Windows 9 is now Windows 10

cwathen
Posts: 1112
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 17.28

Thu 25 Aug, 2016 11.12

How many businesses have switched to Windows 10 at this time though?
Surely that isn't the point - if Windows 8 was the 'miss a version' which didn't get big penetration into business just as Vista was before it, then 10 has to be what businesses will eventually migrate to, and you would expect migration to be under consideration at businesses now, even if full roll out might still be 2 or 3 years away. It doesn't say much if the constant cycle of mandatory updates can potentially break something that was working. SMEs aren't going to be running Enterprise which has longer support for individual builds and has control over updates, they are going to be running Pro, and the ability to delay things for a little while isn't enough.

As I said earlier in this thread, at an SME the 'IT Department' is often just a function of someone working there, and having previously been such an 'IT Department' , it is quite enough to make sure the server stays up, keep up with hardware failures, keep up with minor things the users want done, make new hardware play nicely with esoteric EPOS hardware and keeping up with updates to your EPOS system, along with finding time to build test rigs to test patches and updates, newer operating systems and newer hardware, along with doing the rest of your job outside of IT, without worrying about the operating system on your production machines pulling down a forced update which breaks compatibility with something critical to then have the finger pointed at you for allowing this to happen.
We seem to be at the point we were with Windows 7 where Windows XP was 6 years ago. Windows 7 was the "current" version of the OS, but XP was still the version of choice in most workplace environments. Now, Windows 10 is the "current" version, but the majority of workplaces are still hanging on to 7
I think the bigger question will be whether Windows 7 will become another XP problem for Microsoft - putting aside the number of people who ran it unto 2014 (and some who continue to do so now), XP was a decade old before there was any change to it being essentially ubiquitous in business use - you didn't see much Windows 7 around until 2011/12. Windows 7 is now 7 years old, and has been replaced twice (or as many as 5 times depending on how you look at it) yet still has the largest market share of any Windows version by a considerable way, and is still near ubiquitous in business. Realistically, it is still going to be in common use in 3 years time when it is 10 years old, just like XP was. Given that the world didn't end if you carried on using XP past April 2014 as Microsoft claimed would happen, will people choose to plough on with Windows 7 past 2020 and give Microsoft another OS they struggle to kill off?
And, of course, there's still more than a few XP installations hanging about in workplaces.
Certainly, as of last week when I was in a branch, Natwest's entire branch network still seems to use XP workstations. I am also aware of a national financial institution (albeit not a bank) whose branch network updated the workstations to Windows 7 but to this day features a 'server' in every branch which is actually an XP Workstation. Even brand new replacement 'servers' will have an XP image installed on them. This is because the back end database for their customer management system will not run on anything newer. Yet these machines host customer data of the most sensitive kind (full details of every customer, their name, address, phone numbers, data of birth, employment details, salary details, bank details including account and card numbers, pretty much everything you need to defraud someone), despite being hosted on an unsupported operating system.
User avatar
bilky asko
Posts: 1095
Joined: Sat 08 Nov, 2008 19.48
Location: Yorkshire Riviera

Thu 25 Aug, 2016 12.03

Wasn't there a story around the turn of the millennium that said at least one bank who still handled all transactions in £sd because a part of their system couldn't handle decimal currency?
Image
JAS84
Posts: 411
Joined: Fri 12 Aug, 2011 10.23
Location: Hull, UK

Thu 25 Aug, 2016 17.18

That's ridiculous. A system using £sd probably isn't computerised!
Alexia
Posts: 2966
Joined: Sat 01 Oct, 2005 17.50

Thu 25 Aug, 2016 17.25

First page of Google.
Despite this, some institutions will hang onto their legacy systems as long as they can, because they work and they aren't causing problems.

