Acorncomputer wrote:I have to say that being a fairly cautious person I do not add unnecessary programs to my computers. I do let Windows auto update and I occasionally run Ausligics free disc defrag program but other than that I leave things alone. (My cautious approach is one reason why I am not happy having the Steam client running RailWorks on my machines).
The thing is, even if you adopt this approach, even the Windows updates occasionally 'break' stuff, occasionally seriously. Only recently, there was a 'critical update' (at least on XP 64) that wouldn't remove itself from the schedule after patching and I still can't get SP3 for 32 bit XP to work on one of the laptops...
I do not seem to have to do much 'maintenance' on my computers, I count four PC's and the three RISCOS computers, the latter being virtually maintenance free.
(Curious about the RISCOS machines, now... Archimedes?) The PC I have running the CCTV system (XP 64) and the boy's laptop (Vista Home Premium) are pretty much maintenance free although I recently had to manually upgrade the video drivers on the latter due to an automatic software update causing an incompatibility issue. In fact, on the former, I've never had a problem with it in 3 years of near continuous service. I only power it down now to periodically clean the dust from the filters
My wife's machine and my own machine are both heavily used and are in a pretty much constant state of maintenance. However, this is partly because this is one aspect of our line of work (IT) and partly because my PC is the 1932 Ford hotrod I never owned (it's cost me nearly as damned much!), i.e. it's a toy, a plaything, something that I'm never quite happy with
Hers is kind of the same, but she generally sees something I've done or have and says "Ooh! Can I get one of those for mine?!" or similar
I have some problems of course but I am quite mystified when people say that they have installed Windows several times, for example. Why is this necessary?
Yeah, but as I've alluded to elsewhere, there's really no such thing as a 'standard PC' any more. Heck, go buy a Dell laptop tomorrow and then another one of the same specification in 6 months time (if you can...) and you'll find that components have changed.
Digressing a bit, way back when, in 1980-something, when 'PC' was synonymous with IBM, the story was very different, however, when the restrictions were lifted and every Tom, Dick and Harry started punting them out...uh-oh... For many years after, if you wanted a 'quality' IBM-compatible PC, there was only one name to look at; Compaq. They went tits-up with their acquisition by HP (shortly after Compaq completely lost the plot and swallowed DEC...). These days, there are only really 3 major 'independents' making desktop PCs: HP, IBM (now Lenovo...) and Dell. Dell are the only 'original' company left. What you've also got are thousands upon thousands of companies in support, too, including some biggies in their own right, companies like Acer who manufacture a good number of whole machines for some people as well as marketing their own branded devices...
About the only mainstream machines on the market in the 'personal computing' niche that are (were?) pretty much maintenance-free were (and this sticks in my craw a little*)... Apple, specifically the Macintosh and all the variants it evolved into. The common thing there was the chipset and the Operating System. Be interesting to see what happens now they've 'gone Intel' and Snow Leopard is out...
You can't even say it's a 'Windows computer' either -- which flavour of Windows? I forget now, but there are something like, what, 7 different SKUs for Vista?!
Anyhow, back on-topic, with this massive level of diversity coupled with the equally (if not more) massive quantity of software products out there, it's no small wonder that some people have problems whilst others do not. In my world, the current challenge for many of our customers is whether (or not) to move to Windows 7. There are, amongst them, people still using Windows 95, for the love of chickens!
Why haven't they upgraded? Well partly, in a good many cases, it's because their estate is so massive that it has also to be uniform. Otherwise, the software on which their business relies won't work, or worse, it will work differently. When you're dealing with tens of thousands of machines across the globe, you want to be sure that the vendor from whom you're buying is not suddenly, mid-production, going to switch from, say, Intel to AMD processors.
I am not a programmer -- haven't done anything since 1986 on a BBC Model B
-- but I know a few ( and not the web-monkey variety, either ;p) and they all tell me that coding for gaming is a minefield because even though there are standard Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) and conventions and stuff, the actual 'standards' occasionally aren't standard at all and are in some cases vague and open to interpretation (deliberately, possibly...?). The reason for the angst? In short, it's PCs and for all the various reasons above -- sure, they're all generally the same, but the key word is 'generally'.
There is more to this than meets the eye but I generally go along with the saying that if it ain't broke, then don't fix it.
I agree with the sentiment, Geoff, but it ain't always that simple...
Rgds, Rik.
*because years ago, when a Mac did go tits-up, they used to be notoriously difficult to troubleshoot and the troubleshooting process itself could often include giving yourself electric shocks**
**not deliberately, that would just be weird*** but because of the one-piece design.
***but if that's what floats your boat...
).