jaclaz

Here you are: https://frame.work/laptop-diy-edition Screen resolution 2256x1504, It has 4 expansion slots (with a USB-C connector I believe) and you can use 4 USB-A expansion cards: https://frame.work/marketplace/expansion-cards jaclaz

No (meaning that is not in any way faster than Windows 7 on SAME hardware and with clean installs). We have a member here, NoelC that did objective tests: https://msfn.org/board/topic/170634-i-need-to-confess-regarding-windows-81/ The UI actually sucks, and sucks big, but of course that it is just a matter of personal tastes. jaclaz

Nitpick: organizations of a certain size .... jaclaz

Sure , the note was only about the "young", if you are young you cannot possibly have experienced the solidity and reliability of NT 4.00 and later Windows 2000 in the years 1995-2001. jaclaz

Would two years categorize as "immediately"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vincenzo_Peruggia But I was talking of good taste, someone can have good taste AND break the Law or have "bad" behaviour. jaclaz

And it shows , as of course the best OS ever made was Windows 2000, but you probably missed it as it was "reserved" to professional environments. jaclaz

I believe that when they took Windows 2000 and bastardized it for the masses[1] they thought that it was a good idea to have a (hidden and by default passwordless) built-in administrator account accessible in Safe Mode only, and - as a matter of fact - I think it saved countless reinstalls. So, while making little sense (there could have been tens of better ways to provide a similar mechanism) it does make some, in organizations, the Administrator account would be protected by a password (set by the IT people) but the account would remain hidden, and the user (coming from a Windows DOS/9x/Me) would have only "self" to choose at logon. jaclaz [1] Consider that in those times noone, and I mean noone outside an office or organization had network nor any need for authentication of users (which 99% of the time was only one) so that the DOS/Win9x/Me world was effectively "passwordless" and "all users are admins".

Hmmm. https://www.techrepublic.com/forums/discussions/hidden-administrator-account-win-xp/ jaclaz

For experiments, I would suggest easyOS (the evolution of Quirky *and/or* Puppy Linux), its frugal install approach is - IMHO - very convenient and since it uses grub4dos as a loader, it is very easy to setup in dual boot with *anything else*: https://easyos.org/ jaclaz

I don't know , one can be a spammer (or anyway professionally do bad things[1]) BUT have good taste, after all. jaclaz [1] I mean, think of art thieves or forgers, they are not "good" according to common society standards, yet they are on the same level (if not on a higher one) of many art professors and critics.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_gustibus_non_est_disputandum (but probably there should be a limit ) jaclaz

Maybe the builds here: https://msfn.org/board/topic/177308-ffmpeg-windows-xp-updated-builds-by-corone/ https://rwijnsma.home.xs4all.nl/files/ffmpeg/?C=M;O=D jaclaz

Oww, come on, that would be normal if you actually owned the OS, nowadays it is "their" OS and there is a (sophisticated?) AI in Redmond that chooses what you will see (or not see) on the taskbar. Welcome to the new normal. jaclaz

Well, one could use Edge, now with embedded financial services : https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/articles/introducing-buy-now-pay-later-in-microsoft-edge/td-p/2967030 (and no the article is dated November 15th, not April 1st) jaclaz

You could ask to have your member name changed to NotHereToInstallScriptsWithoutScreenCapsNoSeeNoGo ... Though probably such a long name would wreck for good the forum page layout. HereJustToGainsay would be short and effective, though . jaclaz

It seems like it is "by design" https://www.dell.com/community/Storage-Drives-Media/Dell-Dimension-Blinking-Hard-Disk-Light-SOLVED/td-p/1078513 jaclaz

Sure it is, what is the problem? For the record I paid for it (the Nokia 1280) new some 25 or 28 Euro including 15 Euro worth of calls on the SIM circa 2010 or 2011. jaclaz

Are we going on the personal anecdata route? That disk had a number of bad sectors (all concentrated in a same area), which I believe is a sign of a "head crash", what I did when I salvaged it was to simply find out the area where bad sectors were concentrated and exclude it (+some small area before and after it) from the partitioning, making a volume just before it and an extended partition starting just after it. jaclaz

Great minds : tend to think (and behave) alike. I have a Nokia 1280 as daily driver and a 7 inch[1] tablet at the office. Well, only as a single data point, I managed to live a relatively happy life without it till now. jaclaz [1] any "normal" sized phone has too tiny keyboards, that I either cannot see properly or cannot type on decently.

