On 12/19/2021 1:44 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
> On 12/19/21 10:39, Ken Blake wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Sorry, but as I said above, I'm terrible at remembering software I no
>> longer use.
>
> A couple of years ago I created a Windows 95 virtual machine. Software
> in it would not access my network, and it took a long time to remember
> what I did with Windows 95 was the current thing.
>
> BTW, Win 95 by default does not associate the TCP/IP protocol with the
> LAN (it's dialup only) and has to be fixed manually (not hard IF you
> remember to)

I can barely remember how to spell "Windows 95," let alone any details
about it.

Master Yoda <ghilzvidgzul@gmail.com> wrote:

> "VanguardLH" wrote in message news:1ry4s31b9nsby$.dlg@v.nguard.lh...
>
> Master Yoda <ghilzvidgzul@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Did anyone had problems after Windows 7 support ended on January 14,
>>> 2020 ?
>
>>Did your car stop running after its warranty expired?
>
> I bought my laptop in 2009 with Vista installed on it. When Chrome stopped
> updating because it was not compatible with vista anymore I had to upgrade
> to Windows 7. So I used a pirated version, RemoveWAT helped. I cracked it
> and my Windows was Genuine. For a few years I didn't have any problems. But
> after january 2020 , aprox every 3 or 4 months I have to use the RemoveWat
> tool again.
>
> G

This is not a pro-warez newsgroup.

Besides, the OS didn't stop working. Your license expired, and you
cracked the OS again, and again, and ...

On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 at 08:21:50, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>On 12/19/2021 5:25 AM, DanS wrote:
[]
>> Potentially the worst default setting ever, is to "Hide Extensions
>>of Known Filetypes"....and
>> it's STILL that way (up to Win10 anyway....)
>
>
>I agree. It's a terrible default.
>
I could actually see the use of it when first invented - though
personally I've always liked to see the extensions. But as soon as
malware writers started using (e. g.) .txt.exe as a way of hiding
malware, the default at least should have changed - but it didn't.

I don't think I've _ever_ had anyone whose machine I have changed to
show extensions, complain - and I suspect in the vast majority of cases
they hardly even notice.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

As Groucho Marx said, "I cannot say that I do not disagree with you."

On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 at 08:17:46, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
[]
>I think I've said this here before, but I'll say it again: almost every
>time I switch to a new version of some piece of software, I forget a
>lot of what the old version was like. That's because I put a lot of
>effort into replacing my old memories with what I now need to remember.
>So the result is that it's very hard for me remember much about the old
>version and what I like better about the new version.

Or, you don't necessarily like the new version better, but you've
forgotten the old one, _and_ put effort into learning the new.
>
>Not everyone is the same, but I find it difficult to remember two
>versions of the same program. Maybe that's because of my age (84); I'm
>not sure.

I have to remember how W7 and W19 work, and do remember how Word 2003
and 365 work, since I use both.
[]
>And as I said above, the differences that are improvements to me may
>not be improvements to someone else. We all work in different ways.

Very true.
>
>I'll add just one other point: there are things I don't like about both
>Windows 10 and 11, but I have fixed most of them by installing the
>third-party programs Start10 and Start 11. I recommend that anyone who
>tries Windows 11 and doesn't like it, should download and install the
>trial versions of either Start11 or StartIsBack and see if that changes
>their view of it. With Rene's advice, I tried StartIsBack first, but
>then went to Start11 instead, and I like it better.
>
Hmm. Earlier, you said you put a lot of effort into learning how the new
version works, and thus forget how the old one did. But then you
recommend softwares whose main reason for being is to make the new look
and behave like the old ... (-:
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

As Groucho Marx said, "I cannot say that I do not disagree with you."

On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:44:01 -0800, Stan Brown
<the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 16:55:02 -0500, Master Yoda wrote:
>>
>> Did anyone had problems after Windows 7 support ended on January 14, 2020 ?
>
>No, but then it ended for me when they started bundling "upgrade to
>Windows 10" and "telemetry" nags into so-called security updates.

Sometime around then, I stopped Win-Update and BITS. Win-7 still runs
fine. I'll get rid of it when the machine it's on dies. Meanwhile, it
runs happily.

