May 2009 - Posts
If you didn’t like what I said, or you think that I was nitpicking, consider this. Many PC users have been running XP since it was introduced. I know that there was some resistance at first because it looked different and stuff had been moved about, BUT everything ‘Windows’ was there. A five year active life is a long time for an operating system, long enough for users to get stuck in a rut, perhaps.
When Vista came along, it should have taken all that XP was and run ahead with it. Vista was everything that XP was and more; more security, more features, more stuff moved around, more problems. Hardware incompatibility was not the most prominent of the problems. Bulk and crippling performance topped the list. In actual fact, Vista performance is nothing like as bad as it was, what with the patches and fixes which have filtered through Windows Update, but the bulk and some of the glitches remain.
PC users will have had a further two years of XP up to the point where Windows 7 is released, and first impressions are going to count. The five points I stated are what XP users are first NOT going to see. Many are going to think ‘uh oh, Vista Mk 2’ and reel back quickly.
Windows 7 will have its big opening day very soon and access to the lot is fast, but where are the doors which will let users in? Presently, the only way in is through a small window.
Round colorful thingummybobber here:
1.. Where is the START button?
We believe that the START button was far too recognizable as a feature of XP, and so we decided to give it a new look. Also, we wanted to make it more of a challenge for support people to give a description of what you would first click on for access to the rest of Windows.
2.. Where is ALL PROGRAMS?
Having set the first challenge as per above, we thought that you might be getting into the swing of it. So, rather than present you with a cascading list of everything which is installed, you now have to look around the desktop for a clue.. pssst.. the clue is in the new ‘search’ box.
3.. Where is the CLASSIC MENU?
Our records show that nobody still alive knew about the Classic Menu. Are you a Linux spy?
4.. Where is QUICKLAUNCH?
This feature was far too neat and organized and it left too much space free on the taskbar. By pinning program icons onto the new taskbar, you will look far busier than you are even though you may only be playing Solitaire and reading/sending mail occasionally (very important if you are a corporate employee). It will also make you use the new magnifier function when looking for tiny icons interspersed between what you have open on the desktop. Have you tried it yet? Just type ‘Magnifier’ in the search box (omit all parentheses). See how easy that was?
5.. Where is OUTLOOK EXPRESS?
We take all end user complaints very seriously indeed. We recognize that Windows Vi.. Vi.. Vi, the previous version, took up an extraordinary amount of disk space, and that many upgraders to the previous version could not install the operating system onto a 10gb hard drive. In fairness, it is still not possible with Windows 7 but, as a token gesture to the complainers, we have gone some way to reducing bloat by removing a few k of useful code, some of which included a mail client.
Notes: To further enhance Windows 7 slim look, we have made IE8 a removable feature. However, we do not recommend removal of this feature until it has been used to locate a download site for a competing product. You will also need a browser to locate a mail client which is Windows 7 friendly.
Also, look out for the next upcoming release of Windows, code name WUFB (Windows Users Fight Back) which will include new features including a START button, easier to use menu, and something to enable the user to send e-mail without having to look on the Internet for it.
Peace, brothers and sisters..
Basically, files fragment because any time a file is edited and bits added either directly by the user or indirectly by the system, the file size may not fit the original saved space. In the case of the Windows filing system, the file will be saved elsewhere or the extra cluster(s) used to hold the changes will be dropped in an available free space.
This is how the filing system works in the simplest way I can put it.
Remember the Windows 98 defragmenter? The little blue squares? Each square represented one cluster, and what you saw was a representation of clusters being put back into proper order. When a hard drive is formatted in NTFS format for in 9x, XP, Vista and Windows 7, clusters are being created and each cluster is sized at 4k by default.
Have you ever wondered what a cluster contains? I will tell you. It contains a complete file assuming that the file is less than 4k in size, or it contains part of a file which is larger than 4k. It can’t contain a file which contains an exact data size of 4k because there has to be space allocated in each cluster for information relating to the name given to it when you saved it and the overall size. Without this information, Windows Explorer would not be able to find anything meaningful unless each file was only 4k in total.
