (65 in 4 days). Before I retired in 2011 at age 61, I'd acquired a corporate version of XP Pro SP3 from my company. I've archived the disk's ISO file for possible future use (grin). I'm using Win7 now on one (soon to be 2) laptops. But that's probably as far as I'll go with a Microsoft OS. For me, personally, I see no practical use of Win8.1 or Win10. And I certainly see no use for fancy "touch-screen" tablets which are one cheeseburger away from suffering death by grease overload (grin).

I'd love to migrate to a Linux distro. I really would. But only if I knew how to write my own software for that environment. There just isn't enough open-source development out there to provide the software I'd need to do the things I currently do with my Win7 system. So, until I breach that learning curve in software development, I suppose I'll remain a Microsoft OS hostage.

Run Windows 10 on your existing PC you say, Microsoft? Hmmm.

Re: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I imagine that Direct12 would be of benefit to gamers or people who do high-end CAD/CAM work (or video editing). But to John Q. Homeuser, it has no significance. Speaking of gaming, the only game I play on my Win7 computer is solitaire - which, as I understand, Win10 takes away.

BTW, I have an Acer Win7 laptop. But it will become a backup laptop shortly, replaced by another Win7 laptop I'm having built for me - including a lot of hardware features that runs the OS at its maximum output. Daily backups of Firefox/Thunderbird profile directories will prevent me from losing my desired cookies, history, bookmarks, email, and address book. And hard drive cloning of both systems via an iDsonix external dock done once monthly (or after a major software upgrade) should take care of the rest.

Hehe, I'll probably be using Win7 when Microsoft comes out with Win22 (grin).

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Why are so many users lining up like sheep to be herded into Microsoft's Win10 pen? Whenever I've done upgrades in the past, it hasn't been because "the flock" is doing it. It's been because I noticed a new feature I felt would be of value to me. I saw no new feature in Win8.1 and see no new feature in Win10 that would make me want to take the leap. So, why take it?

One other note. Starting with Win7 (which is what I'm using now), Microsoft made a quantum leap into the area of "licensing control" over users. If you have to replace your motherboard or do any significant hardware modifications, the OS may recognize them as "creating a new computer" ... even if you're using the same one you've been using. If that happens, you end up with a screen warning saying your OS is invalid. In short, Microsoft takes you into "their court" where you're guilty until proven innocent ... and where they have the ultimate thumbs-up or thumbs-down decision over whether you're innocent. Fortunately, with Win7, I've found about 2 or 3 ways "around" that issue that have worked for me in the past. But, I'm assuming that later versions of Windows tighten that noose of control.

One note on Win10. I understand that Microsoft has taken away a user's ability to "refuse" updates. And, they do updates on "their" schedule, not "yours." Example.

Imagine you're a college student working on an assignment due tomorrow. You get to a point where you realize you "must" visit your local library for research - and the library is only open for another hour. So, you turn off your laptop to take it with you to the library - only to be faced with this on-screen message:

"Windows is performing update 1 of 127. Do not unplug or turn off your computer until all updates are complete."

Hmmm. I think I'll stick with Win7. I've turned off Windows Updates ... choosing to do them manually about once a week, just before bedtime (so I can sleep through them).

Assange granted asylum by Ecuador after US refused to rule out charges

the "tiger" is patient

In 2010, Assange went to Sweden because of their strong laws protecting "whistleblowers." While there, he encountered two women with whom he reportedly had sexual relations. But according to the BBC, quote, "Both women reportedly say that what started as consensual sex became non-consensual."

In short, both women voluntarily had sex with Assange. But, at some point, they "claim" it became non-consensual. Sounds pretty fishy to me. Makes me wonder if the sex became non-consensual sex after they were offered money by the U.K and/or U.S. to just "say so."

In the end, however, I think this situation is much ado about nothing. Even if Assange managed to get himself to Ecuador, how long do you think it would be before the U.S. launched a "covert" attempt to grab him? Bottom line? Assange rattled the tiger's cage ... big time. And sooner or later, the tiger is going to get him.

Megaupload honcho sprung from slammer (for now)

missing a technicality?

Many law enforcement entities have botched or ruined a case by overlooking one or more legal technicalities. Could this case be one of them?

It is anticipated that the extradition hearings will be scheduled for August. But, while the US has vocalized its desire to have Dotcom extradited, they have yet to file a "formal" request in writing - a request whose deadline is less than 2 weeks away (March 5th). If, in the fury of their legal activities, the US omits this tiny but important detail and lets the deadline pass, Kim Dotcom will walk free.