Did we all just witness Windows start to die?

Ex_Brit

If you're going through hell, keep going.
Staff member
#2
Thank God not all of us spend all our waking lives going blind staring at small screens. Windows RT was a disaster to start with but that doesn't mean the end of the desktop. I guess these 'journalists' have to justify their pay somehow by accentuating the negative while conveniently forgetting the positive.
 

Terry60

Knows where his towel is.
Staff member
#3
He's puffing his up-coming book with a self-justificatory magazine article.
Like MS before him, he's making the mistake of thinking that only game-playing juveniles or Skyping geriatrics are of any significance.
Both are overlooking the billion commercial PCs out there doing the bulk of the planet's business.
 

Ex_Brit

If you're going through hell, keep going.
Staff member
#4
Exactly.
 

Mak 2.0

Mod...WAFFLES!?!?
Staff member
#5
*YAWN*

If PC's were dying, then why are they still selling more than any Tablet out there....Why are they still more widely used for business purposes and home use than Tablets?

Thats right cause they do more than any tablet. So these journalists can bite it. They have no clue what they are talking about and only want page views and hits. They want people like this to spread links to their reports to get people talking about what they write when it is dead wrong in even the most common sense way.
 

mqudsi

Mostly Harmless
Staff member
#6
MSFT's shares dropped quite dramatically last week as a result of lower-than-expected earnings this quarter. Windows 8 sales are consistent with earlier quarters — while investors often panic and knee-jerk sell and journalists continue the eons-long tradition of exaggerating news and headlines, it is somewhat true that sales should certainly be expected to peak following the release of a new OS instead of hold steady.

The theory I do agree with isn't that PCs are dead, but that most everyone has a PC that is "good enough." With the latest generation of software and the advent of technologies like SSD, with 4 GiB of RAM considered the most basic offering in even entry level PCs and laptops, people no longer see the need to fork over a thousand dollars every two or three years for a new PC, the old one is simply good enough and fast enough to stick with.
 

Ex_Brit

If you're going through hell, keep going.
Staff member
#7
I agree. This one is going to have to last me for a while, I literally can't afford a new one. Bits that wear out will be replaced, as happened recently.

I also see no real reason for a new OS release as often as it happens other than commercial greed.

It should be possible to patch the old ones to meet new innovations.
 
Last edited:

Terry60

Knows where his towel is.
Staff member
#8
There's a lot of truth in that CG.
I built this PC nearly six years ago, and though I did successfully bid on ebay for a cheap CPU upgrade and have also replaced the original graphics to support connection to my TV Cinema, It does everything I need pretty quickly.
The only scope for a really noticeable improvement is the transition to SSD for the OS, Apps and associated data.
That's the real reason I'll eventually get round to replacing it, more for connectivity than just performance. It's run out of SATA space and I just couldn't fit another box inside.

On the question of performance, does any of you have experience of Excel handling large spreadsheets ?

I've just converted my accounts from 123 to LibreOffice Calc in order to make use of RC rather than A1 addressing and it's entirely successful in achieving some improvements which would not be possible in A1, but the startup time is astonishingly extended.

The 123 version, which is over 15Mb on disk, starts the program, loads the data, calculates the half-million cells and is ready to roll in three seconds from clicking the shortcut. Similarly clicking "save" completes in a blink.
LibreOffice, though working acceptably quickly in use, takes about 90 seconds from cold to ready, and about 30 seconds to save despite the fact that the same data only occupies 2.4Mb.

Is this just down to LO, or are all modern examples of SS code as bloated ?

Does anyone have a very complex Excel SS load time as a benchmark ?

An 8 core CPU and a 6Gb/s SSD, should improve things somewhat, but I think it really shows the benefit of using code written when the programmers had to be parsimonious with system resources, if you can still get it to work.
 

Ex_Brit

If you're going through hell, keep going.
Staff member
#9
I really can't be of much help as I can't even remember the last time I used Excel, or to be more accurate, tried to use it. CG or Alex?
 
Last edited:

Mak 2.0

Mod...WAFFLES!?!?
Staff member
#10
I have Excel but the truth is I dont have any large spread sheets to try it on. I only have some minimal ones that I use or create for special purposes and dont have one that I have maintained for several years to grow it.