So now you basically know what is contained in each cluster, but there is another limitation and it is the reason why a defragmenter can’t free up space. All it can do is consolidate clusters into contiguous file groups and free groups..
A cluster can only hold information on ONE saved file. A cluster can’t be shared by two files with different saved names. So, if you create a 1k file, it will be saved on a cluster and nothing else can occupy the space left vacant up to the limit of 4k. In other words, if you saved two 1k files, the hard drive space taken up by them would be 8k (two clusters), even though the actual combined file size is only 2k. A defragmenter does not defragment files per se. It defragments cluster groups, regardless of what is saved on each cluster..
As you can see, a 4k cluster size is not very efficient with regards to space when saving very small files. Fortunately, most files found on a computer are way larger than 1 - 4k. With files over 4k, the most amount of space wasted for each file name can only be 3k maximum. The downside is that there are millions of clusters on the average hard drive, and each one has the potential to be displaced. A 5mb PowerPoint show consumes a great many clusters and can in theory be scattered far and wide.
An obvious way to reduce the capacity for so many clusters to be displaced is to increase the size of each cluster to a higher number than 4. If cluster size was raised to 8k or 16k, there would be many less clusters which could get displaced. Files saved on them would be in larger pieces and fragmentation would not be the problem that it is because the hard drive heads would not have to put in so much work locating and bringing together less parts. If only life was so simple. In the case of 8k and 16k clusters, wasted space would in worst case would increase to 7k and 15k respectively per every file name saved.
The people who decided on the cluster size for NTFS had to make a compromise between the amount of fragmentation that would occur against the amount of space that would be wasted, and 4k seemed like a good idea at the time.
You are probably wondering why we still have to defragment in 2009. It is the same reason that has dogged Windows development for years, namely backwards compatibility. When Windows first appeared, it was a graphical cover slipped over the top of DOS, a low end single user desktop operating system. Windows NT took it up a level, but whatever has carried the name ‘Windows’ has at the very least had to be compatible with the previous version or immediate relative. Microsoft Windows has come a long way despite the compatibility issues, and it is still the cheapest route to what is a highly polished and capable computer operating system. We should not forget that.
Some Linux distros may be free, and they do have the advantage of being developed from what was always a multi-user system, but they lack the finesse and versatility of Microsoft Windows. If the occasional defrag is a price to pay, then pay up willingly. And for those who are quick to point out that Windows is in the sights of every hacker and script kiddie, with all respect, I think that if Linux had 180 million users world wide and Windows was the underdog, it wouldn’t be us Windows users desperately looking for ways to keep our systems clean..
So next time you defrag your system, and you do have to defrag occasionally, do it with pride. You are a member of the largest computer based family on the planet Earth.
I have mentioned the need for a killer application which will revitalize Windows. Well, back in 1992, there was just such an animal, and it was one of the first Windows programs which captured the imagination of home computer users. I am talking about a personal information manager made by a small British software company called Threadz. It was given the look of a File-o-fax, you may know it better as Lotus Organizer, and it still holds the title of being the best selling PC program ever, I think.
Essentially, it was a database in a very neat, easy to use package. It is certainly the best looking PIM ever, and was easy to customize. It came to me as part of the Lotus Smartsuite office suite, but was also available as a standalone program too. Apart from looks and customization, it had one handy feature. There were two icons on the taskbar, one a chain link and the other a broken link.
The chain link enabled the user to link information from one page to information on any other page. In this way, one could link an address in the address book section to information held on another page in the form of a note, and also to a calendar event, maybe a birthday or anniversary perhaps.
Anything which had been linked to a page being viewed appeared as a small tab. This made the address section really useful in that you could link names of business’ or family and easily switch from one section to another or even within a section. This function has never been bettered in anything which followed it.
If it was that good, why are we not all using it? In the words of Steve Ballmer, “Developers, developers, developers”, or should I say ‘lack of developers’. It was a great standalone program, as were all of the constituent parts of Smartsuite. Unfortunately, integration between the applications was not a strong suit. Apart from Lotus 123, all of the Smartsuite applications were bought in, and Lotus made little effort to do anything but leave them much as they were at the time of purchase. In fact, the only part which did get a work over was AmiPro, a frame based word processor which was dropped in favour of WordPro.