I'll be sad when the Win-7 box does die because that's the one I use
to run Forté's Agent on and without Agent I'll be unwilling to browse
Usenet.

I know there are other [some would say "better"] tools but I like
Agent so when WIn-7 dies, Usenet does, too.

That'll be sad as I've been helped by you guys for decades.

Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
happy New Year.

J.

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 15:28:13 -0600, Rene Lamontagne <rlamont@shaw.ca>
wrote:

>On 2021-12-18 3:23 p.m., gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 13:20:29 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/18/2021 1:10 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
>>>> On 12/17/21 20:16, Michael Trew wrote:
>>>>> On 12/15/2021 16:55, Master Yoda wrote:
>>>>>> Did anyone had problems after Windows 7 support ended on January 14,
>>>>>> 2020 ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Still working fine for me here.  I have no intents of switching; I can't
>>>>> tolerate newer Windows OS's.  Might have to go Linux when Windows 7
>>>>> becomes painful to use, but I foresee at least another 5 years (likely
>>>>> more).  Look at it this way, Windows XP is still serviceable as is, but
>>>>> it's begging to become difficult to use.
>>>>
>>>> I started doing that (going to Linux) when Windows 2000 was getting less
>>>> useful. I try to avoid using any Windows later than 7.
>>>
>>>
>>> My opinion is different from yours. I thought Windows 8 was a step down
>>>from 7. 8.1 was a minor improvement to 8, and 10 was a major improvement
>>> to 8.1. The current version 11, is a minor improvement to 10.
>>>
>>> I think both 10 and 11 are better than 7, and I would never want to go
>>> back to 7.
>>
>> What is "better"?
>>
>
>*butter* is *better*.

OT, but, not for me it isn't. Butter is a slow toxin. Sort of like
divalent heavy metals, only worse.

Oleomargerines were a marvelous invention, even if most do taste like
something scraped from the brakepads of articulated lorries.

I quite like "Flora", though.

J.
>
>Rene

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 18:15:38 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
wrote:

>On 12/18/2021 2:23 PM, gfretwell@aol.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 13:20:29 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On 12/18/2021 1:10 PM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
>>>> On 12/17/21 20:16, Michael Trew wrote:
>>>>> On 12/15/2021 16:55, Master Yoda wrote:
>>>>>> Did anyone had problems after Windows 7 support ended on January 14,
>>>>>> 2020 ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Still working fine for me here.  I have no intents of switching; I can't
>>>>> tolerate newer Windows OS's.  Might have to go Linux when Windows 7
>>>>> becomes painful to use, but I foresee at least another 5 years (likely
>>>>> more).  Look at it this way, Windows XP is still serviceable as is, but
>>>>> it's begging to become difficult to use.
>>>>
>>>> I started doing that (going to Linux) when Windows 2000 was getting less
>>>> useful. I try to avoid using any Windows later than 7.
>>>
>>>
>>>My opinion is different from yours. I thought Windows 8 was a step down
>>>from 7. 8.1 was a minor improvement to 8, and 10 was a major improvement
>>>to 8.1. The current version 11, is a minor improvement to 10.
>>>
>>>I think both 10 and 11 are better than 7, and I would never want to go
>>>back to 7.
>>
>> What is "better"?
>
>
>The answer to that question is different for different people. I was
>simply expressing my views. You're welcome to have different views.

That's damned decent of you and I'm not being snarky, sarcy or nasty
when I say this.

There are some lack-wits on here that just can't grasp that idea.

Well done for being a grown-up and Merry Chhristmas.

Oh, and just as a data-point, I won't fix my sister's Win-10 box in
my house in case it infests my machine with Win-10 cooties and I
certainly won't allow that OS onto *my* boxes. Win-leven, neither.

I don't care what *you* do. That's *your* problem. :)

J.

John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:
[...]

> Sometime around then, I stopped Win-Update and BITS. Win-7 still runs
> fine. I'll get rid of it when the machine it's on dies. Meanwhile, it
> runs happily.
>
> I'll be sad when the Win-7 box does die because that's the one I use
> to run Forté's Agent on and without Agent I'll be unwilling to browse
> Usenet.
>
> I know there are other [some would say "better"] tools but I like
> Agent so when WIn-7 dies, Usenet does, too.

