Wineows 8 to Windows 7

burlmart wrote:
I would have an easier time believing you knew a lot about computers if you could tell me why I am needing to restart my router every morning to get devices to connect

No way could any tech ever answer that without knowing far more information. There are a multitude of problems that could cause that. In my case that occurred when our service provider kept dropping our IP requiring the modem/router to be reset. Could have also logged into the router to request a new IP but a power reset was easier. Was not a problem on my end. Could be a problem with your router, your provider, your PC, your network card, software on your PC, problems with other clients on your router. Router configuration. Network conflicts. Windows messed up. The list is endless without more information.

Not a good dodge..

I would have an easier time believing you knew a lot about computers if you could tell me why I am needing to restart my router every morning to get devices to connect here.

I am finding it difficult to believe self-proclaimed expert tekkies on this forum including moderators

We (and I in my post) are not talking Mac vs Windows. We are talking strictly Windows desktops and I am referring to Windows desktops. Try to take an all in one Windows desktop and try to add disk drives, change components, and so on.

Personally, I don't buy off the shelf desktops, I build my own. For what I have seen in the past fifteen years (probably longer) there is no retail desktop worth the money and the frustration of having to put up with the manufacturer's design when it came to upgrade and repair. Plus dealing with the garbage preloaded on the drive. No more. A desktop is an easy build and you can pick and choose anything that you want to put into to make it do exactly what you - and not HP, Sony, etc. think you want it to do.

Suddenly the Apple people have to join in on a Windows discussion to tout the merits of Apple when the discussion is about Windows. Yes, there are a lot of merits to Apple. And in some ways they are leaps ahead of Microsoft. Particularly when it comes to upgrades in their OS.

1775

The words below are from apple.com...

What were you thinking in your last post? Seriously.

*****************************************************

The ultimate all-in-one. Honed to the cutting edge.

The first iMac was a revolution: An all-in-one computer that put everything — display, processor, graphics, storage, memory, and more — inside one simple, stylish enclosure. Countless innovations later, we’ve raised the bar yet again. iMac includes the most advanced, most brilliant desktop display we’ve ever built, and it’s filled with the latest high-performance technologies. Yet it’s just 5 mm thin at its edge with up to 40 percent less volume than the previous generation. To do all that required unprecedented feats of engineering — and imagination. We invented new technologies, pioneered new manufacturing techniques, and devised all-new ways to do more in less space.

*******************************************************

I think you mentioned that Windows AIOs are noy easily modified...Is Apple more so?


When I read the Apple verbage above, all I could see was MARKETING. Markrting is the "evil forces" so many conservative RVers use as a hammer to kill the distinction between a novel new "class" of motorhome from its predecessors.

Is Apple just a marketing gimmick?

strollin wrote:

1775 wrote:
... And is this why MS gave in and included mouse control at the last minute? ...

I'm not a particular fan of the Metro interface or Metro apps but the idea that mouse support was included as an afterthought is just plain silly, IMO.

This comment from 1775 grabbed my attention straightaway as well, but I just decided it was a bit of creative flourished prose. MS knows it takes a long time for one tech to eliminate another - pretty sure they knew touch would not REPLACE a mouse, even if just in METRO...a 7" Metro W8 tablet will demand the mouse equivalent stylus in some apps.

strollin wrote:

1775 wrote:
... And is this why MS gave in and included mouse control at the last minute? ...

There it is again. Where do you get the idea that mouse control was included at the last minute? It makes no sense whatsoever. The Metro interface works best with a mouse/keyboard but happens to also work via touch interface. If you install any legacy Windows apps then they may actually be much harder to use via touch since their controls (buttons, menus, etc...) weren't designed for a touch interface.

I'm not a particular fan of the Metro interface or Metro apps but the idea that mouse support was included as an afterthought is just plain silly, IMO. I keep asking why people repeat this mantra but so far not one person has been able to explain why they say make this statement. It seems to me that people blindly repeat it because they heard someone else say it.

I don't know if the mouse functions were added at the last minute or not but the implementation was obviously added onto the touch screen core design.

I disagree that the metro screen and apps are easier to use with a mouse and keyboard. They are clearly oriented toward a touch screen and are easier to use with a touch screen as far as I am concerned.

I have a Kindle Fire and sweeping down from the top or side of the screen to pull out a menu makes sense because it takes up less valuable screen real estate. On a laptop or desktop I prefer a menu bar with drop down menus.

At least Win 8.1 is supposed to rid us of a few of the things that many of us dislike.
MS must have had a lot of push back from customers or they would not have done that redesign.

1775 wrote:
... And is this why MS gave in and included mouse control at the last minute? ...

There it is again. Where do you get the idea that mouse control was included at the last minute? It makes no sense whatsoever. The Metro interface works best with a mouse/keyboard but happens to also work via touch interface. If you install any legacy Windows apps then they may actually be much harder to use via touch since their controls (buttons, menus, etc...) weren't designed for a touch interface.

I'm not a particular fan of the Metro interface or Metro apps but the idea that mouse support was included as an afterthought is just plain silly, IMO. I keep asking why people repeat this mantra but so far not one person has been able to explain why they say make this statement. It seems to me that people blindly repeat it because they heard someone else say it.

1775 wrote:

All in one desktops were tried in the past and were not good - no way to upgrade, no room to internally expand, etc.

Isn't iMac an all-in-one?


I figure the Metro on laptops and desktops in the long haul will prove to be reasonable as consumption and creation of digital stuff progresses and intermingles.

But at this stage, they are perhaps better being apart, like Apple is doing w/ IOS and OSX. MS should have introduced Metro as the mobile portal between consumption and productivity w/ the consumed data.

MS jumped the gun on (and rudely forced) integration of Metro + PC Desktop, but we will see it happen, and you will see Apple integrate IOS w/ OSX

The only PCs I see coming with touch screens for Win8 are desktops that incorporate the motherboard and "guts" of the computer into the display (essentially a large standing laptop) or laptops. None of the stand alone monitors being sold are touch screen. For a so called advance in OS, none of the monitor companies seem to be "jumping on the band wagon" or do they know that this is not long to last? And is this why MS gave in and included mouse control at the last minute?

All in one desktops were tried in the past and were not good - no way to upgrade, no room to internally expand, etc. Few kept making them and went back to console designs with separate monitors. So now MS comes along and wants to start this all over again - and there are few desktops to find with touch screens. Of course, MS wants to see an end to the desktop and laptop and get everyone on board with an MS made Win tablet which in business is never going to happen just as big business is sticking with Win 7.

And the funny thing is that MS developed what could be the best screen control system for their Xbox - the no touch, move your hand in the air controller. This actually has great potential and could be added on to a desktop if so designed - but no, MS went to touch screen so that your kids can smear jelly and peanut butter all over your monitor when they use your PC.

A touch tablet is one thing, a touch desktop PC is quite another. I do not wish to have to reach across my desk to touch the screen. A mouse and keyboard is FAR easier and faster. Multiple screens would also be a pain with touch. Guess I would get some exercise swinging my arm around!