[Ham-Computers] Speed... (was RE: Avoid one of the "Critical"Windows Updates...)

Mon Jun 19 14:51:11 EDT 2006

Aaron (and all)

I have a system dedicated to the last version of DOS MS released. I have a 
dual boot config with the Windows 98 SE also.

DOS offered me no limitations. The screen readers for the DOS OS worked 
fantastic! Not so with Windows, not one thing I can do about it either!

As my good friend Aaron can tell you, the very expensive JAWS For Windows 
version 7.0 I am running for the Windows XP Home Edition OS, has a curious 
habit of reading in reverse? I am not sure what to call it! But if it is 
checked, it may say "not checked" This is happening with other system 
configuration options as well and makes for a nightmare when one is blind! 
Fortunately I do have some background in computers, so I generally know it 
is not as it seems, otherwisw what I was doing would not be working. 
Nevertheless, as Aaron can testify to, he has spotted several items I had 
set wrong by default, or I checked/unchecked, and he told me to change them.

Now Freedom Scientifinc Inc., are you listening Bryan?, this is NOT 
acceptable QC work. I expect better from a program I had to pay $895 just so 
I could use the computer.

i still love DOS!

Duane Fischer, W8DBF
dfischer at usol.com

HHRP: Historic Halligan Radio Project
Never Before Seen Or Heard Rare Live Video & Audio Now Available!
Bill Halligan, Sr., W9WZE/W9AC Meet The Man 'Before" He Became A Legend!
Photos, DVD and CD Contents, Prices And Where To Get Your Registered Copies 
Immediately!
http://homepage.mac.com/jthayer13/W9WZE/

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hsu, Aaron (NBC Universal)" <aaron.hsu at nbcuni.com>
To: "I>Ham-Computers" <Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 2:04 PM
Subject: [Ham-Computers] Speed... (was RE: Avoid one of the 
"Critical"Windows Updates...)

> Heck, for speed without functionality, I'd go back to Windows 3.11!  A
> few years back, I pulled out a set of Win311 disk and installed in on a
> 1GHz P3.  I copied all 7 floppies to the HD before running the
> installation.  Took about 3 minutes to install.  Boot-up took about 10
> seconds.  Ugly as heck as there were no video drivers for "modern" video
> cards.  I remember installing the same set of disks on a 16-MHz 80386sx
> system with 4MB RAM.  Took about 45 minutes to install and minutes to
> boot.
>
> Yes, 2K and XP are much more solid that previous versions of
> Windows...except for all the security holes - Win9x is definitely
> "safer".  From a "hardened" standpoint, 2K is probably better as it
> didn't include all the PnP functionality that XP has (and all the
> associated vulnerabilities).
>
> If you are running Win98, hopefully you're using "Second Edition".  If
> so, make sure that you run a Windows Update or download all the
> available patches soon...I believe official "extended" support from
> Microsoft ends this month - this means no more patches of any kind.
> Also, no more "paid" support.  Check here:
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifean18
>
> Hmmm, Windows Me support also ends on the same date (July 11,
> 2006)...thank goodness!  WinME was the most horrid version of Windows
> Microsoft ever released!  All the MS people I've worked with
> un-officially state that MS wishes they never released WinME.  When
> asked, I generally avoid working on problems with WinME and ask if it's
> OK to wipe the system and install WinXP instead.
>
> Anyways, 73!
>
>  - Aaron, NN6O
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ham-computers-bounces at mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:ham-computers-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of jeff
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 5:22 PM
> To: Computers (or other) used for amateur radio, communications, or "
> experimenting
> Subject: Re: [Ham-Computers] Avoid one of the "Critical" Windows
> Updates...
>
> On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 16:44 -0700, Loren Moline WA7SKT wrote:
>> Never have cared for XP because I am an old DOS man and want that DOS
>> kernal.
>
> I have to admit that for speed, I'd use 98.  Unfortunately it had a
> habit of crashing and building up a collection of garbage, forcing
> frequent reloads/rebuilds.
>
> I gave up and went to W2k.  Have to use XP now because I support it.
> They're waaaaay more solid, in my experience.
>
> If 98 works for you, more power to you.  Hopefully you can run
> everything you need to under it.
>
> I believe support for 98 is ending shortly.  I don't know it well enough
> to talk about security, but I hope you're adequately protected.
>
>
> Then of course there's linux :)
> I like not rebooting.
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ham-Computers mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net
> ______________________________________________________________
> Ham-Computers mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.html
> Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.0/368 - Release Date: 6/16/2006
> 