Well, your Win-7 box might die, but you could use Win-7 on another
box, couldn't you?

And then there's Windows 8.1, which isn't quite as bad as some people
say it is. (I'm running 8.1 for well over six years.) And also Windows
10/11 can be beaten into submission and look/work like Real Windows (TM).

> That'll be sad as I've been helped by you guys for decades.
>
> Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
> happy New Year.

Season greetings to you too (from a locked down :-( The Netherlands).

On 20 Dec 2021 15:42:06 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid>
wrote:

>John <Man@the.keyboard> wrote:
>[...]
>
>> Sometime around then, I stopped Win-Update and BITS. Win-7 still runs
>> fine. I'll get rid of it when the machine it's on dies. Meanwhile, it
>> runs happily.
>>
>> I'll be sad when the Win-7 box does die because that's the one I use
>> to run Forté's Agent on and without Agent I'll be unwilling to browse
>> Usenet.
>>
>> I know there are other [some would say "better"] tools but I like
>> Agent so when WIn-7 dies, Usenet does, too.
>
> Well, your Win-7 box might die, but you could use Win-7 on another
>box, couldn't you?

Technically, practically, legally and physically, yes, I suppose I
could but I'm a stubborn bastard and lazy, to boot so I probably
won't.

I still have a really nice Win-XP laptop that still works fine but it
takes *hours* to start up as one of the first things it still does is
update the anti-malwares, or try to - some of them have probably died
years ago. I don't use it much so the updates are months, or years,
long. I don't use it because tons of stuff no longer works on it, for
example the version of the browser on it is *ancient*.

By the time my Win-7 box dies, loads of softwares and web-bits will
possibly be utterly incompatible so, unless I move the entire OS plus
everything I use onto a new box those programs won't work well.

Such is life.

I'd hesitate to ever connect the XP box to the 'Net live without
hardening it a *lot*. Hardening a "new" Win-7 box would be almost as
foolish.

Yes, I could VM Win-7 under Mac OSX or *Nixxy stuff but I could do
that today, too. I'm just too farking lazy and the current Win-7 box
is just a lovely machine that purrs along beautifully.

She was new in 2013, the only box in the shop that didn't have Win-10
on it, and she's been running ever since.

I don't expect her to run forever, but she might outlive me.

>
> And then there's Windows 8.1, which isn't quite as bad as some people
>say it is. (I'm running 8.1 for well over six years.) And also Windows
>10/11 can be beaten into submission and look/work like Real Windows (TM).
>
>> That'll be sad as I've been helped by you guys for decades.
>>
>> Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
>> happy New Year.
>
> Season greetings to you too (from a locked down :-( The Netherlands).

Yes, I have read about your troubles. I sympathise and wish you and
your countrymen well.

Take care, try to avoid new-mutants, stay warm and have as Merry and
lovely a Christmas as possible.

And may your New Year be better.

J.

On 12/19/2021 6:02 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 at 08:17:46, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
> wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
> []
>>I think I've said this here before, but I'll say it again: almost every
>>time I switch to a new version of some piece of software, I forget a
>>lot of what the old version was like. That's because I put a lot of
>>effort into replacing my old memories with what I now need to remember.
>>So the result is that it's very hard for me remember much about the old
>>version and what I like better about the new version.
>
> Or, you don't necessarily like the new version better, but you've
> forgotten the old one, _and_ put effort into learning the new.

That's probably sometimes true, but not often.

One example is WordPerfect. I run X7, and I haven't upgraded past that
because the last few versions I had run (X6, X5, etc.) were almost
indistinguishable to me from their predecessors. The only reason I
upgraded to the last few is that I was able to get free copies by
writing reviews for our local Users Group. When that ability ran out, i
never bothered to upgrade again.

Other examples are Windows 8 and 8.1

>>Not everyone is the same, but I find it difficult to remember two
>>versions of the same program. Maybe that's because of my age (84); I'm
>>not sure.
>
> I have to remember how W7 and W19 work, and do remember how Word 2003
> and 365 work, since I use both.