Just for the record, WordPerfect Suite suffered the same fate. While Microsoft were busy buying bits and creating their own stuff for use as a properly integrated office production suite, its competition were sitting on the individual success of one or two elements.
I still have the installation media for Lotus Organizer and I would use it if it were not for the application which killed off all other PIMs. MS Outlook has never looked as cute, it lacks some of the features which made Organizer such a pleasure to use, and it is not quite as easy to use either. What Outlook does have is integration, not only with its other Office elements, but also with the web. For instance, names and addresses shown in White and Yellow Pages can be instantly entered into Outlook with just one click.
Personally, I think that we may never see a killer application like Lotus Organizer again, in which case Lotus Organizer will always be ‘numerous uno’. Maybe that is how it should always be. It captured the imagination of many, and was no doubt responsible for showcasing what a computer could do well way back in 1992. Long live Lotus Organizer, the worlds most favorite application of all time.
And now for the small print..
Though the image of Lotus Organizer as used in this blog entry is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws because:
- The image is used as the primary means of visual identification of the article topic.
- The use of the cover will not affect the value of the software. A screenshot cannot be used to pirate the software.
- The image shows only the default (blank document) interface of the software, and only the Home screen
- It is not replaceable with an uncopyrighted or freely copyrighted image of comparable educational value.
Some recent quotes I have seen..
“Too bad they won't offer those of us with Vista a free upgrade. I guess if I'd lived in the right time period, I'd have bought an Edsel, too.”
“IT SAID WINDOWS XP 7 IS COMING MAYBE IN THE FALL. IT WONT BE SOON ENOUGH. VISTA JUST SUCKS, SORRY”
“It's still Windows and it's still bloated.”
Funny thing is that people who criticize Vista generally can’t actually pinpoint what is wrong with it. Oh sure, there are articles on the Internet dating back to the early days, but then is not now. The majority of people with whom I have spoken are surprised that I run Vista considering that it is crap. Have these same people used Vista? Nope, but they heard from a friend of a friend that it sucks. Something is not right here. Vista works well on the right hardware, so why the problems?
I have a Compaq machine open at the side of me. It is 2005 vintage, Windows XP Home, had 256mb RAM fitted and it ran like a piece of crap. With 64mb being taken for video, the resultant 192mb saw the machine wearing itself out swapping with the pagefile almost continually. I have installed a 1gb RAM module and, for the very first time in it’s life, it will work as it always should have. The client will now be able to watch his ‘subscription paid’ baseball matches on line and it will feel like he is there in real time. It can now also run with a full XP theme in place, Weather Network’s weather eye, and WinPatrol. It boots like a good ’un and applications have a spring in their step. It is a thoroughly usable machine now, capable of delivering a good computing experience to its official owner. I wouldn’t personally install Vista or Windows 7 on it, and will advise the client accordingly, but it is a great XP computer.
It is time for the OEM’s and Microsoft to come clean. Windows XP upped the hardware game more than the industry was prepared to admit. Nobody wanted to lose sales, but the fallout is still coming down on Vista and most likely will on Windows 7 too. Windows NT required more power than DOS based Windows Anything and, as XP and its offspring are derivatives of NT, we have no right to expect them to run on present quoted minimum specs. While they may boot to desktop within the same 24hr period as the power button is pressed, running on a level surface only is to be recommended.
So, guys, can we have some changes please?
- Quit it with silly performance claims
- Revise minimum specs to allow for running stuff other than just Windows, that is to say, be realistic re installed memory
- Quit blaming each other and work together for a change
- Put customer satisfaction on the same level as financial gain
I have been preparing an older XP machine for Windows 7 recently, and it brings back memories from 2006/7. In fairness, the machine in question is a good performer running XP, but is in the bottom 20% of desktops according to PCPitsop. The processor is an AMD 1.6 mobile type, memory is 1.25gb, video is an ATI Radeon 9250 128mb, and the hard drive is an 80gb WD IDE, but this is the kind of machine which a user somewhere is going to try to upgrade to Windows 7. Running the Windows 7 Upgrade advisor, it passes the processor and memory, but fails the video card as far as Windows Aero is concerned.
