Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.os.windows-11 > #36558 > unrolled thread

Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.os.windows-11

Contents

  Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-23 08:15 -0400
    Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "Alan K." <alan@invalid.com> - 2026-10-23 08:34 -0400
    Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2026-10-23 10:37 -0400
      Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-23 11:17 -0400
        Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-10-23 16:22 -0400
        Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2026-10-24 15:37 -0400
          Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-24 20:35 -0400
            Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2026-10-25 03:17 -0400
              Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-25 01:29 -0700
                Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2026-10-25 05:15 -0400
                  Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Brock McNuggets <brock.mcnuggets@gmail.com> - 2026-10-25 02:30 -0700
    Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2026-10-23 18:02 +0200
      Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-10-23 17:03 -0400
        Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Nick Charles <none@none.none> - 2026-10-23 23:25 +0000
          Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-10-23 19:51 -0400
        Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2026-10-24 15:24 +0200
      Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-23 21:13 -0400
        Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Nick Charles <none@none.none> - 2026-10-24 02:05 +0000
        Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2026-10-24 15:23 +0200
          Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-10-24 13:48 -0400
            Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-24 20:30 -0400
          Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-24 20:27 -0400
            Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-10-24 22:58 -0400
            Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2026-10-26 20:29 +0100
              Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-26 15:45 -0400
                Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-10-26 20:05 -0400
                  Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-26 20:14 -0400
                    Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2026-10-26 20:38 -0400
                Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2026-10-28 15:51 +0100
                  Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-10-28 15:16 -0400
                    Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2026-10-28 16:53 -0400
                  Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> - 2026-10-28 17:05 -0400
    Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Peter Jason <pj@jostle.com> - 2026-10-24 11:29 +1100
      Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-10-24 12:29 +0000
        Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Jack <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-10-24 23:13 +0100
          Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2026-10-25 15:36 +0000
            Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Peter Jason <pj@jostle.com> - 2026-10-26 11:51 +1100
              Re: Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-10-25 22:25 -0400

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#36558 — Windows laptops now cost more than similar Macs

<https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>

Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?

-- 
CrudeSausage
MacBook Air M4 Sky Blue
iPhone 13
Friendly Apple zealot

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#36559

On 10/23/26 8:15 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
> 
> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
> 
Wow!   Take a Valium!

I'd have listened but he had way too much coffee or something.   Didn't want the YouTube 
video to run that long maybe.

-- 
Mint 22.3,  Thunderbird 153.4.0esr,  Firefox 158.0
     Alan K.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36562

On 10/23/2026 8:15 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:

> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
> 
> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?


I pretty much buy your argument.  I'm not in the market for laptops 
myself, but if I were ...

-- 
Joel W. Crump

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36563

On 2026-10-23 10:37 a.m., Joel W. Crump wrote:
> On 10/23/2026 8:15 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> 
>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>
>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
> 
> 
> I pretty much buy your argument.  I'm not in the market for laptops 
> myself, but if I were ...
> 

You'd be bored with a Mac. The fact that you suddenly don't need to 
constantly fix your computer's software or hardware means that you can 
actually use it to do something.

-- 
CrudeSausage
MacBook Air M4 Sky Blue
iPhone 13
Friendly Apple zealot

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36572

On Fri, 10/23/2026 11:17 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> On 2026-10-23 10:37 a.m., Joel W. Crump wrote:
>> On 10/23/2026 8:15 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>>
>>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
>>
>> I pretty much buy your argument.  I'm not in the market for laptops myself, but if I were ...
>>
> You'd be bored with a Mac. The fact that you suddenly don't need to constantly 
> fix your computer's software or hardware means that you can actually use it to do something.

As a former Apple user (three Apple computer), attraction is zero.
Been to that rodeo, got off the horse.

Also not in the market for a new computer, as the market now
is all about gouging consumers.

I'm still waiting for the oxygen rentals to start. Surely
someone can corner the oxygen market, and start the rentals.

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36605

On 10/23/2026 11:17 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:

>>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>>
>>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
>>
>> I pretty much buy your argument.  I'm not in the market for laptops 
>> myself, but if I were ...
> 
> You'd be bored with a Mac. The fact that you suddenly don't need to 
> constantly fix your computer's software or hardware means that you can 
> actually use it to do something.


For me, a WinARM laptop might be just as good.  But it's a strong sector 
for Apple, no question about it.  The MBP despite having an OS I don't 
prefer is a masterpiece.

-- 
Joel W. Crump

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36610

On 2026-10-24 3:37 p.m., Joel W. Crump wrote:
> On 10/23/2026 11:17 AM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> 
>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>>>
>>>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
>>>
>>> I pretty much buy your argument.  I'm not in the market for laptops 
>>> myself, but if I were ...
>>
>> You'd be bored with a Mac. The fact that you suddenly don't need to 
>> constantly fix your computer's software or hardware means that you can 
>> actually use it to do something.
> 
> 
> For me, a WinARM laptop might be just as good.  But it's a strong sector 
> for Apple, no question about it.  The MBP despite having an OS I don't 
> prefer is a masterpiece.