I can't remember ever running two different versions of the same program.

>>And as I said above, the differences that are improvements to me may
>>not be improvements to someone else. We all work in different ways.
>
> Very true.
>>
>>I'll add just one other point: there are things I don't like about both
>>Windows 10 and 11, but I have fixed most of them by installing the
>>third-party programs Start10 and Start 11. I recommend that anyone who
>>tries Windows 11 and doesn't like it, should download and install the
>>trial versions of either Start11 or StartIsBack and see if that changes
>>their view of it. With Rene's advice, I tried StartIsBack first, but
>>then went to Start11 instead, and I like it better.
>>
> Hmm. Earlier, you said you put a lot of effort into learning how the new
> version works, and thus forget how the old one did. But then you
> recommend softwares whose main reason for being is to make the new look
> and behave like the old ... (-:

Yes, but those pieces of software change only some of the things in the
new version. As usual, in almost any piece of software, there are some
things I like about it, some I'm indifferent to, and some I would change
if I could.

It's like a recipe for food. I might like it, but also might like it
better with more or less of some ingredient, or with some ingredient
added or removed.

On 12/20/2021 8:40, John wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:44:01 -0800, Stan Brown
> <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 16:55:02 -0500, Master Yoda wrote:
>>>
>>> Did anyone had problems after Windows 7 support ended on January 14, 2020 ?
>>
>> No, but then it ended for me when they started bundling "upgrade to
>> Windows 10" and "telemetry" nags into so-called security updates.
>
> Sometime around then, I stopped Win-Update and BITS. Win-7 still runs
> fine. I'll get rid of it when the machine it's on dies. Meanwhile, it
> runs happily.
>
> I'll be sad when the Win-7 box does die because that's the one I use
> to run Forté's Agent on and without Agent I'll be unwilling to browse
> Usenet.
>
> I know there are other [some would say "better"] tools but I like
> Agent so when WIn-7 dies, Usenet does, too.
>
> That'll be sad as I've been helped by you guys for decades.
>
> Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
> happy New Year.

I keep hearing about this Forte Agent. I just use Thunderbird. What is
the benefit to that newsreader?

On 12/20/2021 10:53, John wrote:
> I'd hesitate to ever connect the XP box to the 'Net live without
> hardening it a*lot*. Hardening a "new" Win-7 box would be almost as
> foolish.

Have some fun, and connect a Dos 6.2/Windows 3.11 workgroups machine up
with a TCP/IP packet and an old Ethernet card. Find an old version of
your newsreader, and that can be your dedicated Usenet machine ;)

(I've had one online in the past year, and I've honestly thought about
it, just for fun).

On 12/20/21 07:40, John wrote:

[snip]

> Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
> happy New Year.

2020 was the year of CoViD

At the beginning of this year, I heard someone say it as "2020 won"

Next year is "2020 too"

On 12/20/2021 10:15 AM, Michael Trew wrote:
> On 12/20/2021 8:40, John wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:44:01 -0800, Stan Brown
>> <the_stan_brown@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 15 Dec 2021 16:55:02 -0500, Master Yoda wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Did anyone had problems after Windows 7 support ended on January 14, 2020 ?
>>>
>>> No, but then it ended for me when they started bundling "upgrade to
>>> Windows 10" and "telemetry" nags into so-called security updates.
>>
>> Sometime around then, I stopped Win-Update and BITS. Win-7 still runs
>> fine. I'll get rid of it when the machine it's on dies. Meanwhile, it
>> runs happily.
>>
>> I'll be sad when the Win-7 box does die because that's the one I use
>> to run Forté's Agent on and without Agent I'll be unwilling to browse
>> Usenet.
>>
>> I know there are other [some would say "better"] tools but I like
>> Agent so when WIn-7 dies, Usenet does, too.
>>
>> That'll be sad as I've been helped by you guys for decades.
>>
>> Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
>> happy New Year.
>
> I keep hearing about this Forte Agent. I just use Thunderbird. What is
> the benefit to that newsreader?

I use to use Agent, but dI switched to Thunderbird, which I now like
better, about a year ago.

There are some things I preferred about each, but I don't remember all
the details. and my preferences aren't necessarily the same as yours.
Try Agent and see for yourself which you prefer.