"There are bank systems out there that are still operating at the back-end in pounds, shillings and pence — old currency," Skinner said.
http://www.zdnet.com/article/how-uk-ban ... -disaster/

FIRST PAGE JAS84!
User avatar
Nick Harvey
God
Posts: 4028
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 22.26
Location: Deepest Wiltshire
Contact:

Thu 25 Aug, 2016 23.44

I certainly programmed computer systems, back in the sixties, which worked in £SD. In those days, 10d and 11d were special, single characters, so the pence column always took up just one position.

The youngsters today don't realise how easy they have it, just working to base 10 and the occasional bit of base 16 for hexadecimal.

The early computers worked in octal, base 8. Then you had to work in base 12 and base 20 for currency; base 16 and base 14, plus a few others, for weight; base 12 and base 3 for length; plus all the other variations of Imperial.

To this day, I can switch to doing calculations to pretty well any base, in my head.
User avatar
WillPS
Posts: 1953
Joined: Tue 22 Apr, 2008 18.32
Location: Carlton
Contact:

Fri 26 Aug, 2016 15.47

Nick Harvey wrote:I certainly programmed computer systems, back in the sixties, which worked in £SD. In those days, 10d and 11d were special, single characters, so the pence column always took up just one position.

The youngsters today don't realise how easy they have it, just working to base 10 and the occasional bit of base 16 for hexadecimal.

The early computers worked in octal, base 8. Then you had to work in base 12 and base 20 for currency; base 16 and base 14, plus a few others, for weight; base 12 and base 3 for length; plus all the other variations of Imperial.

To this day, I can switch to doing calculations to pretty well any base, in my head.
Fascinating! Which systems were these for? What medium was your code stored on? When was it deprecated?
Image
User avatar
Nick Harvey
God
Posts: 4028
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 22.26
Location: Deepest Wiltshire
Contact:

Fri 26 Aug, 2016 23.13

For the ICT 1500 (RCA 301 clone). Written in both machine code and FAS (Fifteen Hundred Assembly System). Initialy punched onto seven channel paper tape from code sheets, then the assembled programs stored on magnetic tape.
User avatar
Nick Harvey
God
Posts: 4028
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 22.26
Location: Deepest Wiltshire
Contact:

Fri 26 Aug, 2016 23.28

Here's the machine:

Image
User avatar
Nick Harvey
God
Posts: 4028
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 22.26
Location: Deepest Wiltshire
Contact:

Fri 26 Aug, 2016 23.40

Here's a bit of assembly code what I once wrote:

Image
cwathen
Posts: 1112
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 17.28

Sat 27 Aug, 2016 12.07

So this was transcribed from the sheets straight onto paper tape? No punched cards in between with the individual statements on?

What did this program do Nick?

Out of interest, would you say computing was more interesting back then? Being just a little bit junior to you, my first computing experience was on 80's home machines like the C64 and Spectrum, programming them in BASIC. Despite the limitations of what those machines could do, I still found the idea of understanding it and crafting your own software, along with having some idea of how they actually operated inside, what chips did what, how the memory was mapped etc far more rewarding then anything done on modern Windows machines today. The manual for the BBC micro was huge, and went as far as including schematics for the motherboard in case you needed to make repairs, and diagrams showing how every part of the computer worked in case you needed to push it to it's limits when programming it. Then there were libraries of books written by others about exploiting other things you could do with the computer - interfacing other hardware with it, upgrading it (real upgrades involving getting your soldering iron out, not a 21st century upgrade like slotting in a new graphics card), it was all there.

Although the machines were very simple and limited compared to what we have today, the subject itself seemed so much more immersive and rewarding compared to spending hours watching Youtube or playing Candy Crush.

Even when I was at school, it was still considered a staple of any serious computing course to teach programming, we learned Pascal in 6th form and before that at GCSE we wrote Macros in Excel to create stock control systems and although the idea of understanding how the computer itself worked was gone by then, you still understood what was going on within the language and again it was rewarding to feel that you were creating software.

Things like learning how to format documents in Word or using Powerpoint to make charts was very much a year 7/8 activity, today it seems to be as advanced as many people get.
Please Respond