Steenamaroo
...
You can't be serious?
You can't be serious?
ollie99
New member
What kind of proof could you give though? like a copy of the email from the seller?
Steenamaroo
...
If you're buying this thing retail then you'll have receipts or documents of some kind. Invoice, payment receipt, email confirmation....
You'll have something.
I'd just be honest and say "Unwanted extra with recent laptop purchase - I have receipts to prove authenticity."
The chances are if you write that, no one's gona ask anyway.
You'll have something.
I'd just be honest and say "Unwanted extra with recent laptop purchase - I have receipts to prove authenticity."
The chances are if you write that, no one's gona ask anyway.
PTravel
Senior Senior Member
I certainly am serious. Why would you think otherwise? This isn't just my personal take on Win8. The general consensus of the computer community is that Microsoft made a big mistake in trying to force a uniform interface on users for both tablets and laptops. I don't know anyone who uses their laptop for more than surfing or reading RSS feeds or updating Facebook who works in Metro. On a non-touch screen machine, which is almost all laptops and desktops, it is a huge hindrance and offers no benefit.
ollie99
New member
ollie99
New member
I agree with you, and you can buy touchscreen laptops now designed to basically be a tablet then turn into a laptop.
But thanks for your advice, I'll look into it
Steenamaroo
...
It just seems like a lot of messing around to get a nice working system.
Steenamaroo
...
Okay
Then perhaps they'll be a twist where in fact I was actually sold fakes :O
LOL. Could happen I suppose, but if you buy new from a retailer and that happens, you're covered.
Seems very unlikely.
ollie99
New member
Yeah especially HP, I could screw them
Steenamaroo
...
Relax dude. You're not gona get a fake from HP.
ollie99
New member
PTravel
Senior Senior Member
Not really. Start8 imposes very little CPU overhead. Once its installed, the machine just boots into the classic desktop with the traditional Start button in the lower left corner. With very minor differences, it's exactly like working in Win7. You can have multiple windows of any size, start programs either form icons on the desktop, quick launch from the task bar or by selecting within the program menu that opens from the Start button. I installed it on an old netbook I had lying around, primarily because I could get it from Microsoft for $30 or so. The netbook did seem to perform faster under Win8, but the Metro interface was absolutely useless. Once I installed Start8, it performed as a reasonably credible computer. It was, of course, too under-powered for any serious work, but that was a result of it being a low-powered netbook, and not any fault of Win8.
Steenamaroo
...
Yeah but, would you not like to just buy something and turn it on and use it?
When I think of how accessible a computer is I think of my parents or someone like them.
There's no way on this earth they're going to research all this stuff; They're just going to take it as it is and presumably end up with a kak UI?
PTravel
Senior Senior Member
Sure, but that's the point: Win8 is unusable for most serious purposes and, unfortunately, it is very hard to find a computer that still comes with Win7. That's why programs like Start8 have become so very popular -- they're the only way to make the computer usable.
For what it's worth, no computer is really usable right of the box. Almost all have to be "decrappified" to remove all the junky demoware. Some anti-malware software has to be installed, even if it's must Microsoft's own free Security Essentials (which is pretty good, but not bullet-proof). There are personal preferences that need to be set up, printers and other peripherals to install and, of course, software to be loaded. Including installation of Start8 in this process really isn't inconvenient at all, and the benefits are profound.
As for your parents, well, I'm an older guy (I won't say how old, but I'm certainly old enough to be the father of many, if not most, of the folks who post here
). Trust me -- there's nothing inherent in being-of-an-age that prevents people from learning about and effectively using computers. Most of my friends who are my age are very competent computer users. Now, when it comes to activities that are more popular with younger people than older people, e.g. social networking, games, peer-to-peer file sharing, etc., no doubt the younger folks have a considerable edge. However, when it's a question of using computers to get useful work, like recording, composing, mixing and mastering, we can probably hold our own.
Steenamaroo
...
Well look, I know this isn't the appropriate thread but that really is my point.
Apple computers are totally usable out of the box. Other than a motu and canon driver, my system is literally as from factory.
I can't think of one thing that I'd want/need to remove, turn off, adjust or customise.
I know it seems like I'm on a fan-boy mission here, but these quotes are the reason I'm sticking at my point.
I have experience of both sides (probably more of microsoft) and Eccs advice just doesn't apply on Apple's platform.
That alone is a significant benefit.
Last edited:
PTravel
Senior Senior Member
Sure they're usable right of the box. That's because a lot of decisions about how you should work and how the computer should be configured have been made for you by Apple. I had one job that required that I use Mac, exclusively. I hated it because I was used to "having it my way," to borrow from Burger King. Macs cost a lot more than a comparably-powered PC. Macs have a smaller selection of available software than PCs, and, though at the top-end, software prices are comparable, PCs have a lot more low-priced and free stuff. If he Mac suits your needs, that's fine. It's not a "bad" computer or anything like that. I just don't see the advantages offered by Macs outweighing the disadvantages when compared to a PC. If the choice is either use it out-of-the-box but only in the way pre-determined by Apple and with a limited selection of software titles vs. spend a little time configuring it to work the way you most like to work and with a a vast selection of software titles, I'll go with the latter.
It only looks like a mission if you start handing out pamphlets and say, "Have you discovered Mac?"
Steenamaroo
...
There certainly is a much smaller range of software available.
That in itself is a disadvantage, but almost being guaranteed compatibility across their range is the flip side.
Open source and free software has come in leaps and bounds on OSX though. There's a LOT of free stuff out there.
I consider that to be a huge advantage. I can appreciate that it's not to others though.