Now this may come across as a minor issue, but one of the likeable things about Vista and to a lesser extent Windows 7 is the softer feel and look of the Aero desktop. The video card actually passes, if only just, on dedicated memory, but fails re full DX9 compatibility. A newer video card would get Aero onto the desktop, but it is probably not the smartest upgrade on a six year old machine. The hard drive is also a little small, and will not allow for much free space after installing the operating system and supporting production software. This will cause performance issues all of its own, especially if free space drops below 30%. Peripheral device drivers like webcams, printers, scanners etc will all need a driver upgrade, or worst case a replacement compatible unit.
Regarding software on the machine, most of it will work in Windows 7, but not quite all. Optical drive burning software of the same era as the machine is not going to work any more than it did back in 2006/7 for Vista. I did upgrade the original CD writer to a DVD writer, but the software supplied with the new unit was still a mix of Cyberlink’s DVD authoring programs and Nero 6 burning software. Now, I could buy a new DVD writer which comes with Vista/Windows 7 compatible software hopefully. If it did, it would be a cheap way to get the software because one is also getting a faster drive with a nice new laser. Other options include buying a cheap burning suite like Ashampoo, or going for a free one. The trouble with the free ones is that they tend to look nothing like the more polished expensive suites, and they tend to be less intuitive in use.
Windows 7 feels more sprightly than Vista and it is said that it does not require as much power to push it along, but make no mistake, older machines will need money spending on them just as they did back in 2006/7. Each user will have to decide whether it is viable to do so. If the decision to spend is a no-no, and there are compelling reasons not to spend on an older machine, then the only way forward is to buy all new. Do NOT fall into the same trap as many did with Vista. With the world economy the way it is, I can see any lessons learned by the OEM’s at the Vista release being shelved in favour of manufacturing machines which will again be underpowered in a bid to keep the prices down.
Underpowered = lousy performance if you didn’t already know, and lousy performance = bad computing experience..
In the interests of those who use the machine that I have been using as a reference above, I will leave it as it is, and run XP Pro SP3 for the duration of its useful life.
It is easy to see why Ubuntu & Co. does no good. If something is given away for free, the general perception is that the product is crap. If a Microsoft operating system was offered at half the regular price, more people would buy it than would download Ubuntu or PC Linux. For some, obtaining a cracked version of a Microsoft operating system would be better. So, when some people download a Microsoft operating system from a torrent, they think of it as getting a valued product for free. The laughable part is the Windows 7 RC is available through kosher channels for FREE. Almost anybody can get it. Of course, there is an element of ‘value added’ to stuff that comes down through a torrent. Free admission to a botnet is often included too.
This happened with Apple’s iWorks 09. Open Office 3.0 is as free for Mac’s as it is PC’s, but pirating iWorks was a far better prize. It has happened now with Windows 7. Much of the stuff available on torrents and P2P is probably ok, but the newest and most desirable may contain more that you bargain for. Being part of a botnet is not fun. We can all be affected, but whoever controls them will get your passwords and bank details before they get mine.
Nothing is free unless the original owner says that it is free. The price paid for overriding the owners rule could land you with a larger payback than the cost of whatever it is you have ‘taken’. Re Windows 7 RC, if you ask nicely, you will receive, and there is no compulsory membership to a botnet in the small print. There is a time limitation but hey, you get to use the latest Microsoft operating system for free until June 2010. Not too bad for a company that is trashed by many for being money grabbers..
For the last two or three years, I have used a 19” LCD monitor as my primary display alongside an 18” Dell P990. Three months ago, the LCD monitor started to play up. It would lose colour brightness occasionally, but one day decided it was not going to display anything at all. The common thinking is to dump a broken LCD monitor. The trouble is that it seems very wasteful, and the last thing that a landfill site needs is yet another toxic backlight. So I decided to take the repair route and, not being too adept at electronics repairs, took it into a place which advertises repairs.