Once you get used to MacOS, it's hard to consider going back. I just 
like the fact that the computer always performs at the same rate. With 
every PC I've ever owned, it's fast for a while, slows down, speeds up, 
goes back to being fast, freezes, runs slows, goes fast again, etc.. 
With the Mac, there is only one speed: fast.

-- 
CrudeSausage
MacBook Air M4 Sky Blue
iPhone 13
Friendly Apple zealot

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36612

On 10/24/2026 8:35 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:

>>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>>>>
>>>>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows 
>>>>> machine?
>>>>
>>>> I pretty much buy your argument.  I'm not in the market for laptops 
>>>> myself, but if I were ...
>>>
>>> You'd be bored with a Mac. The fact that you suddenly don't need to 
>>> constantly fix your computer's software or hardware means that you 
>>> can actually use it to do something.
>>
>> For me, a WinARM laptop might be just as good.  But it's a strong 
>> sector for Apple, no question about it.  The MBP despite having an OS 
>> I don't prefer is a masterpiece.
> 
> Once you get used to MacOS, it's hard to consider going back. I just 
> like the fact that the computer always performs at the same rate. With 
> every PC I've ever owned, it's fast for a while, slows down, speeds up, 
> goes back to being fast, freezes, runs slows, goes fast again, etc.. 
> With the Mac, there is only one speed: fast.


I get that.  But Windows software is better, to me.

-- 
Joel W. Crump

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36615

On Oct 25, 2026 at 12:17 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote in
11bkaeg$3d3da$1@dont-email.me:
> On 10/24/2026 8:35 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
> 
<snip>
>>>>
>>>> You'd be bored with a Mac. The fact that you suddenly don't need to
>>>> constantly fix your computer's software or hardware means that you
>>>> can actually use it to do something.
>>>
>>> For me, a WinARM laptop might be just as good. But it's a strong
>>> sector for Apple, no question about it. The MBP despite having an OS
>>> I don't prefer is a masterpiece.
>>
>> Once you get used to MacOS, it's hard to consider going back. I just
>> like the fact that the computer always performs at the same rate.
>> With every PC I've ever owned, it's fast for a while, slows down,
>> speeds up, goes back to being fast, freezes, runs slows, goes fast
>> again, etc.. With the Mac, there is only one speed: fast.
> 
> 
> I get that. But Windows software is better, to me.

Any specific examples?

-- 
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36616

On 10/25/2026 4:29 AM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
> On Oct 25, 2026 at 12:17 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote in
> 11bkaeg$3d3da$1@dont-email.me:
>> On 10/24/2026 8:35 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>
>>> Once you get used to MacOS, it's hard to consider going back. I just
>>> like the fact that the computer always performs at the same rate.
>>> With every PC I've ever owned, it's fast for a while, slows down,
>>> speeds up, goes back to being fast, freezes, runs slows, goes fast
>>> again, etc.. With the Mac, there is only one speed: fast.
>>
>> I get that. But Windows software is better, to me.
> 
> Any specific examples?


It's a general thing, very few macOS-native apps impressed me.  Far and 
away, in fact, MS Office for Mac was the big one that I saw (2010).

-- 
Joel W. Crump

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36617

On Oct 25, 2026 at 2:15 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote in
11bkhca$3fcf6$1@dont-email.me:
> On 10/25/2026 4:29 AM, Brock McNuggets wrote:
>> On Oct 25, 2026 at 12:17 AM, Joel W. Crump wrote in
>> 11bkaeg$3d3da$1@dont-email.me:
>>> On 10/24/2026 8:35 PM, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> Once you get used to MacOS, it's hard to consider going back. I
>>>> just like the fact that the computer always performs at the same
>>>> rate. With every PC I've ever owned, it's fast for a while, slows
>>>> down, speeds up, goes back to being fast, freezes, runs slows, goes
>>>> fast again, etc.. With the Mac, there is only one speed: fast.
>>>
>>> I get that. But Windows software is better, to me.
>>
>> Any specific examples?
> 
> 
> It's a general thing, very few macOS-native apps impressed me. Far and
> away, in fact, MS Office for Mac was the big one that I saw (2010).

MS Office is different on the two -- or was when I last played. For the
most part I prefer the macOS versions. Photoshop, for example, has the
Mac color picker. Makes a big difference for me. Almost all apps have a
saved-status indicator (though that is less important now than it the
past). Most documents have a proxy icon which I often use... and the
ability to see the path to the file easily, and rename and move it
without going to the Finder (Explorer). Lots of other little benefits I
miss when on other systems.