It seems petty, but that's all I wanted.
I'm not interested in what's 'better'. That's preference, but advantages exist.
Fair play to you.
PS: I wasn't suggesting that older folks aren't competent or anything. I just took my parents as an example because they aren't especially savvy.
Jeez..computers move so fast I'm starting to think 27 is new the 60.
ollie99
New member
So much for not being a pc vs mac thread
PTravel
Senior Senior Member
"Just when I thought I was out, they pulled me back in." Extra points for anyone who knows what that's from.So much for not being a pc vs mac thread
PTravel
Senior Senior Member
I'm not interested in what's 'better'. That's preference, but advantages exist.
Fair play to you.[/quote]It's not petty at all. The "best computer" is the one that does the job for you. My writing partner uses Macs and, for her, they are clearly the best choice -- she has neither the time nor interest in doing with her machines what I do with mine. She needs to do the books for her business (she runs a yoga studio), draft letters, send email and, of course, Skype with me, write lyrics and listen to the music I send her, either as MP3s, WAVs or Finale scores (Finale has a free "notepad" version for both Macs and PCs with limited composing capabilities, but the ability to play back Finale scores created in the full version). For her, the Macs were ideal solutions. For me, it's a little different because I demand a lot more from my machine. Bringing this back on-topic, in addition to running a slew of music software, including a gazillion VSTs, my new laptop goes with me to the office where it runs the full Microsoft Office Suite on two 1920 x 1200 monitors, runs everything from Photoshop to a variety of specialized legal software, indexes every single document on our file server, and lets me do legal research. It travels with me on business trips and, in addition to letting me do everything I do at the office, provides my entertainment in the form of Slingbox, Netflix, and ripped DVDs and BluRays that it plays both on its own screen and via HDMI to the hotel's flat screen television. At home, it's a media computer that connects via WiDi to my bedroom computer. On planes, it's my in-flight entertainment, eBook reader and office desk. All of this requires a fairly complicated array of communication tools, including several flavors of VPN (including one corporate VPN that is simply unavailable for Mac), VNC, FTP, Bluetooth, WiDi (which, I think, is also unavailable for Mac), and networking utilities. Not everyone needs all this, particularly if they're using their machines for a single primary purpose like music or photography or video. However, I really like being able to exploit the power of my computers so that I can do all sorts of things that, when I was younger, simply weren't available (when I went to college, we still used slide rules -- you might have to Google that
-- computers were these huge, multi-million dollar things that were locked up in refrigerator rooms and guarded by guys (always guys) in white coats.As I said, the computer that does what you need it to do is the "best computer" for the job. For some it'ss a Mac, for others it's a PC, for still others its a Linux box or, god forbid, a Chromebook.
I'll admit to being he go-to guy when it comes to technology for a lot of my friends. My own parents were never interested in computers, even when I gave them machines that were set up and optimized to be as simple as possible to operate. My wife's parents split down the middle -- my father-in-law loves technology and can't get enough. My mother-in-law is an absolute Luddite and had to be persuaded to even allow a laptop in the house. I find the greatest generational divide when it comes to technology to be more sociological. Everyone of any age likes a nice big flat screen TV. Younger folks, however, socialize differently than older folks do and did. I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to things like Facebook (though I have a Facebook page -- who doesn't?). I know about computer gaming only because I represent a number of game developers in my law practice. I absolutely HATE texting, and I never, ever, ever use Twitter. It's really just a question of preference. Even here, my musical tastes are very different than most others who post. I like jazz and, though there a couple of hip hop artists whose work feels more like jazz to me and who I like, for the most part I don't like hip hop or any other rap variant. I don't care for any popular artists except (strangely, I think) Lady Gaga, who I think is immensely talented. I write musical theater (I'm one of 5 straight men in America who likes musical theater -- however, two are dead, we haven't heard from one for some time, and I've got questions about the other.
).There's no "better" involved, and no "right." There's only different strokes.
Think about this: when I was in high school, there were no cellphones, no calculators, only three broadcast television networks, plus PBS. Televisions were all black and white and 21" was a "big screen." To hear music, I either had to buy easily-scratched vinyl records or go to a live performance. FM was around, but considered Bohemian, and most radios didn't receive it. I learned a little computer programming at a local college when I was in high school. We used punch cards and had to hand in our "deck" and then wait a few hours to see if the program actually ran. There were no video display terminals -- output was printed, only. In college, we could enter programs with modified IBM selectric typewriters or teletype terminals, but I didn't see a "glass terminal" until my senior year. When I got my MFA, my school's music department had a Moog synthesizer (one -- that was it). It was a big console thing with dozens and dozens of patch cords and dials. It was strictly monophonic and had, if I recall, a two or three octave range. We did echo and pseudo-reverb with a custom-modified reel-to-reel tape recorder that had an extra playback head on a movable arm; you would feedback the signal from the extra head to the recording head to create an echo effect. A "portable cassette deck" weighed several pounds and was about the size of a loaf of bread. Back in the 80s, I ran a BBS called MIDIum, which was dedicated to the then-brand new technology of MIDI. As there was no internet, you reached it by using a modem over the telephone (initially 300 baud -- slower than most people type). At its peak, it had a whopping 500 megabytes of storage, which was enormous (and costly).Jeez..computers move so fast I'm starting to think 27 is new the 60.
For some real perspective, my parents were born around 1915. For them, the primary means of communication was the telegraph, commercial radio broadcasting was still in its infancy, and recorded music meant a gramophone or a player piano. Telephones were a luxury when they were children and didn't really become common until they were in their teens.
You're absolute right -- things have changed, and continue to change, at a lightning pace.