The first shot at repair did not go well. I received the unit back but it would only stay up for two minutes. Thereafter, powering it down and back up gotten another twenty seconds of a picture then off again. The second shot at repair saw it work for almost two weeks, but now it is back to not staying up.
There are, as I understand, only two parts which can go wrong, the power inverter and the backlight, and neither part is too expensive. So why am I down $100 and still no working monitor? Incompetence on the part of the repairer maybe? Needless to say that the monitor is out of warranty and sending it back to the North American manufacturer base is a big no-no. I am in Canada, the manufacturer base is in Phoenix AZ. I am going to take it to the repairer for a third time.
How reliable are LCD monitors? I have a client monitor at my base, a ViewSonic 20” LCD. It will power up once every two weeks. If the power cable is pulled or the monitor is turned off using the front panel switch, it’s done for the next two weeks. My monitor was never powered down using the switch on the front panel. I just used ‘sleep’ at the end of the day.
CRT monitors can suffer with power switch problems, but generally will run for years before exhibiting problems. For this reason, I replied to an ad on my local Kijiji site in response to a 19” LG CRT. Assuming that it is still available, I will get 19” of monitor real estate for $30, and it works.
If anybody out there has had similar experiences with LCD monitors, I would be interested to hear about them.
It’s all here.. http://windowsteamblog.com/blogs/windows7/default.aspx
I wonder how long it will be before Vista is wheeled out to the dumpster. Judging by the content of the above blog, it will be at around the same time that the leaves are falling. I will keep my copy under lock and key. Nobody is taking mine to a landfill site. It has been good to/for me and, like any good friend, I am not about to say goodbye any time soon.
Windows 7 has almost everybody raving. Yes, it is ok, but come on!! It isn’t all things to all people and when all is said an done, it is only an operating system. From a productivity stand point, I am more interested in seeing and trying out Office 14. As long as I can get Windows Mail to work in Windows for newsgroups, most of my work is done in that and Outlook as far as communication and organisation goes.
If I had the spare funds, I would KVM a Windows 7 machine alongside this one to give me instant access to both operating systems. This is a very different scenario to that of the run up to November 2006 where I ran Vista as much as possible. I only kept XP going as a backup system and admittedly had it installed and updated until Windows 7 beta was released, but I was quick to drop it at that point. Sorry Microsoft, but I do not feel the same way about Windows 7. I am quite happy to use Vista until I can find a way to make ‘7’ work in the way I want it to work for me, and not how somebody else is going to dictate how it works for me.
You see, I am not overly bothered by boot times. I want functionality, and part of this is to be able to sort out the desktop for the way I like to work. It may not seem like much to some, but it does to me and I am the one who has to work with it.
However, I do wish Windows 7 success. The PC industry is badly in need of a booster shot, and Windows 7 will do that. Maybe it will be so successful that somebody out there will create an add-on that will bring back some of the old Windows functionality for us older but still functioning computer users. That is a hint to all of you code writers. Here it is again in bolder text..
Maybe it will be so successful that somebody out there will create an add-on that will bring back some of the older Windows functionality for us older but still functioning computer users.
‘Mike’s Window’ is written in Windows Live Writer which is running in Vista 64. This is the OS which everybody loves to hate. I do have Windows 7 64bit RC installed too but I prefer Vista.
This is my production PC.. Biostar T6100-939. AMD 64 3500+ (single core), 4 x1gb Kingston value RAM, MSI nVidia 6600 256mb, WD 320gb SATA II, WD 160gb SATA II, WD 80gb IDE 7200rpm, LG DVD –RW/+RW 16x, LG CD 52x, NEC 1.44mb FD
Not state of the art by today’s standards, but it will play Halo and Fable with maximum detail enabled. It is slowish booting to desktop because I have a fair bit starting all at one time but, other than that, it works really quite well and I don’t ever get BSOD’s. It runs a full complement of production software which includes Office 2007 Ultimate. AV protection is courtesy of ESET NOD32 v.4.
