"...a story of forced obsolescence..."
In this case the "story" is fiction since no one is forced to upgrade
anything by anyone.
If a computer is upgrade is is only because the owner CHOOSES to
upgrade.
If "forced obsolescence" were true as you suggest older computers
would not be performing their jobs well, some still using Windows 3.1.
"The idea that the old should be in the landfills"
That may be your CHOICE, but not mine.
I use more than age to determine if something is suitable for a job
and nothing prevents anyone else from doing the same.
This applies to almost everything, not just computers.
--
Jupiter Jones [MVP]
[url]http://www3.telus.net/dandemar[/url]
[url]http://www.dts-l.org[/url]
"NoStop" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:1174837220.617370@netadmin1.interbaun.net...[color=blue]
> Your "guess" is correct. This has been the plan ever since
> Microsoft,
> through its monopolization of the desktop, and its "partners" came
> together
> with the idea of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours, and
> together
> we'll be able to enrich ourselves at the expense of our user base."
>
> Microsoft over the years has proven to be a relentless money
> grabbing
> corporation whose reason for being is to enrich its owners. It is no
> wonder
> that Bill Gates is the richest man in the world and Screaming
> Ballard is
> the 14th richest man. Every upgrade cycle has been a story of forced
> obsolescence requiring its user base to upgrade both its software
> and
> hardware. All this is done in the name of innovation, when in fact,
> the
> majority of users have rather simple needs (email, web browsing,
> word
> processing, etc) that previous versions already provided.
>
> The idea that the old should be in the landfills of this world and
> the
> consumer should forever be consuming has become a fine art thanks to
> the
> likes of Microsoft and its "partners". Welcome to the world of the
> corporate domination of life on planet earth, lead in part (a major
> part)
> by the greed of Microsoft - the most profitable corporation the
> world has
> ever known.
>
> Cheers.
>
>[color=green]
>> "PTravel" <ptravel@travelersvideo.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23zg$Z%23mbHHA.5044@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...[color=darkred]
>>> Why is it that so many hardware manufacturers seem to know less
>>> about
>>> Vista than I do? I've had two instances, now, in which the
>>> information
>>> provided by the hardware manufacturer was simply WRONG, and I was
>>> able to
>>> get the hardware in question working just fine.
>>>
>>> 1. Netgear: I have a GA511 gigabit PCMCIA NIC. When Vista is
>>> allowed to
>>> install it, device manager reports that it's working, but it
>>> doesn't.
>>> Manually tweaking the registers for the NIC got it working with
>>> the Vista
>>> default driver, but I couldn't force it to 1-gig only operation --
>>> it
>>> would lock up unless allowed to autodetect. When it would
>>> autodetect
>>> 1-gig, it would report the speed as 10 mbps (though actually
>>> running at
>>> gigabit speeds). However, autodetect was unreliable -- half the
>>> time it
>>> would connect at 100 mbps. Repeated contact with Netgear was
>>> futile. I
>>> finally reached a knowledgable tech who told me, "Oh, yeah -- I
>>> know
>>> about
>>> that. I'm trying to work something out." Finally, I decided I'd
>>> play
>>> with other drivers for the GA511 chipset, and found an internal
>>> alternative driver in Vista that works perfectly (except for the
>>> false
>>> speed report,
>>> but that's cosmetic only). I can now force the NIC to default to
>>> 1-gig
>>> and it works reliably. So, no new driver necessary.
>>>
>>> Way to go, Netgear! How many customers did you lose because you
>>> know
>>> less about your products than they do?
>>>
>>> 2. Adaptec SlimSCSI 1480b Cardbus SCSI adapter. I've got some
>>> old HP
>>> scanners lying around. They're very good scanners and I don't
>>> want to
>>> replace them. I used to use them in an XP laptop with an Adaptec
>>> 1460c
>>> PCMCIA SCSI adapter. That card can't be installed under Vista on
>>> my new
>>> laptop. The Adaptec website has a page that lists Vista
>>> compatibility
>>> for
>>> its various products. It indicated that, though the 1460c
>>> wouldn't work
>>> underVista, Adaptec's 1480b adapter would, and there were
>>> downloadable
>>> drivers available on the website. I found the card on eBay (great
>>> deal
>>> -- $35 for a card that retails for over $200) and went to the
>>> Adaptec
>>> website
>>> to download the driver. Well, Adapatec has changed the website --
>>> now
>>> the Vista page says that it is working on a driver and will have
>>> one out
>>> eventually, but the card will not work with Vista now. Great!
>>> Just for
>>> kicks, I downloaded an old NT driver for the 1480b and installed
>>> it.
>>> Bingo -- Device Manager reports it's working perfectly. I plugged
>>> in my
>>> oldest HP scanner, a LaserJet IIcx that is about 15 years old.
>>> Vista
>>> recognized (despite it not being plug and play!) and installed the
>>> right
>>> driver. All my HP software works perfectly, including the very
>>> useful
>>> Deskcopy utility. So, no new driver necessary.
>>>
>>> Way to go, Adaptec! How many customers did you lose because you
>>> know
>>> less about your products than they do?
>>>
>>> What is it with these companies? What are their technicians
>>> doing,
>>> anyway? I'm not a computer professional, and I can get their stuff
>>> working
>>> under Vista. Why can't they figure this out?[/color][/color]
>
> --
> The "Wow" starts now.
> [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyLqUf4cdwc&eurl=[/url]
>
> "No sane person wants Vista, so Microsoft is making sure they have
> no
> choice."
> [url]http://www.aaxnet.com/editor/edit043.html[/url]
>[/color]