Quality of OSes

[kdg]

All in all I think a reply could be:

I don't see how this works right away, so I added the name:

Quote

 

QUOTE= jaclaz ::::        or by your convoluted and unclear way of writing it.

It is not about you writing nonsense, it is about you writing something that - since it cannot be understood (by me) - may appear like nonsense.

I am pretty sure that you know what you want to say, and most probably it represents an interesting point of view , but unless somehow we find a way to understand each other a conversation is simply not possible .

 

Basically it is true what it says here. Just how I intended to say it. Or what happens in that case: short, catchy, sufficiently true. And apparently not many people are thinking about it. Indeed a reason to say anything to anyone. I don't mean your reply (here) as much, but normally someone would reply something relating to the content. 

Edited September 3, 2017 by kdg

[kdg]

But to elaborate on the two OP-posts I posted:

• Do you believe all these updates are necessary? So-coincidentally eating all of your systems resources. It looks more like some sort of financial plan to me. The same with new versions of OSes and hardware too: CPU's, RAM. I did not even start about that. Which doesn't make it more complicated. It seems to be directed quite centrally. 
   
• Who wants to work with someone else's financial plan? Or even have it in his house? 
   
• I say that the safety aspect is controversial. And that anyone can see that right here and now. And even that if this is something, it is TOTALLY clear that there is a much better method that does not change how well the operating system works to the user. 
   
• And of course all these other nonsensical issues people run into. So really a bit more emphasize on 'all'. 
   

[dencorso]

Well, while I cannot deny your command of English is flawless when you talk about more mundane things, as for instance:

On 9/2/2017 at 3:53 PM, kdg said:

About a day ago I made a thread that was closed

... when you get to your intended main subject you become much more difficult to undestand, as for instance:

On 9/2/2017 at 3:53 PM, kdg said:

XP-ish as an operating system seems to be best working all in all. A touch and some technical aspects of later operating systems COULD be interesting. But that is not what is being served. This thread is about how this can become how it is.

Now, this may be due to you having fine-honed your English by studying the I-Ching and Burroughs' works, particularly "The Ticket that Exploded" and "Naked Lunch", or to being involved in Production and Operations Management most of your life, so I really don't fault you for that. But I do have to observe that to cause a person or a thing to "become how it is" is yet another ontologically impossible™ task, because they already actually are what they must become.

[bphlpt]

@kdg,

We really are not trying to disrespect you at all, we either just don't understand what you are trying to talk about, or we might not want to participate even if we do (think) we understand, or there are already several other threads on the board discussing the same thing and we don't see a need to start another thread.

If you are saying by this:

On 9/2/2017 at 2:53 PM, kdg said:

XP-ish as an operating system seems to be best working all in all. A touch and some technical aspects of later operating systems COULD be interesting. But that is not what is being served. This thread is about how this can become how it is.

that Win 2K/XP was the best OS that MS produced and that all of MS's efforts since then have gone downhill from there in efficiency, performance, GUI effectiveness, etc, (with the exception of a very, very few performance improvements and feature additions), then many members here will agree with you, but as jaclaz explained:

20 hours ago, jaclaz said:

Besides there are probably tens of topics where the idea that the best OS ever has been 2K (followed by XP) has been debated ad nauseam, maybe a pointer to a couple of them would show to the OP that there is not any particular *need* to start a new one?

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/173322-windows-2000-one-of-the-forgotten-best-ms-os/

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/175265-windows-xp-is-still-king/

Also, some of the celebrations of 2K or Xp are in the threads reated to the new (crappy) OSes, like (again examples):

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/155290-windows-8-deeper-impressions/

http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/174208-windows-10-deeper-impressions/

And as sdfox7 further clarified:

16 hours ago, sdfox7 said:

@kdg

When you create a thread to debate the quality of operating systems, you are opening a [endless] can of worms, because debating quality is subjective, based solely on the requirements of the person who will be using it.

Every person on the planet has different wants and needs. Trying to prove one OS is better than another is known as a Pyrrhic victory. This is when you think you have won an argument, but you really may have lost, because one person's standards may not align with yours, and they may have different priorities than you do.