The work area PC (Windows XP Pro SP3) which also doubles as a print server for the network is an aging Intel D845 running a low powered P4 1.7ghz, 640mb, ATI Radeon 9250 128mb, 80gb IDE, LG CD-RW 52x32x52, DVD 16x, 1.44mb FD. There is an HP DeskJet 5150 attached. AV protection varies between trials of free solutions.
The general use PC (Windows XP Pro SP3) is an ECS L7VMM, AMD 1.7ghz, 1.25gb RAM, ATI Radeon 9250 128mb, LG DVD –RW/+RW 16x, 1.44mb FD. It runs Office 2003 Professional and an assortment of other stuff. AV protection is courtesy of ESET NOD32 v.4.
Networking is courtesy of a D-Link DI 624 wireless router which is not as reliable as I would like it to be re wireless connections.
I will freely admit that, funds permitting, I would probably change all of the above hardware for newer stuff, but the reality is that I don’t need newer stuff. What I have works well for the purpose for which it is used. The one item I will most likely change is the router which would be replaced for a more Vista compatible unit, and which would also be network printer capable.
What I want to put across is that you do not need state of the art stuff if all you do is general stuff, even if running Vista or Windows 7.
Uninstalling RC drifted along smoothly, as did installation of the standalone five language RTM. It has taken a couple of days for the system to settle back down, but Vista 64 is running nicely again, and I have no major issues. There are still niggling problems such as windows not retaining view settings but, other than that, Vista has proved to be an excellent and stable base for me.
Language packs have disappeared from Windows Update again, but will no doubt reappear in compatible form before too long, and all will be well again.
Looking back:
I have never really understood why Vista is seen as so different from its predecessors. It has all of the attributes of its predecessors and some operational features which started way back in Windows 95. Vista is the last of its kind, and people will miss it when it has gone. It is often compared to Windows ME, something I have never seen as fair. ME could blue screen on its first reboot after installation, and would even blue screen if left doing nothing at all. Vista has never been that bad. It just lacked the support from the rest of the industry at the beginning of its life.
Vista was not a good candidate for installing onto what had been an XP budget machine in a previous life. It took up more hard drive real estate than anything before it, but new machines were supplied with considerably larger hard drives anyway. It required 2gb of RAM to run well, but XP’s performance was barely adequate in 256mb, not too bad in 512mb, and a flyer in 1gb. Install Vista onto an high end XP OEM Media Center machine and performance was every bit what you would expect it to be.
Looking forward:
Windows 7 will not suffer the same fate as Vista did because the industry as a whole learned valuable lessons at the end of 2006 and into 2007. While Vista and Microsoft took the brunt of the early criticism, the real culprits knew who they were. The sad part is that the hardware manufacturers and software authors will not have to run around like scalded cats because the donkey work has been done. What finally was made to work in Vista will work in Windows 7, assuming of course that no specific OS identifier has been slipped in surreptitiously. They should still have a bomb placed under them if only to keep them on their toes.
For the most part, upgraders will avoid Vista and make their way directly to Windows 7. Make no mistake, Windows 7 will take up way more space than Windows 2000/XP ever did. It will still not fit well into a 20gb partition along with user preferred applications, taking up 15gb as it does without anything else being present. It will still have the same memory requirement as Vista if anything other than mediocre performance is to be expected. The only difference is that it will not be left standing on its own as Vista was for the reasons stated already.
Oh, and by the way, if you didn’t upgrade to Vista because you didn’t like the look of it, there is a possibility that you are really going to dislike Windows 7.
Personally speaking:
With rumours abounding of an impending Windows 7 release as early as October of this year, it looks like Vista will be well and truly consigned to ‘Room 101’. I am not ready to do that, and I will not be ready in October either. There are features which have been dropped from Windows 7, features that make my life much easier than what is being offered in their place. Until somebody can come up with a work around for a menu system that works for me, I may put Windows 7 into Room 101 for a while.