-- 
It's impossible for someone who is at war with themselves to be at peace with you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36564

On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:15:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
> 
> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?

There are still sites around where you can buy a laptop without OS,
aren't there?

-- 
Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae.
		- Julius Caesar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36574

On Fri, 10/23/2026 12:02 PM, s|b wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:15:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
> 
>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>
>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
> 
> There are still sites around where you can buy a laptop without OS,
> aren't there?
> 

Considering the price of the machines to begin with, why would
you care what was on it when it arrived ? for example, if PopOS was
on it, I'd replace that with something else, as a first step.
You can do anything you want, once the machine arrives... assuming
there are no purposeful impediments to prevent it. Any box that
attempts to limit your choices, gets struck off the list of
candidates.

You want processors that run more than one OS, boot schemes
that don't prevent doing what you wish, and so on. Any
cunning proprietary scheme, can be pissing off.

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36575

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
> On Fri, 10/23/2026 12:02 PM, s|b wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:15:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>> 
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>> 
>>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
>> 
>> There are still sites around where you can buy a laptop without OS,
>> aren't there?
>> 
> 
> Considering the price of the machines to begin with, why would
> you care what was on it when it arrived ? for example, if PopOS was
> on it, I'd replace that with something else, as a first step.
> You can do anything you want, once the machine arrives... assuming
> there are no purposeful impediments to prevent it. Any box that
> attempts to limit your choices, gets struck off the list of
> candidates.

Struck off YOUR list of candidates.
 
> You want processors that run more than one OS, boot schemes
> that don't prevent doing what you wish, and so on. Any
> cunning proprietary scheme, can be pissing off.

YOU want that.  Not everyone.   

People who buy Macs are not looking to screw around with Operating Systems.
  The whole point of Macs is that you don’t need to be a computer geek to
use it.  

Windows is sort of there, but there are still too many problems that USERS
cannot handle.  Updating ANYTHING (the OS/an app/or a driver) can crash the
whole system, due to the poor design of Windows.   It does not help that
the error messages are gibberish.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36577

On Fri, 10/23/2026 7:25 PM, Nick Charles wrote:

> YOU want that.  Not everyone.   
> 
> People who buy Macs are not looking to screw around with Operating Systems.
>   The whole point of Macs is that you don’t need to be a computer geek to
> use it.  
> 
> Windows is sort of there, but there are still too many problems that USERS
> cannot handle.  Updating ANYTHING (the OS/an app/or a driver) can crash the
> whole system, due to the poor design of Windows.   It does not help that
> the error messages are gibberish.  

I hope you're not encouraging ignorance as a way of life.

We cannot afford that.

The Black Hats are winning, the White Hats are losing.
(Especially in the era of Mythos. Mythos in the hands of Black Hats.)

Someone the other day (Tomshardware) was coding up an application
to read out the temperature on some sort of Mac Mini box. Now,
right away, we're in ignorance country, because this individual
didn't even check to see what tasks were running on the box,
before dropping to AI and attempting to vibe code his way
to fame and fortune. There was a Bitcoin miner running on
the box and the CPU temperature was 110C.

In a newsgroup like this, we would tell you "do you have a process status,
a "top" command, a "Task Manager", anything that lists the processes ?".
You should, as a user, be educated about the operation of your machine,
and when there is "unexplained slowness or the thermal vent is as hot as toast",
well... check.

We believe in Safe Hex here, and fending for yourself. Do what
you can, what you're capable of, instead of "believing in Sparkle Ponies
as the solution to all problems". I don't know everything, and
I do the best I can to solve problems. AND I was doing that when
I owned the three Apple computers in the room too. I used to hang
out in an enthusiast Apple web forum, to help out (NOT the Apple forum).
For example, one day we helped someone who had acquired a root kit.
The user was smart enough to notice that the Finder was no longer
able to list any file that began with the letter "f". And for crude
rootkits, that's just about the worst way they can find of hiding
themselves :-) In another case, someone joined the forum to distribute
an executable. One of the people on the site, was the first to sample
it and determined "malware!" and sent out the warning. And the little
bastard whined "it took me three months to write that".

It doesn't matter where you hide, someone is planning to make
a victim out of you. And a proper attitude, helps.

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36595

On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 17:03:57 -0400, Paul wrote:

> On Fri, 10/23/2026 12:02 PM, s|b wrote:
>
> > There are still sites around where you can buy a laptop without OS,
> > aren't there?

> Considering the price of the machines to begin with, why would
> you care what was on it when it arrived ? for example, if PopOS was
> on it, I'd replace that with something else, as a first step.
> You can do anything you want, once the machine arrives... assuming
> there are no purposeful impediments to prevent it. Any box that
> attempts to limit your choices, gets struck off the list of
> candidates.
8< snip >8

I'd care, because if it was Windows (or MacOS) I would have to pay for
that OS as well instead of only the hardware.