Do you want a hybrid 16-bit/32-bit OS with ultimate MS-DOS compatibility? Use Windows 95/98.
Do you want a very old but stable OS? Use Windows NT 4.0.
Do you want a old but but still somewhat modern OS? Use Windows 2000.
Do you want a old but still mostly serviceable/software-compatible OS? Use Windows XP.
Do you want a modern OS that still has near-100% compatibility with modern software? Use Windows 7.
Do you want the latest up to date OS available from Microsoft? Use Windows 10.

Of course, this list only addresses Microsoft Windows, not the numerous other operating systems available such as Linux, Mac, etc.

not only has this subject been, and is still being, covered in many other threads on the board, but the claim is very subjective and other people's needs might not be the same as yours.

If your comment - "This thread is about how this can become how it is." - is trying to start a discussion of how to modify a newer MS OS to be more like Win 2K/XP, that has also been, and continues to be, discussed in many other threads on the board.  On the other hand, if you are trying to start a discussion to influence MS to modify newer versions of their OS to be more like Win 2K/XP, well, (1) that result is just not going to happen, and (2) those efforts have already been tried, and are continuing, in the "deeper-impressions" threads, among others on the board.

So, while we welcome you to MSFN and are glad you want to be an active participant on the board, my suggestion would be to make your comments in an existing  thread that is already discussing the subject you want to talk about.  We don't need another thread about the same thing.

Of course, if I have misunderstood your intention, then you can ignore all of my above comments except for using them as proof that we are not understanding what you are trying to say, and try again to express yourself simply and clearly so that we can better appreciate your contributions to MSFN.

Cheers and Regards

Edited September 4, 2017 by bphlpt
spelling and format corrections

[kdg]

A minute ago, I saw this thread: 

 

[kdg]

19 hours ago, dencorso said:

 

... when you get to your intended main subject you become much more difficult to undestand, as for instance:

Now, this may be due to you having fine-honed your English by studying the I-Ching and Burroughs' works, particularly "The Ticket that Exploded" and "Naked Lunch", or to being involved in Production and Operations Management most of your life, so I really don't fault you for that. But I do have to observe that to cause a person or a thing to "become how it is" is yet another ontologically impossible™ task, because they already actually are what they must become.

This about ''how I say something'' has to go. Or I simply can't continue this. Even: agreeing that I did not make a mistake. It could be ok if it is left for now and a remark about it when there is an opportunity to. I am ok with a change in wording if there is something with it. 

Edited September 4, 2017 by kdg

[kdg]

But this subject is new. To say it short: it is like a savings account with possibly a very high interest rate. But there must be the opportunity to talk about it peacefully. 

The main thing is pressing charges by a lot of people. So they don't run any risks. The contents of these charges is things that lead to an operating system and hardware that is not a cash cow to a few individuals. 

Maybe it doesn't sound that good as a plan. I don't know and I don't have to know now. In all cases it needs a conversation by more than one person. 

[Dibya]

Hello my dear please speak in normal English.  Your writing are as such I am reading any Shakespearen play like merchant of Venice or comedy of errors 

[jaclaz]

19 hours ago, Dibya said:

Hello my dear please speak in normal English.  Your writing are as such I am reading any Shakespearen play like merchant of Venice or comedy of errors 

Just wondering, should kdg take your posts as a reference for "normal" English?

@kdg

The general idea of a conversation follows a number of conventions.

Among these conventions there is anyone's right to declare he/she doesn't understand what another member of the conversation is saying and at that point the other member should attempt to explain what he/she just said,
This procedure is usually repeated when needed in a loop until everyone taking part to the conversation nods meaning that he/she understood, and at this point the conversation continues, usually on the same topic discussed at the time the request for clarification was issued. 
Now, if you ignore such requests for clarifications, the other people willing to take part to the conversation, since they cannot understand what you are saying, will likely leave.

I am leaving. 

jaclaz

[Tommy]

I was the one that closed the thread and nobody contacted me about it, my inbox is open to those who have any concerns. Hence why I have a super moderator badge on my profile.

I have no issues with discussing quality of OSes, not one bit. In fact I'm one that questions the quality that goes into Microsoft products these days myself. However, it was a pointless thread and it wasn't going anywhere, it made no sense. I will let this one stay open as long as meaningful discussion takes place in it. I wasn't even aware this thread was created until just now. I don't close threads without reason. If you want to have a meaningful discussion about how you feel the quality of Windows has declined, have at it! But let's just keep it that way, okay? And please try not to double post so much unless a large amount of time has elapsed otherwise it just continues bumping the thread and pushing other ones off the radar. If you can do those two things, that would be much appreciated.