Michael Trew <michael.trew@att.net> wrote:
> On 12/20/2021 10:53, John wrote:
> > I'd hesitate to ever connect the XP box to the 'Net live without
> > hardening it a*lot*. Hardening a "new" Win-7 box would be almost as
> > foolish.
>
> Have some fun, and connect a Dos 6.2/Windows 3.11 workgroups machine up
> with a TCP/IP packet and an old Ethernet card. Find an old version of
> your newsreader, and that can be your dedicated Usenet machine ;)

Way, way too modern! Just use YARN with SOUP on DOS 3.0. We need no
stinkeen *Internet* for *Usenet*!

> (I've had one online in the past year, and I've honestly thought about
> it, just for fun).

On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 09:35:02, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>On 12/19/2021 6:02 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 at 08:17:46, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
>> wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>> []
>>>I think I've said this here before, but I'll say it again: almost
>>>every time I switch to a new version of some piece of software, I
>>>forget a lot of what the old version was like. That's because I put a
>>>lot of effort into replacing my old memories with what I now need to
>>>remember. So the result is that it's very hard for me remember much
>>>about the old version and what I like better about the new version.
>> Or, you don't necessarily like the new version better, but you've
>> forgotten the old one, _and_ put effort into learning the new.
>
>
>That's probably sometimes true, but not often.

Sorry, I thought it's what you were saying.
>
>One example is WordPerfect. I run X7, and I haven't upgraded past that
>because the last few versions I had run (X6, X5, etc.) were almost
>indistinguishable to me from their predecessors. The only reason I
>upgraded to the last few is that I was able to get free copies by
>writing reviews for our local Users Group. When that ability ran out, i
>never bothered to upgrade again.
>
>Other examples are Windows 8 and 8.1
>
So you'll upgrade if it's more or less free and not very different. On
the whole, I'll do the same.
>
>
>>>Not everyone is the same, but I find it difficult to remember two
>>>versions of the same program. Maybe that's because of my age (84);
>>>I'm not sure.
>> I have to remember how W7 and W19 work, and do remember how Word

(I meant W10 of course.)

>>2003
>> and 365 work, since I use both.
>
>
>I can't remember ever running two different versions of the same program.
>
I have a provided machine for council work that has W10 and '365. This
machine has 7-32 and 2003. I support (as friends - no money) others who
have XP (and I don't know if he has any Word - I don't think he WPs),
7-64 (and WordPad IIRR - I'm pretty sure she doesn't WP), and 10-64 and
2003 (and 2019 but she doesn't use it). And I remember - unreliably! -
XP, '9x, and even 3.x, so make (woolly!) suggestions on these
newsgroups.
>
>>>And as I said above, the differences that are improvements to me may
>>>not be improvements to someone else. We all work in different ways.
>> Very true.
>>>
>>>I'll add just one other point: there are things I don't like about
>>>both Windows 10 and 11, but I have fixed most of them by installing
>>>the third-party programs Start10 and Start 11. I recommend that
[]
>> Hmm. Earlier, you said you put a lot of effort into learning how the new
>> version works, and thus forget how the old one did. But then you
>> recommend softwares whose main reason for being is to make the new look
>> and behave like the old ... (-:
[]
>Yes, but those pieces of software change only some of the things in the
>new version. As usual, in almost any piece of software, there are some
>things I like about it, some I'm indifferent to, and some I would
>change if I could.

I guess that applies to all. You did _appear_ to be saying you always go
for the newest, putting in the learning effort where necessary; that
turns out not to be entirely the case. My own philosophy is mostly _not_
to change is there are significant differences or cost, but I _know_
this eventually comes home to bite me.
>
>It's like a recipe for food. I might like it, but also might like it
>better with more or less of some ingredient, or with some ingredient
>added or removed.
>
Good analogy! Though sometimes my preferred mince pie/Christmas cake
won't run with next year's marzipan (-:
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when
you make it again. -Franklin P. Jones

On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 12:15:12, Michael Trew <michael.trew@att.net>
wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>On 12/20/2021 8:40, John wrote:
[]
>> Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
>> happy New Year.
>
>I keep hearing about this Forte Agent. I just use Thunderbird. What
>is the benefit to that newsreader?