That is not a recommendation, that is vague, generic advice. When (if) "they" will give you a small list of suitable devices and tested, easy to follow specific instructions, then it will become a recommendation. About "alternative" Operating Systems they tend to be - usually - "poor", i.e. their functionality is severely reduced on most (of the very few supported[1]) phones. So you have to choose (on trust only) one of these alternate OS's, then choose among the list the specific device that is reported to be the most functional, then procure the specific device. At this point you have good probabilities (but NOT certainty) that you'll manage to root/sideload/whatever the chosen OS on the specific device you have following a complicated sequence of steps (usually very poorly detailed, contradicting or however very much NOT clear for anyone already familiar with the processes involved), with the concrete risk of bricking the device unintentionally. And once you hopefully succeed you will have a smartphone with quite a few missing capabilities. The above is not at all to put you down, but you need to be aware of the limitations and possible caveats, this is something (IMNSHO) that you should take as a (fun) project to learn new, strange things rather than a sure path to google-freedom. jaclaz [1] LineageOS namely has a long list of devices that are not supported anymore (why?) and for which you need to build yourself the OS (what?), given the amount of these devices you have no guarantees whatever that the specific device that you choose and are able to procure today won't be "abandoned" tomorrow.

Well, you have the toothpick at least, around here you have to spin cardboxes in your hands, and few people can get more than xbox 270, most people are between xbox 90 and xbox 180. jaclaz

So you have something that contains some 1,465,149,168 (onebillionfourhundredsixtyfivemilliononehundredfortyninethousandsixtyeight) "items" + a considerable number of "spare items", ready to replace any defective one, and you throw in the trash the whole thing. It must be very comfortable living, when you are rich. jaclaz

You are right, re-looking at the values, they aren't that bad (set apart the ECC errors), the issues are likely related to age more than anything else supposing that the SMART data is accurate or - rather - if the way they are interpreted is correct, which is something I always greatly doubt. It is something I simply hate, there is not any real, definite standard, each manufacturer uses RAW values that seem random and each and every tool seems more like guessing what they actually mean., the scarce documentation that you can find is either inaccurate, or wrong, or contradictory, or wouldn't apply to the model you have at hand, it's simply a huge mess. jaclaz

Sure, I do have some familiarity with them, but a common mistake is to believe that the make (as opposed to specific model and even firmware version) means anything, some Seagate models were better than - say - WD, and WD often (but not always) have been better than another make - still there have been some WD models that were crappy to say the least, and eben on a same exact make/model and firmware there have been reports of reliability differences depending on the actual factory in which they were made. But I was talking of something else, "weak sectors", these may develop in time on *any* disk and either remain "weak" "forever" or turn into bad sectors, even if - generally speaking - they are usually spread on the disk, if there is a certain number of such "weak" sectors near an area with a concentration of actually "bad" sectors it makes sense to exclude also the "weak" sectors, besides the "bad" ones from the partitioning. BTW the reknown, at least here on MSFN, Seagate 7200.11 saga wasn't at all about "bad" drives, only about a "wrong" firmware and a complete mismanagement. jaclaz P.S. @XPerceniol Those are just the "smart" data, no need of Victoria to read them, and they are largely meaningless, see: https://msfn.org/board/topic/153191-does-copying-several-giga-bytes-on-a-daily-base-screw-the-hard-drive/ what you need to do is the "test and repair", but - personally - I would try that only after having imaged the disk drive (or at least having made sure to have a recent, working backup). Sure your SMART data, unreliable as they may be: https://msfn.org/board/topic/177196-is-my-drive-still-healthy-seagate-sshd-1tb/?do=findComment&comment=1146918 don't look any good , particularly most of the "key" (I would call them "only meaningful") 5 ones: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/what-smart-stats-indicate-hard-drive-failures/ The main thing you must care about is to not stress the disk too much, and it would be a good idea if you need to image it, to do it in chunks and making sure (placing an old PSU fan near the disk is good enough) to keep it cool.

I endorse (for what it is worth) RainyShadow suggestions. Making a "full" format may be not entirely a good idea, it depends on the specific "type" of bad sectors and the amount of them. BTW tools like Victoria or MHDD will tell you not only which sectors are actually "bad" but also those that are "weak". Now, there are two most common cases: 1) all (hopefully few) bad sectors are spread here and there on the hard disk then the full format is the way to go. 2) but if bad sectors are concentrated in a given area (which is typical of a head crash) it makes more sense to "isolate" the area, partitioning the disk in such a way that no partition extends over the "bad" area, as the number of "spare" (please read as re-mappable) sectors is limited, so if you have more than a few of them, you shouldn't "waste" them for a largish contiguous area jaclaz