-- 
Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae.
		- Julius Caesar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36581

On 2026-10-23 12:02 p.m., s|b wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:15:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
> 
>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>
>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
> 
> There are still sites around where you can buy a laptop without OS,
> aren't there?

There are. What would you install on those machines?

-- 
CrudeSausage
MacBook Air M4 Sky Blue
iPhone 13
Friendly Apple zealot

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36582

On Oct 23, 2026 at 9:13:51 PM EDT, "CrudeSausage" <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:

> On 2026-10-23 12:02 p.m., s|b wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:15:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>> 
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>> 
>>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
>> 
>> There are still sites around where you can buy a laptop without OS,
>> aren't there?
> 
> There are. What would you install on those machines?

macOS of course!  :-)

But seriously. I had loads of fun with Hackintoshes 20 years ago. When Apple
went Intel, there was a thriving cottage industry of people creating OS X
"distros".  The main problems were GPU drivers and network drivers.  

If your hardware was close enough to Apple, you only had to edit the driver
PLIST file to add your specific hardware version name to the list, then fix
the permisions on the file and reboot.  

So I was running OS X on an Asus Core 2 Quad machine with 8GB RAM. It ran
surprisingly well, but it was using only 1 CPU core. To get all 4 running took
way more work than I wanted to do at the time. 

It was fun, but of course you could not do the standard Apple Software Update.
  You had to wait for the next "distro" to get to the next version of OS X. 
There was even a company selling PCs with hardware that was exactly the same
as Apple Intel hardware.   The name escapes my mind.  But they claimed you
could run standard Mac OS X on it.  No "distro" needed.

Ah.   Good Times.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36594

On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 21:13:51 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> On 2026-10-23 12:02 p.m., s|b wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:15:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
> > 
> >> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
> >>
> >> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
> > 
> > There are still sites around where you can buy a laptop without OS,
> > aren't there?
 
> There are. What would you install on those machines?

A variety of Linux distributions.

-- 
Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae.
		- Julius Caesar

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36602

On Sat, 10/24/2026 9:23 AM, s|b wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 21:13:51 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
> 
>> On 2026-10-23 12:02 p.m., s|b wrote:
>>> On Fri, 23 Oct 2026 08:15:55 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>>>
>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/shorts/FurWKk0h5hs>
>>>>
>>>> Considering that, why the heck would you bother with a Windows machine?
>>>
>>> There are still sites around where you can buy a laptop without OS,
>>> aren't there?
>  
>> There are. What would you install on those machines?
> 
> A variety of Linux distributions.
> 

If this works at all, it works for existing Linux users who have experience.
Now, imagine that describes three percent of the market.

If this is all the audience had as options when unboxing, there
would be a high rate of return. Which would sink any prospective
new company that did not have deep pockets.

Many people do not remember the launch of Corel Linux.
Boy, did that stop quickly. The company pivoted on a dime.
I bet the folks there learned something. It was a lesson
in what "reality tastes like".

*******

One thing you strive for in business, is not shipping something
that results in a "high rate of return". The product has to
satisfy, when received.

You could ship a machine with both Windows and Linux, and
use as a boot manager, the equivalent of BootMagic from
the year 2000. That treats the OSes installed equally,
puts a lozenge on the screen for each one, you click the
lozenge to start. Then, if a user starts the Linux choice
and they don't like it, they can reboot and try again...

BootMagic was great, in that it hid the details, and while
I was using that on the P2B-S, it never bit me on the ass.
It always worked. I may have had three different ecosystems
at that time, and several disk drives installed in the
machine. And as a boot manager, it looked nothing like
the individual boot managers of the OSes, and it seemed
to work, whatever it was doing. (That was PowerQuest and
they are long gone as a company. BootMagic was bundled
with PartitionMagic.)

*******

Windows has an "automatic recovery" for a reason. That's
to cover off some small percentage of problems for users.
Most of the time, that has done nothing for me here
(it was always faster to just fix it myself, like
when the automatic recovery starts doing a bad block
scan, you'll never be rescued then). It actually
rescued me the other day, but only because the
machine dropped in the middle of the login screen.
That seemed to present a stimulus that worked to
trigger a proper recovery. If the machine drops dead
after the desktop returns, that's not a good trigger for it.

And having that recovery, would improve the
chances of a user not returning a product
immediately. If the recovery scheme worked...

Summary: There's a lot to running a business.
         You'd be surprised what it takes.
         We used to put a ShockWatch capsule inside the computer
         box, because certain shippers were treating us badly,
         and we wanted to find out which shipper to keep :-)
         That's an example of the kinds of things you have
         to do, to improve your rate of return. Vet the shipper.
         The list of thing you should do, is endless.

   Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.os.windows-11

csiph-web