Some would say that it's not an email client. Others would not say
that's an advantage.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"To YOU I'm an atheist; to God, I'm the Loyal Opposition." - Woody Allen

On 12/20/2021 2:01 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 09:35:02, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>

>>Yes, but those pieces of software change only some of the things in the
>>new version. As usual, in almost any piece of software, there are some
>>things I like about it, some I'm indifferent to, and some I would
>>change if I could.
>
> I guess that applies to all. You did _appear_ to be saying you always go
> for the newest, putting in the learning effort where necessary; that
> turns out not to be entirely the case.

Almost the case, but not entirely. Sorry if wasn't clear. With
application programs, I *usually* go for the newest, putting in the
learning effort where necessary, since in most cases (except
WordPerfect), there are improvements. But with Windows, I *always* go
for the newest, not for improvements, but because there are always
potential security issues with older versions, and because there a
potential for newer versions of application programs and utility
programs I use to have problems with older versions of Windows.

> My own philosophy is mostly _not_
> to change is there are significant differences or cost, but I _know_
> this eventually comes home to bite me.

Yes, especially with Windows.

>>It's like a recipe for food. I might like it, but also might like it
>>better with more or less of some ingredient, or with some ingredient
>>added or removed.
>>
> Good analogy! Though sometimes my preferred mince pie/Christmas cake
> won't run with next year's marzipan (-:
>

On 12/20/2021 2:01 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 09:35:02, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
> wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>>On 12/19/2021 6:02 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> On Sun, 19 Dec 2021 at 08:17:46, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
>>> wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>>> []
>>>>I think I've said this here before, but I'll say it again: almost
>>>>every time I switch to a new version of some piece of software, I
>>>>forget a lot of what the old version was like. That's because I put a
>>>>lot of effort into replacing my old memories with what I now need to
>>>>remember. So the result is that it's very hard for me remember much
>>>>about the old version and what I like better about the new version.
>>> Or, you don't necessarily like the new version better, but you've
>>> forgotten the old one, _and_ put effort into learning the new.
>>
>>
>>That's probably sometimes true, but not often.
>
> Sorry, I thought it's what you were saying.
>>
>>One example is WordPerfect. I run X7, and I haven't upgraded past that
>>because the last few versions I had run (X6, X5, etc.) were almost
>>indistinguishable to me from their predecessors. The only reason I
>>upgraded to the last few is that I was able to get free copies by
>>writing reviews for our local Users Group. When that ability ran out, i
>>never bothered to upgrade again.
>>
>>Other examples are Windows 8 and 8.1
>>
> So you'll upgrade if it's more or less free and not very different. On
> the whole, I'll do the same.

With WordPerfect, I also wanted to write the reviews.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 14:20:47 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
wrote:

>On 12/20/2021 2:01 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 09:35:02, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
>
>>>Yes, but those pieces of software change only some of the things in the
>>>new version. As usual, in almost any piece of software, there are some
>>>things I like about it, some I'm indifferent to, and some I would
>>>change if I could.
>>
>> I guess that applies to all. You did _appear_ to be saying you always go
>> for the newest, putting in the learning effort where necessary; that
>> turns out not to be entirely the case.
>
>
>Almost the case, but not entirely. Sorry if wasn't clear. With
>application programs, I *usually* go for the newest, putting in the
>learning effort where necessary, since in most cases (except
>WordPerfect), there are improvements. But with Windows, I *always* go
>for the newest, not for improvements, but because there are always
>potential security issues with older versions,

Aren't there always potential security issues with everything? Old
operating systems, new operating systems, old applications, new
applications, etc.

We're always told to upgrade to something newer because it's more
secure, but then a new version of that thing comes along and suddenly
the version that was fine yesterday is unusable today.

