Stone Knives and Bearskins

  • This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.
#2
As Rex reported in another thread, MS (apparently intentionally) broke backward compatibility in their VS 2012 RTL.

It seems MS wants to cash in on the new health care laws and their substantial cost increases by forcing health care providers to replace millions of perfectly working systems and retrain their operators to brand new user interfaces of programs with often reduced capabilities, never mind the incorrect diagnoses and treatments of patients until all that is done. Vendors win, the public loses.
 
Likes: TEA-Time

rconn

Administrator
Staff member
May 14, 2008
10,101
85
#4
As Rex reported in another thread, MS (apparently intentionally) broke backward compatibility in their VS 2012 RTL.

It seems MS wants to cash in on the new health care laws and their substantial cost increases by forcing health care providers to replace millions of perfectly working systems and retrain their operators to brand new user interfaces of programs with often reduced capabilities, never mind the incorrect diagnoses and treatments of patients until all that is done. Vendors win, the public loses.
I agree -- if by "perfectly working systems" in the case of XP you mean archaic, slow, and bug-riddled security disasters. If your time is worth less than $0.01/hour, then it *might* make economic sense to stick with XP. Otherwise, I cannot fathom why anyone would choose to use it.
 

Charles Dye

Super Moderator
Staff member
May 20, 2008
3,385
39
Albuquerque, NM
prospero.unm.edu
#6
I agree -- if by "perfectly working systems" in the case of XP you mean archaic, slow, and bug-riddled security disasters. If your time is worth less than $0.01/hour, then it *might* make economic sense to stick with XP. Otherwise, I cannot fathom why anyone would choose to use it.
On the other hand, people who feel their time is valuable might prefer an OS that mounts flash drives in seconds, rather than long minutes....
 
#7
I agree -- if by "perfectly working systems" in the case of XP you mean archaic, slow, and bug-riddled security disasters. If your time is worth less than $0.01/hour, then it *might* make economic sense to stick with XP. Otherwise, I cannot fathom why anyone would choose to use it.
A system works perfectly if it does everything its owner wants it to do correctly and at a speed which satisfies the owner. If it is connected to the world outside of the LAN through external firewalls (e.g. VPN to other facilities) and all its authorized users are authorized to all information on the LAN and physical access is limited, the only security issue is unauthorized persons with physical access. In such facilities the cost of conversion, when you include retraining time of persons like chief of cardiac surgery, far exceeds the possible savings in the firewall complexity. Of course, in such facilities only system administrators (and software developers, if any) would explicitly use JPsoft products (though the programs doing some of their daily chores might).
 

rconn

Administrator
Staff member
May 14, 2008
10,101
85
#9
In such facilities the cost of conversion, when you include retraining time of persons like chief of cardiac surgery, far exceeds the possible savings in the firewall complexity.
Nobody needs to be retrained when switching from XP to Windows 7. Windows 8 might be a different matter, at least when using the Modern interface (I've turned it off and boot straight to the desktop).
 
May 20, 2009
217
0
53
ITALY
#10
...
Windows 8 might be a different matter, at least when using the Modern interface (I've turned it off and boot straight to the desktop).
How did You turn it off?
I mean, You use a software such as classic shell or You change some system settings?

Thank You and regards

Rodolfo Giovanninetti