And we are not affiliated with Microsoft, not at all. So we are not biased based on their products but instead of our own opinions.

[bphlpt]

Hey, Tommy, Thanks for trying to keep some sense of order on the board.  To clean things up a bit, and give kdg some examples of what you mean about just editing instead of consecutive posting, might I suggest that you merge the two threads, keeping it the title of this one, and merge any consecutive posts where you think it appropriate, and then see if this thread goes anywhere from there, ... or not.

As to locking threads, my personal opinion is to just let almost all threads die a natural death by abandonment.  There are many, many threads on this board that have been reinvigorated years after the "last" post.  Some for just a comment or two, and some of those were a mistake, but occasionally for a worthwhile conversation.  I think, and again just my own opinion, that threads should only be locked when they have devolved into flame wars or personal insults AND the responsible parties have refused to curtail their behavior after being publicly warned.  But, that's just me.

Cheers and Regards

[kdg]

I though I would post this first and then read replies. 

Posting these two threads I am just thinking: I should just talk about this with others. Where it is likely it is about that.

But this: I said: ''pressing charges''. This will involve lawyer(s). Does this idea lead to doubts, that sort of things to one or more others here?

[Damnation]

31 minutes ago, kdg said:

''pressing charges''. This will involve lawyer(s).

pressing charges, for what?

[jaclaz]

2 hours ago, bphlpt said:

As to locking threads, my personal opinion is to just let almost all threads die a natural death by abandonment.  There are many, many threads on this board that have been reinvigorated years after the "last" post.  Some for just a comment or two, and some of those were a mistake, but occasionally for a worthwhile conversation.  I think, and again just my own opinion, that threads should only be locked when they have devolved into flame wars or personal insults AND the responsible parties have refused to curtail their behavior after being publicly warned.  But, that's just me.

Count me in with that.  (also just me)

 

@kdg

So it seems that even safety could be better when these futlongs wheeze as if something anyone says here that it is posted and believed coincidentally emphasizing the methods people want.
It is complicated when one has the need where to plan next.
Who that anyone could?
And about what seems it not course enough there same like aspect requires much to believe, even elaborate. 

jaclaz

 

[kdg]

On 4-9-2017 at 1:59 PM, bphlpt said:

@kdg,

We really are not trying to disrespect you at all, we either just don't understand what you are trying to talk about, or we might not want to participate even if we do (think) we understand, or there are already several other threads on the board discussing the same thing and we don't see a need to start another thread.

If you are saying by this:

that Win 2K/XP was the best OS that MS produced and that all of MS's efforts since then have gone downhill from there in efficiency, performance, GUI effectiveness, etc, (with the exception of a very, very few performance improvements and feature additions), then many members here will agree with you, but as jaclaz explained:

And as sdfox7 further clarified:

not only has this subject been, and is still being, covered in many other threads on the board, but the claim is very subjective and other people's needs might not be the same as yours.

If your comment - "This thread is about how this can become how it is." - is trying to start a discussion of how to modify a newer MS OS to be more like Win 2K/XP, that has also been, and continues to be, discussed in many other threads on the board.  On the other hand, if you are trying to start a discussion to influence MS to modify newer versions of their OS to be more like Win 2K/XP, well, (1) that result is just not going to happen, and (2) those efforts have already been tried, and are continuing, in the "deeper-impressions" threads, among others on the board.

So, while we welcome you to MSFN and are glad you want to be an active participant on the board, my suggestion would be to make your comments in an existing  thread that is already discussing the subject you want to talk about.  We don't need another thread about the same thing.

Of course, if I have misunderstood your intention, then you can ignore all of my above comments except for using them as proof that we are not understanding what you are trying to say, and try again to express yourself simply and clearly so that we can better appreciate your contributions to MSFN.

Cheers and Regards

Sorry, I think I have made a mistake in what I said after this post above. I apologize. The thing is

The threads I posted are about some kinds of fraud. That is already a bad thing.

Apart from that the quickest response to it, was totally e.g. insulting to me. Which is nobody's fault. Not of any normal forum users. (Or moderators)

To me that makes it horrid to read replies too precisely, until matters are more cleared up. It looks like it the others in this thread have this same kind of problem.