>and because there a
>potential for newer versions of application programs and utility
>programs I use to have problems with older versions of Windows.
>
>
>> My own philosophy is mostly _not_
>> to change is there are significant differences or cost, but I _know_
>> this eventually comes home to bite me.
>
>
>Yes, especially with Windows.
>
>
>>>It's like a recipe for food. I might like it, but also might like it
>>>better with more or less of some ingredient, or with some ingredient
>>>added or removed.
>>>
>> Good analogy! Though sometimes my preferred mince pie/Christmas cake
>> won't run with next year's marzipan (-:
>>

On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 21:03:08 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 12:15:12, Michael Trew <michael.trew@att.net>
>wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>>On 12/20/2021 8:40, John wrote:
>[]
>>> Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
>>> happy New Year.
>>
>>I keep hearing about this Forte Agent. I just use Thunderbird. What
>>is the benefit to that newsreader?
>
>Some would say that it's not an email client.

I guess those people would be wrong, since Forte Agent is obviously a
combo Usenet/email client. You don't have to configure both halves of
the program, but that's irrelevant.

>Others would not say that's an advantage.

I'm not sure what that means.

On 12/20/2021 7:35 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 21:03:08 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
> <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 12:15:12, Michael Trew <michael.trew@att.net>
>>wrote (my responses usually follow points raised):
>>>On 12/20/2021 8:40, John wrote:
>>[]
>>>> Merry Christmas and may you all have a new-mutant-free, wonderful and
>>>> happy New Year.
>>>
>>>I keep hearing about this Forte Agent. I just use Thunderbird. What
>>>is the benefit to that newsreader?
>>
>>Some would say that it's not an email client.
>
> I guess those people would be wrong, since Forte Agent is obviously a
> combo Usenet/email client. You don't have to configure both halves of
> the program,

Yes, I used to use Agent, but only as a newsreader. Now I use
Thunderbird (Betterbird, actually) for both e-mail and news.

> but that's irrelevant.

What'sa da big animal with four legs and a trunk?

On 12/20/2021 7:33 PM, Char Jackson wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 14:20:47 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On 12/20/2021 2:01 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 at 09:35:02, Ken Blake <Ken@invalidinvalid.com>
>>
>>>>Yes, but those pieces of software change only some of the things in the
>>>>new version. As usual, in almost any piece of software, there are some
>>>>things I like about it, some I'm indifferent to, and some I would
>>>>change if I could.
>>>
>>> I guess that applies to all. You did _appear_ to be saying you always go
>>> for the newest, putting in the learning effort where necessary; that
>>> turns out not to be entirely the case.
>>
>>
>>Almost the case, but not entirely. Sorry if wasn't clear. With
>>application programs, I *usually* go for the newest, putting in the
>>learning effort where necessary, since in most cases (except
>>WordPerfect), there are improvements. But with Windows, I *always* go
>>for the newest, not for improvements, but because there are always
>>potential security issues with older versions,
>
> Aren't there always potential security issues with everything? Old
> operating systems, new operating systems, old applications, new
> applications, etc.

Yes, certainly. There can always be a security issue with any piece of
software. But most application programs have much less risk than
operating systems.

> We're always told to upgrade to something newer because it's more
> secure, but then a new version of that thing comes along and suddenly
> the version that was fine yesterday is unusable today.

Yep. That's what advertising does.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 20:33:14 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:

> We're always told to upgrade to something newer because it's more
> secure, but then a new version of that thing comes along and suddenly
> the version that was fine yesterday is unusable today.

Windows 3.1 is apparently still available:
https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/topic/windows-installer-3-1-v2-3-1-4000-2435-is-available-e3978d9b-5fbf-bfec-71b9-1a463290065a

-is that still usable?

On 12/21/2021 10:12 AM, mechanic wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Dec 2021 20:33:14 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:
>
>> We're always told to upgrade to something newer because it's more
>> secure, but then a new version of that thing comes along and suddenly
>> the version that was fine yesterday is unusable today.
>
> Windows 3.1 is apparently still available:
> https://support.microsoft.com/en-gb/topic/windows-installer-3-1-v2-3-1-4000-2435-is-available-e3978d9b-5fbf-bfec-71b9-1a463290065a
>
> -is that still usable?

Many businesses use this operating system to run their machines.
They're not hooked up and surfing on the internet and worried about
anything other than running their equipment. It is extremely expensive
to upgrade this equipment, and unnecessary for many companies whose only
interest in in keeping their equipment running and producing.